How often do you look at the world through the eyes of another person? There are many cliches that suggest we should. We all know we can "walk a mile in the others shoes" and we should "do unto others as we would have them do unto us." Cliches aside, however, actually taking the perspective of another person is a very difficult thing to do. It's kind of hard to believe that the I- centered way we view the world is a cultural thing.
Likewise, the way we think about communicaton is very much a cultural thing. There are many models and theories of communication that make very different assumptions about communication. For most of us, the default model of communication focuses on transmission. A sender transmits a message to a receiver. The telephone becomes the perfect metaphor for any communication with its electronic encoding of message, its transmission of the message over copper or fiber optic cables (or radio waves), and the decoding of message by the phone on the receiving end.
Try this experiment. Think of communication as a waterfall. Communication begins at the top of the waterfall; there certainly is movement as the water rushes off the cliff. As the water cascades it is shaped, changed, and dispersed. Some of the water evaporates. If you're standing near the waterfall you will be cooled or chilled by the mist. Some of the water impacts the land behind the waterfall, over time this land erodes and changes shape. Most of the water lands in the pool at the bottom. Sometimes the stream into the pool is steady and predictable. Other times it seems to land in a random fashion. If the stream stops the pool at the bottom dries up.
What does this metaphor say about the communication between a student and a teacher? What does it say about the communication between you and your significant other. Who's the pool at the bottom? Where does the water at the top come from? Can we learn anything new about communication from radically changing the metaphor we use. Some people believe that our transmissional metaphor causes as many problems in understanding communication as it solves.
What things about communication should a good metaphor highlight? What is your default model for thinking about communication? Does it ever prevent you from understanding communication?
--Rick
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
What a odd yet insightful way to think about communication, as a metaphor. I cannot even begin to explain what my metaphor is or what I even know about how to communicate. I've been told I've always been a talker and I do a pretty good job at it. I feel like I really understand good communication. Things that should be highlighted about communication are that it's never boring, you never have anything that is unimportant to talk about. What you had to eat today is sometimes interesting but always leads to something on the more "stimulating" side. Another thing that is important about communication is understanding the cultural differences about communicating, because when we talk about communicating we are not only talking about verbal communication which I sometimes get stuck with that narrow-minded thought, we are also talking about non-verbal communication. Such as the way I sit in class or the way I greet another. Communication is such an extrodinary thing, the waterfall metaphor for example. I never thought of communicating like that before. We will never know who we impact by what we say or who will remember us by what we do. We never know where the communication between me and my roommate will fall in the pool (of people?) We basically control how we present ourselves and everything we do by using our communicating knowledge, verbally or non-verbally. Maybe everyone should have to take communication classes.
What a odd yet insightful way to think about communication, as a metaphor. I cannot even begin to explain what my metaphor is or what I even know about how to communicate. I've been told I've always been a talker and I do a pretty good job at it. I feel like I really understand good communication. Things that should be highlighted about communication are that it's never boring, you never have anything that is unimportant to talk about. What you had to eat today is sometimes interesting but always leads to something on the more "stimulating" side. Another thing that is important about communication is understanding the cultural differences about communicating, because when we talk about communicating we are not only talking about verbal communication which I sometimes get stuck with that narrow-minded thought, we are also talking about non-verbal communication. Such as the way I sit in class or the way I greet another. Communication is such an extrodinary thing, the waterfall metaphor for example. I never thought of communicating like that before. We will never know who we impact by what we say or who will remember us by what we do. We never know where the communication between me and my roommate will fall in the pool (of people?) We basically control how we present ourselves and everything we do by using our communicating knowledge, verbally or non-verbally. Maybe everyone should have to take communication classes.
