Chapter 2 3 - Steven McCornack & Kelly Morrison, 2019. Reflect & relate: An introduction to PDF

Preview

Summary

Steven McCornack & Kelly Morrison, 2019. Reflect & relate: An introduction to interpersonal communication (5th Edition). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s....

Description

Chapter 2 The self is an evolving composite of self- awareness, self- concept, and self- esteem. Although each of us experiences the self as singular (“ This is who I am”), it actually is made up of three distinct yet integrated components that continually evolve over time, based on your life experiences. Self- awareness is the ability to view yourself as a unique person distinct from your surrounding environment and to reflect on your thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. That is, you are able to turn a lens on yourself and examine the resulting image that you see. As we’re watching and evaluating our own actions, we also engage in social comparison: observing and assigning meaning to others’ behavior and then com- paring it with ours. Social comparison has a particularly potent effect on self when we compare ourselves to people we wish to emulate. You can greatly enhance your interpersonal communication by practicing a targeted kind of selfawareness known as critical self- reflection. To engage in critical self- reflection, ask yourself the following questions: What am I thinking and feeling? Why am I thinking and feeling this way? How am I communicating? How are my thoughts and feelings influencing my communication? How can I improve my thoughts, feelings, and communication? The ultimate goal of critical selfreflection is embodied in the last question: How can I improve ? Improving your interpersonal communication is possible only when you accurately understand how your self drives your communication behavior. Self- concept is your overall perception of who you are. If self- awareness is your ability to focus a lens upon yourself, self- concept is the picture taken through that lens. Your self- concept is based on the beliefs, attitudes, and values you have about yourself. Beliefs are convictions that certain things are true— for example, “I’m an excellent student.” Attitudes are evaluative appraisals, such as “I’m happy with how I’m doing in school.” Values represent enduring principles that guide your interpersonal actions— for example, “I think it’s wrong to cheat on schoolwork.” Your self- concept is shaped by a host of factors, including your family, friends, gender, and culture According to Cooley, when we define our self- concepts by considering how others see us, we are creating a looking- glass self. The degree to which you have a clearly defined, consistent, and enduring sense of self is known as self- concept clarity (Campbell et al., 1996), and it has a powerful effect on your health, happiness, and outlook on life. Research suggests that people who have a stronger, clearer, sense of self (i.e., higher self- concept clarity) have higher self- esteem, are less likely to experience negative emotions (both in response to stressful situations and in general), and are less likely to experience chronic depression

Second, our self- concepts often lead us to create self- fulfilling prophecies— predictions about future interactions that lead us to behave in ways that ensure the interaction unfolds as we predicted. Some self- fulfilling prophecies ignite positive events. After our self- awareness allows us to turn a lens on ourselves, and we develop the picture by defining our self- concepts, self-esteem is the overall value, positive or negative, that we assign to what we see. Standards The key to bolstering your self- esteem is understanding its roots. Self- discrepancy theory suggests that your self- esteem is determined by how you compare to two mental standards ( Higgins, 1987 ). The first is your ideal self, the characteristics (mental, physical, emotional, material, and spir- itual) that you want to possess— the “perfect you.” Kelly describes this as your “fairy godmother” self: that is, if your fairy godmother flew down, and waved her magic wand— instantly transforming you into whoever you dream of being— who would that be? The second is your ought self, the person others wish and expect you to be. You can think of this as your “should” or “supposed to be” self, from the viewpoint of others. This standard stems from expectations of your family, friends, colleagues, and romantic partners, as well as cultural norms. Thus, a critical aspect in maintaining self- esteem and life happiness is choosing to reduce contact with people who routinely tear us down, and instead opting for fellowships with those who fortify us. One primary outside force shaping our sense of self is our gender— the composite of social, psychological, and behavioral attributes that a particular culture associates with an individual’s biological sex (American Psychological Association [APA], 2015), and that differentiate women and men (Canary, Emmers- Sommer, & Faulk- ner, 1997). - Actually, scholars distinguish gender, which is largely learned, or constructed through our social interactions, from biological sex, which is a category assigned at birth. Attachment anxiety is the degree to which a person fears rejection by relationship partners. If you experience high attachment anxiety, you perceive yourself as unlov- able and unworthy— thoughts that may result from being ignored or even abused during childhood. Attachment avoidance is the degree to which someone desires close interper- sonal ties. If you have high attachment avoidance, you’ll likely experience little interest in intimacy, preferring solitude instead. Such feelings may stem from child- hood neglect or an upbringing that encouraged autonomy. Secure attachment individuals are low on both anxiety and avoidance: they’re comfortable with intimacy and seek close ties with others. Secure individuals report warm and supportive relationships, high self- esteem, and confidence in their ability to communicate. Preoccupied attachment adults are high in anxiety and low in avoidance: they desire closeness

