Discussing stereotypes

The one concept in the book I feel deserved extra discussion is stereotypes. I know that stereotypes seem like an average topic, but I thought that there wasn’t enough discussion on it in the book. It didn’t really go into depth on either the negative or objective aspect. With some of the other concepts there were more examples and explanations. The reason I feel that stereotypes should be further discussed is because though it shouldn’t always be looked at negatively in reality it is. I think that if people were more aware of how stereotypes are simply objective perceptions then they would less likely turn into negative situations of prejudice. I hear too many times in the media how stereotypes are depicted as something negative. I also believe that the media always spins the negative aspect of stereotypes. Personally the stereotypes I think that are made toward my ethnicity or the place I reside are humorous. However not many people would agree at times that stereotypes are neither humorous nor amusing.

Two interesting concepts

The two concepts from the book I thought were the most interesting are e-fatigue and non-verbal behaviors. First I will discuss e-fatigue. As I discussed before I am between generations so I grew up without the internet for the most part until high-school. I remember how in high school the internet was just becoming known. Now the internet is frequented by almost everyone. Not only is the internet of increased use but other avenues of technology as well. I have seen how technology has evolved and grown over the years. I simply find it interesting how it has evolved into a major part of our lives and history.
The second concept I like to talk about is non-verbal behavior. Non-verbal behavior is just one of those characteristics that I can share with everyone. No matter what kind of people we are we all practice this simple concept. Out of all the characteristics on behavior discussed in the book, non-verbal behavior is one that I will have in common with virtually everyone. That is why it is so interesting.

Communication Inquiry

The most interesting method is gathering and analyzing data. I find this part the most interesting because this formulates theories and/or answers. A question I would pose for researching deception on cheating spouses would be “when was the first time you noticed your spouse leaving home?” Sounds like a basic question to the scenario but so many answers could be shared. The most interesting part is how the answers are shared and to the extent of information given. The most ideal method for this scenario would be gathering and analyzing data. Analyzing data from the question would probably find possible answers. Analyzing this particular scenario would take considerable study because it is primarily based on assumptions (if of course no concrete evidence is found). In order to find concrete answers there must first be a thorough investigation. I also believe with this situation there really isn’t a specific answer or solution so the other methods may not be feasible.

E-Fatigue

I find this concept to be interesting in chapter 11 for two reasons. One is because I have never heard of the term. Second is that I believe this is a true statement of how communication effects our current society.
Being that I am between generations of the cyber age and of the one that precedes, I see the relevance to this term. When I was younger the internet was just introduced. Had I known that technology would eventually replace books and classrooms, I might have reconsidered the thought of actually physically attending college. But aside from that I find the consistent change of technology keeps me interested. Every year it seems that there is something significantly different than before. Technology changes quite frequently that at times it’s hard to keep up. I remember when I just bought my first phone and how excited I was. Then the newer model came out only months later. I remember that feeling of wanting the newer version because mine was already outdated. Honestly that feeling was a bit of an annoyance.

Medium

Mediums consist of different tools of communication. Those tools can be through television, radio, or the internet to name a few. I believe any sort of medium is important because it is in the perception of individuals who place value on these tools. Format, content, and broadcasting elements of communication go hand in hand. First the formatting would have to illustrate a particular interest. The content would then display this particular interest. Lastly it is how the interest is broadcasted to gain the most prospects. I find that it is the interests of audiences that ultimately determine what goes into each element. For example gamers will most likely pay attention to these elements if they are set into a video game. Another example would be of sports fanatics. Their medium would perhaps be more effective on the large advertising screen at a sporting event. So yes I would have to conclude that the medium is essential to successfully relay a message.