There are several elements of communication that a good metaphor should highlight. I think that the first thing that should be noted when using metaphors to explain communication is that there are going to be misunderstandings between different individuals. Although the message may seem completely clear to the sender and to some others, some individuals may have had some kind of interference when listening to that message, whether it is commotion surrounding the message, such as the noise in a classroom or in an office, or even a language barrier. The second thing that I think a good metaphor should highlight is how communication is ever changing. They way we communicate now is a lot different from the types of communication methods used years ago. We have much more technology now and messages can get sent to others through numerous sources such as e-mail, telephone, and fax. These different types of communication can add to the misunderstandings and confusion of messages. I think that the waterfall metaphor is a good metaphor. The idea that although most of the water (the message) reaches the the big pool (the receiver), and some water may splash elsewhere (indicating that the entirety of the message was not received) covers the general thought that misunderstandings often occur. The idea that communication is ever changing is also covered by the waterfall metaphor. The idea that the bottom of the body of water that the waterfall flows into erodes and changes form is a good comparison. The bottom of a lake changes, just like the ways we receive messages has changed. Overall, I don't think that there can be only one possible metaphor to sum of communication in total because there are so many different elements to it. The idea of communication may seem relatively simple, but misunderstandings and misinterpretations happen all the time
Well when it comes to a student-teacher relationship I think that the waterfall metaphor is somewhat applicable. The waterfall would be the information the prof is trying to relay to the student and the pool at the bottom, would be what the student catches of that information - or retains. What we retain however, is affected by a number of factors and those factors are represented by the way the water is shaped, changed, and dispersed as it cascades. Looking at the metaphor from the relationship perspective you could say that the closer you are to the fall, the more you are allowing it to affect you (being misted, getting chilled ect.) and if you chose to move further away you are not letting the water have an effect on you. I think this is a good way to think about getting closer to someone in a relationship.
I think that a good metaphor to describle communication should hightlight a) a message getting from point a to point b b) the many factors that affect the message on its way to point b c)how it takes work to communicate effectively. To be honest I have never really thought of a personal default model for describing communication. A car traveling somewhere that the driver isn't necessarily familiar with comes to mind. The attempt to get from point a to point b represents the sender and reciever. The effectiveness of the message being recieved is represented by all of the things that could affect the cars trip (bad weather, detours, road conditions, ect.) I don't think that my metaphor necessarily prevents me from understanding communication, but rather the complexity of the topic itself and the fact that like I stated before, communicating naturally is usually ineffective.
I have heard many times before about that metaphor of communication with the telephone. I think there is more to look at with this one as far as problems go. There is always the possibility, now that cell phones are widely used, of a dropped call or severed connection. When one person calls another, the receiver may not always understand what the sender is saying. I would consider this as static in the conversation. Dropped calls are quite common now with cell phones and can be seen as interference within a conversation. I sometimes wonder if the other person really hung up or not. I think with society changing that a new metaphor should be used to describe communication. This metaphor needs to cover all the bases as far as communication is concerned. Here's my example: communication is sending a text message to someone else. Here a sender is sending a text to the receiver who also has a cell phone. There is the chance that it will be dropped due to interference. The receiver may not be able to read the text due to the jargon that is used nowadays. I think my metaphor definitely works with communication.
I don't think I would have ever imagined communication to be like a waterfall, had you not suggested it. When I imagine two people conversing as if they were the top of the waterfall and the pool at the bottom, I consider the receiver to be the pool. I feel this way because, as you described, water is always lost on its journey down. This is similar to the way that meaning is always lost in conversation. This result cannot be prevented, no matter what the relationship. Never is 100% of the meaning recieved. I feel like we can learn new things about communication when we change the metaphor we use. For example, the telephone metaphor (that messages are sent and received by both individuals) doesn't acknowledge the fact that information is often lost. In reality, the telephone model is much too simplistic. A more fitting metaphor might be the creeping and receding tide. Picture the water being the messages sent and received. As the tide goes up the shore and back down, messages are sent. But, messages also come back. This is what can't happen with the waterfall metaphor: water can go down, but not back up. But in life, messages are both sent and received. The tide metaphor also allows for the suggestion that meaning is lost when the water (message) does not recede in the exact same way it creeps. Finally, things such as nonverbal behaviors are often the cause of meaning not being fully conveyed. In the tide metaphor, this includes things such as sand, wind, and gravity. I apologize if this makes no sense for anyone else. It's just what I think about.