but are plagued with fear of rejection. They may use sexual contact to satisfy their compulsive

need to feel loved. People with low anxiety but high avoidance have a dismissive attachment style. They view close relationships as comparatively unimportant, instead prizing and prioritizing self- reliance. Finally, fearful attachment adults are high in both attachment anxiety and avoidance. They fear rejection and tend to shun relationships. Fearful individuals can develop close ties if the relationship seems to guarantee a lack of rejection, such as when a partner is disabled or otherwise dependent on them. In addition to gender and family, our culture is a powerful source of self. Culture is an established, coherent set of beliefs, attitudes, values, and practices shared by a large group of people (Keesing, 1974). If this strikes you as similar to our definition of self- concept, you’re right; culture is like a collective sense of self shared by a large group of people. Renowned sociologist Erving Goffman (1955) noted that whenever you communi- cate with others, you present a public self— your face — that you want others to see and know. You actively create and present your face through your communication. Your face can be anything you want it to be—“perky and upbeat,” “cool and level- headed,” or “tough as nails.” We create different faces for different moments and relationships in our lives, such as our face as a parent, college student, coworker, or homeless- shelter volunteer. - Sometimes your face is a mask , a public self designed to strategically veil your private self (Goffman, 1959) . Masks can be dramatic, such as when Rick Welts hid his grief for weeks over the loss of his longtime partner. Or masks can be subtle— the parent who acts calmly in front of an injured child so the youngster doesn’t become frightened. - Losing face provokes feelings of shame, humiliation, and sadness— in a word, embarrassment. Revealing private information about ourselves is known as self-disclosure (Wheeless, 1978), and it plays a critical role in interpersonal communication and relationship development. According to the interpersonal process model of intimacy, the closeness we feel toward others

in our relationships is created through two things: self- disclosure and the responsiveness of listeners to our disclosure But in all relationships, depth and breadth of social penetration are intertwined with intimacy: the feeling of closeness and union that exists between us and our partners

Follow the advice of Apollo: know your self. Before disclosing, make sure that the aspects of your self you reveal to others are aspects that you want to reveal and that you feel certain about. This is especially important when disclosing intimate feelings, such as romantic interest. When you disclose feelings about others directly to them, you affect their lives and relationship decisions. Consequently, you’re ethically obligated to be certain about the truth of your own feelings before sharing them with others. Know your audience. Whether it’s a Snapchat post or an intimate conversa- tion with a friend, think carefully about how others will perceive your disclosure and how it will impact their thoughts and feelings about you. If you’re unsure of the appropriateness of a disclosure, don’t disclose. Instead of disclosing, talk more generally about the issue or topic first, gauging the person’s level of com- fort with the conversation before revealing deeper information. Don’t force others to self- disclose. We often presume it’s good for people to open up and share their secrets, particularly those that are troubling them. Although it’s perfectly appropriate to let someone know you’re available to listen, it’s unethical and destructive to force or cajole others into sharing information against their will. People have reasons for not wanting to tell you things — just as you have reasons for protecting your own privacy. Avoid gender stereotypes. Don’t fall into the trap of thinking that because someone is a woman she will disclose freely, or that because he’s a man he’s incapable of discussing his feelings.