Cyber friendships

In regards to having friendships online, I have established few through networking sites. There are some that only exist through the internet because some are with others who live in other countries. I find it difficult to have face to face friendships with those who do not live near by. The internet seems to have the proper tools in order to keep those lines of friendship intact.
I think face to face friendships largely differ from online relationships. One reason is because I see how friends of my own have friendships online. Yes they converse online but I have yet to witness any of them finding interest conversing in person. In my opinion I think these relationships simply are not the same as those with face to face relationships because they are established online. Honestly I think this question is difficult to explain because there are some people who truly value friendships online and those who do not. As for myself I could really careless either way.

Dating in the Workplace

The one concept from chapter 8 in Trenholm I’d like to discuss is workplace relationships. I found this topic interesting because there have been stigmas attached to dating in the workplace as taboo and to not consider the option for years. However it seems that the stigma is quickly fading. For the most part I would agree that having a workplace relationship can be complicated. But if it happens to work out in the end, that would be the more positive aspect. The negative aspect is that it may not work out. When it doesn’t work out things can get complicated. For example if the two individuals worked in the same department and there is a need for constant interaction a break-up might have an impact on workflow. On the other hand if the two individuals work in a large corporation and in separate departments, complications won’t be as evident. None the less work relationships should be carefully thought through before engaging.

Communication Etiquette

Cellular phones have definitely contributed to life conveniences. Answering machines are now a thing of the past. Conference calls have narrowed down the distance between important contacts. Faxes have found ways for important documents to be imported at faster rates. Among these technological communication types, I believe call phones have caused numerous annoyances as well. Most of the annoyances I have noticed are when people use them while driving-really? I know we can all be guilty of it, but if we can live through decades of driving without talking on a phone why stop now? Along with the annoyances it can also be very dangerous.
Timing communication is key to any fundamental concern, especially in regards to time zones. For example one shouldn’t send a fax or make a phone call at 9 pm in California to someone in New York because it would midnight. Setting up email or internet screen names for work versus personal is important. You wouldn’t want your work screen name to be “big.papa.4.u” because people may not take you seriously. It just seems to be common etiquette. Call waiting use to be an exciting feature. Being able to take two phone calls at home sounded convenient. However to others it can become quite irritating. The question I pose for this is if I am to call first, why should I hold on so you can a second? What I have to say about call waiting is that they can wait.

Community outreach

Organizations tend to have a focus on the environment they are in. For example homeless shelters tend to be in urban areas, whereas country clubs are typically in the suburbs. Another example would be how my school is built in the center of downtown San Jose which is between urban and suburban. Much of the campus’ organizations are focused on poverty, low income families, and homelessness. Through my education at San Jose State, I have participated in many affiliations involving homelessness and poverty. I believe being that San Jose State is near an urban area, it serves an obligation to reach out to the problems urban areas tend to have.
The ethical value of San Jose State is that it is reaching out to the urban community. I believe there are always ethical values of organizations. Typically community organizations are developed to help implement services that help with social issues such as illiteracy or drug dependency. Which ever the case may be or what area they are in, organizations help find solutions to those problems.

On the Positive Side

The most interesting and important concept from Trenholm (2011) in chapter 6 is Relational Maintenance Behavior. I thought the concepts of positivity, openness, assurance, networks, task sharing, conflict management, and advice sharing-offering are characteristics of a successful relationship. Whether it’s platonic or romantic these concepts can help shape and improve relationships. The most important one I believe is positivity. According to Trenholm positivity is where partners are cheerful and optimistic, build each other’s self-esteem, patient and forgiving, and refrain from criticism. While I don’t completely agree that we can comply with these guidelines constantly we should always remain objective about situations and know that we are all human and make mistakes.
The concept I believe to be the most useful is task sharing. Trenholm states that task sharing is where individuals are both equally responsible in a relationship and both help with tasks that need to be done (2011). This reminds me of teamwork. Teamwork can help improve on communication and also simplify issues that seem difficult.