It's very interesting to look at communication as a metaphor, but I feel a very good way to do so. Communication to me is always changing and there is always a different turn it takes. For instance, when talking with my friends or family, communication could be smooth and understanding, but at the same time could be lost or misinterpreted. There are many different ways to talk to people, especially when dealing with parents, teachers, and friends. You talk differently to different people. For example, you talk with respect to a teacher or parent, but may talk relaxed with a friend. Either way, communication is always a moving process. Like the waterfall metaphor, as communication moves from one person to another (water flowing over the waterfall into the big pool) it can be lost along the way. Another important aspect to understand about communication is the cultural differences. For instance, we have different non-verbals in America than we do in Japan. We need to understand these differences and apply them to our communication processes. Without this understanding, it is difficult for the waterfall to flow effectively. Either way there are going to be misunderstandings, but with the knowledge of communication and taking the effort to communicate properly, hopefully we can limit the amount of turns the waterfall takes!
I would have to say that my default model of communication is more like the Transactional model, because I think of communication as an ongoing process with no definite beginning or end. The persons involved in the communication are both simultaneously a sender and a receiver. They are sending messages, which can be effected by noise, interpreting messages, which are effected by numerous factors, and are giving feedback (verbally and nonverbally).
As far as viewing the world, or communication, through the eyes of another, I agree that it’s difficult and because we live in such a fast-passed, “I-centered” society, I don’t think everyone takes the time to reflect. I know I’m guilty! Communication happens so fast and we communicate so often that it is easily taken for granted. Like in our textbook, “you cannot not communicate.”
Thinking of communication as a waterfall is a creative metaphor. The professor would be at the top of the waterfall and their message is the water rushing off the cliff. The message is shaped, changed, and dispersed due to physical and psychological noise, maybe even by the frame of reference of it’s receivers, and other factors. If the student allows themselves to be cooled or chilled by the water, they are considering how to interpret the message. What the student gets out of the message is the pool at the bottom. The land behind the waterfall represents the student’s past experiences (which change over time) that effect how they interpret communication. I guess that’s how I understand the metaphor!
I really like the metaphor of a waterfall when speaking of communication. It is a very good way of looking at how communication works and shapes as it continues. To me, communication is never ending. You may have a conversation with one person and it will carry onto the next person you interact with. There is a form of communication at every point of our lives, from hearing someone else’s conversation (being cooled with the mist of the waterfall) to diving deep into a conversation with a loved one (plummeting to the bottom). It even becomes difficult with the interruptions and internal noises that affect us. I think that a lot of times people get caught up in the idea that everyone will communicate the same when in fact it is the opposite. This can also create barriers, even create arguments.
When it comes to teacher/students relationships, one never knows how much a student really hears, or even retains. The teacher would be the top of the waterfall the students the bottom. You can think of the relationship being a single day in class or semester. What gets in the way? Personal emotions or other distractions. You can look it as ones entire school career. How has the pool at the bottom changed, how do you look at teachers now as opposed to 6 years ago. The communication on both the receiver and sender sides molds and changes throughout years.
I think that many people think of communication as something simple yet it has many turns and challenges.
When I first read the waterfall metaphor, I thought of it a little different in the student teacher relationship. I imagined the students being the water and the professor being the land around the river. Professors (land) can morph and shape the way students (river) learn act and communicate. Professors can’t do anything too drastic, otherwise they will get eroded away. Overtime students change the way professors think too. The waterfall would be students getting thrown out into the work world. (I’m going out on a limb here) If the professors gave us a challenging river path, then we will be warmer water and thus by the time we get to the pool (workplace) we will float to the top. So that was my initial thought when reading the metaphor, but I see after reading everyone else’s thoughts, I am a little off base. But I thought of it more as a transactional process where both the professor and the students have an effect on each other indirectly.
This is a very interesting thought. It makes a lot of sense though. If we look at communication as a waterfall, a basic conversation between a student and teacher represents the waterfall and the mist is the message being picked up indirectly by near students. They probably only hear bits and pieces of the conversation to see if it relates to them or not.
The communication between you and a significant other is shown through the waterfall changing, the communication between two people can be different and change from the sender to the reciever. The pool at the bottom is either where people do not understand the message sent at all or represents people who did not even hear the message, so it stops. The water comes from the pool. Communication is still constant and always going so the bottom of a waterfall could actually be the top of another one. I think we can learn a lot about communication through this metaphor. It shows us that there are so many other people involved in a message being sent and recieved. A good metaphor should highlight the fact that communication is always constant, it effects other people around the message, and that their are a lot of different disturbances that can change a message or be interpreted differently. My default model is that of a basic sender/receiver model. It does put a limitation on the way I think.