Men and women are more similar than different when it comes to disclosure. At the same time, be mindful of the tendency to feel more comfortable disclosing to women. Don’t presume that because you’re talking with a woman, it’s appropriate for you to freely disclose. Be sensitive to cultural differences. When interacting with people from different backgrounds, disclose gradually. As with gender, don’t presume disclosure patterns based on ethnicity. Just because someone is Asian doesn’t mean he or she will be more reluctant to disclose than someone of European descent. Go slowly. Share intermediate and central aspects of yourself gradually and only after thorough discussion of peripheral information. Moving too quickly to discussion of your deepest fears, self- esteem concerns, and personal values not only increases your sense of vulnerability but also may make others uncomfortable enough to avoid you. Warranting theory (Walther & Parks, 2002) suggests that when assessing someone’s online self- descriptions, we consider the warranting value of the information presented— that is, the degree to which the information is supported by other people and outside evidence - Information that was obviously crafted by the person, that isn’t supported by others, and that can’t be verified offline has low war- ranting value, and most people wouldn’t trust it. Information that’s created or sup- ported by others and that can be readily verified through alternative sources on- and offline has high warranting value and is consequently perceived as valid. So, for example, news about a professional accomplishment that you tweet or post on Face- book will have low warranting value. The simple rule is that what others say about you online is more important than what you say about yourself. The Components of Self ● The root source of all interpersonal communication is the self , an evolving composite of selfawareness, self- concept , and self- esteem. ● We make sense of ourselves and our communication by comparing our behaviors with those of others. Social comparison has a pronounced impact on our sense of self when the people to whom we’re comparing ourselves are those we admire. ● Our self- concept is defined in part through our looking- glass self. When we have a clearly defined, consistent, and enduring sense of self, we possess self- concept clarity. ● And yet, sometimes a clear self-concept can lead us to develop self-fulfilling prophecies about our behavior. ● It is challenging to have positive self- esteem while living in a culture dominated by images of perfection. Self- discrepancy theory explains the link between these standards and our feelings about our selves, and ways we can overcome low self- esteem. The Sources of Self ● When our families teach us gender lessons, they also create emotional bonds with us that form the foundation for various attachment styles, including secure, preoccupied, dismissive, and fearful attachment.

● Many of us identify with more than one culture and can be thrust into situations in which we must choose a primary cultural allegiance. Communicating Your Self ● The face we present to others is the self that others perceive and evaluate. Sometimes our face reflects our inner selves, and sometimes we adopt masks. ● According to social penetration theory, we develop relationships by delving deeper and more broadly into different layers of self. The more we reveal, the more intimacy we feel with others. ● Revealing private information about ourselves to others is self- disclosure, which, along with the responsiveness of listeners to such disclosure, makes up the interpersonal process model of intimacy. The Online Self ● Information posted about you online has higher warranting value than what you post directly. Chapter 3 Perception is the process of selecting, organiz- ing, and interpreting information from our senses. We rely on perception constantly to make sense of everything and everyone in our environ- ment. Perception begins when we select information on which to focus our atten- tion. We then organize the information into an understandable pattern inside our minds and interpret its meaning. Each activity influences the other: our mental organization of information shapes how we interpret it, and our interpretation of information influences how we mentally organize it. The first step of perception, selection , involves focusing attention on certain sights, sounds, tastes, touches, or smells in our environment. Consider the house- mate example. Once you hear her enter, you would likely select her communication as the focus of your attention. The degree to which particular people or aspects of their communication attract our attention is known as salience Once you’ve selected something as the focus of your attention, you take that infor- mation and structure it into a coherent pattern in your mind, a phase of the percep- tion process known as organization During organization, you engage in punctuation , structuring the information you’ve selected into a chronological sequence that matches how you experienced the order of events As we organize information we have selected into a coherent mental model, we also engage in interpretation, assigning meaning to that information. The knowledge we draw on when interpreting interpersonal communication resides in schemata, mental structures that contain information defining the char- acteristics of various concepts, as well as how those characteristics are related to each other In addition to drawing on our schemata to interpret information from interpersonal encounters, we create explanations for others’ com- ments or behaviors, known as attributions. Attributions are our answers to the why questions we ask every day.