Getting to know you

In relation to the readings the filters I typically rely on to objectively choose a spouse would be physical proximity and interaction cues. Physical proximity is important to me because I don’t take well to long distance relationships. I believe that living within close proximities of friends is also helpful to keep relationships close. Interaction cues are relevant in how I choose a spouse because I would want to have comfortable interactions. According to Trenholm interaction cues determine if conversations will go smooth and comfortable or awkward and difficult (2011). For the most part this filter is important because I don’t want to struggle keeping conversations interesting. I can also tell if I have common interests with someone simply by interactions.
Characteristics in someone I don’t care for are those who like to talk about themselves. I find that people who talk about themselves tend to be uninteresting or disinterested in me. Self centeredness is truly unattractive. As far as eliminating and reconsidering someone based on different filters is something I have experienced. There have been several instances where I didn’t care for someone because a conversation didn’t go well (interaction cues), however getting to know that individual better did I reconsider them as a friend (cognitive cues).

One-up

In regards to rigid complementarity, competitive symmetry, and submissive symmetry I would have to argue that rigid complimentarity would be the hardest to change. Being that I once lived under the strict rules of my parents and now being a parent myself I understand how this concept would be hard to change. As a child, adolescent, and young adult I was constantly making the wrong decisions-even when I thought I was making good ones. Therefore I believe parents naturally assume the position as the “one-up” person to help guide their children to make proper decisions. Now that I’m a parent I want to do the same for my child. Though it will be frustrating at times I believe that it’s hard to change because parents will want to be the person in charge.
Out of the three concepts the one I think would be the most damaging would be competitive symmetry. In Trenholm it states that to individuals compete to be in the higher position (2011). I think this is damaging to any relationship when competition is involved. Friendships rely on equal ability and mutual understanding to sustain a relationship. Competitiveness will only add tension eventually resulting in negative feelings. I also believe this concept can cause self-esteem issues. If two individuals are in constant opposition one person may eventually think the other is better-even though it’s not true. I’ve seen this happen in many friendships through high school where teens compete for popularity.

Stereotypes

One concept from the book I’d like to discuss further is stereotypes. According to Trenholm stereotypes are generalized second hand beliefs which provide conceptual biases (2011). Though this topic is pretty general, I think it’s something that deserves plenty of recognition. In our everyday lives we carry biases about almost everything. We may not realize it but we judge everything from people to books, movies or places.
This chapter in Trenholm discusses how people are creatures of habit and that we tend to adapt to our cultural beliefs. Cultural beliefs can also be related to stereotypes. We grow up thinking the way we do because our culture has created distinct ways to look at the world. This is how stereotypes develop. Stereotypes are not bias of culture as they exist everywhere. Again it is due to our natural instincts that we perceive judgments as we are a result of the judgments our cultures create.

Premises Relating to the Judicial System

For the most part I do agree with rationality, perfectibility, and mutability premises. I think they are basic understandings of human development in regards to learning through our mistakes. As human beings we constantly make mistakes, but as we grow we consciously deter away from those mishaps. This would relate to how we discover truth through logic; achieve goodness through effort and control, and act in ways that have been shaped through our environment (Trenholm, 2011).
If I were to incorporate these beliefs into a system I would conclude them to be a part of the judicial system and the individuals who have gone through the processes of. Within the judicial system when someone is being prosecuted they must go through trials to seek their innocence with logical evaluation. For those who have been incarcerated we would like to believe they can achieve decent behavior if they continually make conscious efforts. Lastly, many people who are incarcerated have faced trials of their own through circumstances in their lives which may have been out of their control. Although I relate these premises to the judicial system, they can be practiced among groups of people through out the world as well.

A shocking indifference

I firmly believe that human beings are purely creatures of habit. I grew up in a richly Filipino culture where friends and family kiss on the cheek as a greeting. When my parents divorced we still carried on our traditional greetings even when my mother re-married a Caucasian man. He came from a family where it wasn’t customary to even hug unless you were family or known each other for a long time. When I first met my step-dad’s sister-in-law, I went to give her a hug and a kiss on the cheek and she pulled away. I was completely embarrassed. It was more than habitual-it was traditional. After that encounter I no longer greet with a kiss unless I know it’s appropriate.
I suppose that my way of greeting was my own traditional “habit” however I have altered it since. This is where I would argue that there is a possibility to change cultural traditions. I think that if you experience a shocking indifference similar to what I did with my step-dad’s sister-in-law there is definitely going to be altercations. I also think that if you’re open to new experiences then one shouldn’t be afraid of different customs.

Onto another topic

One particular topic I would like to discuss is nonverbal messages as complements which “modify or elaborate…” (Trenholm, 2011). Nonverbal signs and cues give an extension of meaning to communication. Sometimes there are instances where we would like to communicate something further without saying anything more than we’d like. There are many ways nonverbal messages can help clarify these feelings and or emotions. For example first dates, job interviews, or even friendly conversation. First dates can always be nerve racking which facial expressions of endearment can come in handy if we are interested in the other. Or perhaps expressions of boredom can be a clear indicator of disinterest instead. Job interviews are tricky also. By keeping a relaxed demeanor we can portray ourselves as being confident instead of nervous. Speaking among friends can take on a completely different role all together. Usually with friends we can be comfortable exhibiting an array of nonverbal actions without feeling judgment. Even when we are completely comfortable we’d like those around us to notice in our demeanor.

Was it something I said?

American culture is very different from Asian culture. I come from an Asian background and I have traveled to Asia. I see many differences in how people communicate versus how people communicate in the US. In general much of the communication styles and techniques are similar, but there are significant differences as well. For instance if someone were to be reprimanded by a parent within the Asian culture, we are taught not to speak or look them in the eye. It would be considered rude and disrespectful. However in the American culture, we are suppose to look our parents in the face as a sign that we are listening. Growing up in the US, I had to distinguish this difference early on while I attended school. I can remember a time when I got in trouble for leaving school campus. The Vice-Principle kept saying “Please look at me” and it felt somewhat odd. She thought I was being defiant, but I was reacting as I always did at home. My mother had to go in and explain it to her. After their conversation she understood better why I was reacting the way I did.

Reading it all wrong

I can recall there was a moment with a co-worker who I thought was upset with me. It was an important week at the school I work for and the school event was quickly approaching. I had been avidly getting things prepared for the class and I asked my co-teacher if she could help hang some decorations. She quickly replied “yes, ok” and walked away. She didn’t return to the classroom for about a half hour so I assumed she was irritated that I asked her. Upon her return we were both very quiet. A couple minutes into the silence she turned to me and said she wasn’t feeling well and had to leave. Apparently she left the room because she was very sick-not upset. I was relieved because I thought I had upset her but she was simply ill. From chapter 5 Trenholm (2011) argues that we should “give proper attention to nonverbal cues”. I should have realized that she wasn’t feeling well and if I wasn’t so intent on getting the classroom ready I probably would have noticed.

Attention please

I find it very difficult to focus at times when listening to certain individuals. Sometimes these individuals are the ones closest to me. As stated from the book we have to be selective of what we pay attention to therefore we screen out most of the sensory data that surrounds us (Trenholm, 2011). I tend to do this often when I am engulfed in a busy workday. I thought this concept from the book aligned with my attitude of communication pretty well. I can recall a number of times when I simply zone out and pay little attention to those who need my attention. I don’t purposely do it. There are just times in the day where I constantly focus on other things that keep my mind occupied. So it is not the lack of interest I find in communicating, it’s the distraction of everyday life that get in the way of normal communication functions including my attention.

FeMale

I do agree that females and males have a different way of communicating. First of all women and men are different emotionally and psychologically. One way to look at it would be how women think. Women tend to attach more emotional feelings to interactions. We also like to think and inquire about everything. On the other hand, I believe with men certain things simply don’t matter. For instance women care if an outfit doesn’t look flattering whereas a man doesn’t typically care if their socks match. However if a women were to ask a man (that doesn’t care about his socks) about her outfit, he will most likely give an undesirable answer. In this case the male simply isn’t interested nor does he feel he has offended. On the other hand the female would probably be upset. It is simply the indifference that males and females share when it comes to processing perceptions and communication strategies.