Internal attributions presume that a person’s communication or behavior stems from internal causes, such as character or personality. For example, “My professor didn’t respond to my email because she doesn’t care about students” or “Janet sent this message because she’s rude.” External attributions hold that a person’s communication is caused by factors unrelated to personal qualities: “My professor didn’t respond to my e- mail because she hasn’t checked her messages yet” or “Janet sent this message because I didn’t respond to her first message.” One common mistake is the fundamental attribution error, the tendency to attribute others’ behaviors solely to internal causes (the kind of person they are), rather than to the social or environmental forces affecting them A related error is the actor- observer effect, the tendency of people to make external attributions regarding their own behaviors (Fiske & Taylor, 1991). Because our mental focus during interpersonal encounters is on factors external to us— especially the person with whom we’re interacting— we tend to credit these factors as causing our own communication. This is particularly prevalent during unpleasant interactions. Our own impolite remarks during family conflicts, for example, are viewed as “reactions to their hurtful communication” rather than “messages caused by our own insensitivity.” In cases in which our actions result in noteworthy success, either personal or professional, we typically take credit for the success by making an internal attribution, a tendency known as the self- serving bias (Fiske & Taylor, 1991). Suppose you’ve successfully persuaded a friend to lend you her car for the weekend. In this case, you will probably attribute this success to your charm and persuasive skill, rather than to luck or your friend’s generosity. The self- serving bias is driven by ego protection: by crediting ourselves for our life successes, we can feel happier about who we are. - bias. If you think someone has spoken to you in an offensive way, ask yourself if it’s possible that outside forces— including your own behavior— could have caused the problem. Also keep in mind that communication (like other forms of human behavior) rarely stems from only external or internal causes. It’s caused by a combination of both Uncertainty Reduction Theory, our primary compulsion during initial interac- tions is to reduce uncertainty about our communication partners by gathering enough information about them that their communication becomes predictable and explainable - Known as passive strategies, these approaches can help you predict how he or she may behave when interacting with you, reducing your uncertainty. - Second, you can try active strategies by asking other people questions about someone you’re interested in. - Third, and perhaps most effective, are interactive strategies: starting a direct interaction with the person you’re inter- ested in. When you grow up valuing certain cultural beliefs, attitudes, and values as your own, you naturally perceive those who share these with you as funda- mentally similar to yourself—

people you consider ingroupers In contrast, you may perceive people who aren’t similar to yourself as outgroupers. Personality is an individual’s characteristic way of thinking, feeling, and acting, based on the traits— enduring motives and impulses— that he or she possesses

At the same time we perceive people through a filter of our own self- perception, we also tend to perceive our own unique traits more favorably than unique traits possessed by others— even romantic partners— an effect known as the self-enhancement bias Your perception of Shoshanna was created using implicit personality theories, personal beliefs about different types of personalities and the ways in which traits cluster together When we use perception to size up other people, we form interpersonal impressions—mental pictures of who people are and how we feel about them. One way we form impressions of others is to construct a Gestalt, a general sense of a person that’s either positive or negative. Pollyanna effects come into play when we form Gestalts. When Gestalts are formed, they are more likely to be positive than negative, an effect known as the positivity bias. When we create Gestalts, we don’t treat all information that we learn about people as equally important. Instead, we place emphasis on the negative information we learn about others, a pattern known as the negativity effect.

This tendency to positively interpret what s...