The Mindful Listener

I personally don’t think it’s possible to perceive others without any sort of judgment. I believe that as we grow we develop pre-judgments about places, things, and “types” of people over time which we can’t seem to avoid. Of course at no fault of our own, we would rather think in one consistent way instead of taking the time to analyze thoughtfully. In the book it is explained as “cognitive misers” or saving our conscious attention for important situations and spend much of our time being mindless. (Trenholm, 2011). Although we can be mindless, we can definitely re-program ourselves to be mindful when need be. Trenholm goes onto explain that “effective listeners know when to rely on familiar scripts, but they also know how and when to switch from mindless to mindful…”. I agree with Trenholm that effective listeners can adapt to be more self-conscious, other aware, and able to shed pre-conceived perceptions to conduct a fair listening environment.

Personal and Professional Consequence

In chapter 9, Trenholm states “The ability to convey that information clearly and effectively is essential for professional advancement.” As a senior, I am swiftly approaching the possibility of an internship in a new field of work. This topic resonates with me because I am hopeful that my course work in Communications will guide me along the path to professional success. Communicating is an important piece to many job markets, but only certain individuals are able to attain a certain level of success. I see this example from the book as good advice. I have to remember that if ever I’m in a situation where my communication skills are going to be criticized, I need to be an effective facilitator. This holds true to my current job also. I have seen through my college experiences that my communication in my current job has improved; another example that communicating well can help your current employment status.

The Ex-Vice President

Among the many great speakers I have seen on television and in person, one that I enjoyed watching the most would have to be ex-vice-president Al Gore. Aside from having the fortunate pleasure in watching him speak near a former elementary school I worked at in the past, I’m also fond of his documentary An Inconvenient Truth. His strongest characteristics as a speaker would have to be all three-credibility, attractiveness, and power. In his film, he covers many aspects of environmental concerns from both a political and educational stand point. His credibility as a well educated vice-president made him quite appealing to listen to. As far as incorporating Ethos into the way he speaks, I believe he did an exceptional job already. However if he were to improve that aspect I think he should share his educational background with the audience more frequently. Although it’s obvious of his credibility as a political leader, noting his educational experiences can give others another perspective of his intelligence.

Memorable speaker

The best speaker I have heard thus far is actually a grad student here at SJSU. She was in one of my senior courses this past year and she actually inspired me. I have heard other speakers before, but she is definitely the more notable speaker I remember. I enjoyed listening to her because she was telling her experience about being a Communications major and how she grew to be a better communicator through the process. I related closely with what she spoke about, however it was the way she carried herself and her obvious confidence that I admired. It is that type of confidence I would like to achieve through my own experiences.
The worst speaker I have to admit was John McCain (apologies in advance to anybody who is a McCain fan). Although I watched him in the Presidential debate on television, he was quite possibly the worst speaker. He seemed nervous and portrayed defensive tactics in every message. It was evident through out the whole debate. I simply thought it was distasteful. I believe within a good debate, you need to have a level of rationality with an opposing individual/s regardless of opinion.

Misinterpreting

I thought the psychological model was interesting considering the way we communicate today. The psychological model discusses how “meanings intended by the source differ from the meanings interpreted by the source”. I believe this happens more often now because of the increasing use of technology. In our current generation there is consistent use of email and messaging through cell phones. I wanted to point out how messages through email or texting can be easily misinterpreted. For this reason is because body language and emotions can’t be seen or felt through a message. From personal experience, a friend thought I was mad because I wouldn’t reply to her text message when in actuality my phone was turned off. Messages cannot relay tone, reasoning, or feelings which are necessary for successful communication. When there is a lack of interpersonal communication messages can become confusing. These examples signify the psychological model and how they are present in today’s society.

Communicating Pragmatically

It completely makes sense that communication becomes a pattern of interaction. I would simply relate patterned interaction to ones personality. Through our development our personality’s progress and change forming the ways we communicate. Each of us has different standards in communicating with different individuals. Based on those standards (i.e. being humorous, serious, casual etc.) they essentially become our patterns.
Communication is similar to a game because we strategically choose our patterns and words to influence another individual. For example if I want someone to see my humorous side, I would tell a joke. If I want someone to know I’m serious about an issue I would change my tone and manner to be more earnest. However communication is unlike a game because there may not always be an end result. Players in a game would walk away either winning or losing. With communication both participants could either be satisfied or unconvinced.

Communicating Culture

When I think of building worlds in the American culture, I think of consumer waste. Not to say that the entire American culture is wasteful, I’m just using it as an example to how I visualize other countries. Here in America there is a need for everything consumable involving paper goods (i.e. toilet paper, paper towels, tissues, napkins). I think mainly about paper products because there are so many variations of the sort! Honestly do we need that many? When I traveled to different parts of Asia, paper goods simply didn’t exist or there was very little of. Here in America it’s everywhere! I think it’s a big part of the way we “build worlds” because it’s been engrained in the way we live for as long as I can remember. We communicate to future generations that it’s ok to consistently use paper products, and we keep doing so. As for it being successful, I would have to say it’s not because we are the main cause to our own waste.

Memory

One concept I wanted to discuss is one of the five canons of rhetoric. The one I think is the most important to note is memory. Memory is “the ability to hold content, style, and arrangement in one’s mind” (Trenholm). As with any good speech, being able to recall facts or data can be crucial for success. Also with memory, it’s useful during debates. The theory behind memory is that if a speaker can remember quickly, there is little room for error. I think it’s also useful for speakers because you don’t want to look like you’re reading off a piece of paper. Speakers tend to know their information better when information is memorized. It’s beneficial for a speaker to have a good memory so a speech can flow with ease. Memory also helps keep complex parts of a speech in order. It’s as if holding all the information from an outline inside your head.

Being an orator

I would have to agree with what the Greeks believed about moral beliefs coinciding with being an orator. When you’re speaking to an audience, you want them to believe what you say, so truth seems necessary. However morals are not essential to be a good one. When I envision an orator (I might not believe in them) I think of the used cars salesman down the street. They have wonderful persuasion skills in getting people to buy from them, but they may not be completely honest about their products. I have to admit they can be pretty good with their delivery in most instances. But on the other hand when there isn’t honesty behind words spoken, it can or eventually would become evident. So honesty and integrity can also be a valuable suit for a good orator. However just like the used cars salesman, the delivery of information is what constructs an orator as well.

I'm sticking to Logos

One particular speaker I admire would have to be my former boss and director Katherine. I had seen her facilitate meetings four to five times a year. I thought Katherine’s use of persuasion fell under the Logos category. Katherine was very well informed on everything that would go on in work from both the good and bad sides of situations. She tended to stay reasonable and would speak in meetings as if she were to address everything and everyone. She always took a practical approach in dealing with issues to make sure things would be resolved fairly. Being she was very professional, Aristotle’s classifications fit her work personality well. As for myself, I believe I fall under Logos as well. I suppose that is why I admired Katherine’s way of speaking in meetings and with other co-workers. I like to make sure that when I speak I’m being sensible and not overlooking details that are important. In general that is also how I try to persuade-with the use of logical information that hopefully everyone can agree upon.

Introduce myself

Hello COMM 105!
I am in my last and final semester here at SJSU. Aside from day to day communication, my communication experience has mostly been through college. I haven't had the opportunity to apply for internships yet, but I will be entering one for Kaiser this summer. I enjoy crafty projects, snowboarding, and going to football and baseball games. Goodluck to you all this semester!