Posted By Amanda F:
The metaphor is an interesting way to look at communication, especially between a teacher and a student. I agree with what jennie said. In relation to the waterfall metaphor, the communication that begins at the top of the waterfall is the teacher and the message that they are trying to send. The student is the pool at the bottom. Some of the message the teacher is trying to send may evaporate, or not reach the student due to barriers and then how the student decodes the message can happen in many different ways, just like when the waterfall hits the bottom. Chapter two describes many different ways in which communication can be used in an organization, such as communication as a startegic control or communication as an information transfer. Communication can be used in so many different ways. I think that a communication metaphor should highlight the fact that communication may seem to start from one place, but it can be used so many different ways. It is also important to highlight the fact that everything that we try to communicate to someone may not be decoded, as the waterfall metaphor describes with the water evaporating. After thinking about the metaphor, i realized one thing it highlights for me is that communication may seem like such a simple thing, but it changes with every person.
The waterfall metaphor is probably the best metaphor I can think of when discussing communication. I like how the water falling represents the message, with the sender being the actual waterfall and the receiver being the pool at the bottom. What we don't take into consideration often enough is the people who are close enough to get splashed. I think this is an excellent example of how no matter what you say there is always a chance that someone will get wet, err...overhear what has been said no matter who was intended to be at the bottom of the waterfall.
I think of the waterfall metaphor in a somewhat different way. I would compare the fall and the water. I would have to say that I feel like the teacher is usually the fall itself and the student is the water. I think this because the form of the fall dictates which way the water falls and the water travels over the falls. Meaning: we go to class and operate according to how the teacher has set up the communication in the classroom. This can go either way.
I can't really think of any metaphors that go well to define communication because right when I think I begin to gain an understanding of communication, I'm surprised by yet another facet of it. However, I really like Brandon's dropped call idea. Because there is an interference with the message sent the receiver believes the message to be one way but the sender fails to get a response and there is a lot of confusion. Although the commercials are comical and demonstrate dropped calls, they also demonstrate miscommunication.
I really like the idea of seeing things from someone else's perspective because it's something that we don't often do. It is sad that we are a I/My view society but I guess that's what's become of it. As I've grown up and began to understand communication better I definitely have been trying to see things from other people's perspective. It makes a world of difference and helps me to remember to be more patient.
When communicating with a signifant other, I think the waterfall signifies a persons good intentions or what they really think and feel at that moment, but depending on a the receievers environment and frame of reference, the message is distorted at the bottom. The message is understood differently and changes shape from what it orginally was. I think this is unavoidable and it is hard to have someone understand the exact meaning you intended to give. In a student/teacher relationship. The teacher gives intructions dealing with homework, lectures, or other projects. The student takes that information and morphs it with their own thoughts and ideas, possible producing a different output than the teacher expected. I think this also happens a lot in the business world, between managers and employees underneath them. In professional settings like this, we don't always put out the message we are really feeling. Communication between friends and communication in a work or school situation are definitely different.
I think that the waterfall metaphor is a good one for communication. It is important to emphasis that communication is always changing and can be easily misunderstood. This happens to me all the time, especially between friends and boyfriends. I always try to find hidden meanings behind what people are saying to me, or even try to decode their body language. This could either help me confirm what they were trying to say, or I could totally distort the real message.
I completely agree with DeAnn. When I first read the waterfall metaphor I envisioned the waterfall being the message or lesson being taught and the students minds are the landscape being shaped over time. The water has to be the message though, because depending on the terrain (context and meaning) the water is going to shift and change before it hits the pool at the bottom. I guess the water landing in a pool at the bottom would be a common thing that we all have a general understanding of, such as theories. They make a giant pool in all of our minds, but the thing that erodes and changes for all of us are the specific examples used to describe or remember the theories. We all have personal stories or interactions that we use to remember the theories we learn in class and that’s what changes the fall of the water.
I think there are many metaphors that can be used to describe communication, and I think the waterfall one is very applicable, but mostly in situations where there is a hierarchy of power (such as a teacher/student, boss/employee, etc.) However, I think this metaphor falls apart a little bit when explaining communication in other situations, such as a group of close friends causally talking about their weekend. I also think this metaphor does not effectivly describe non-verbal communication, which I think is far more significant than most people think. I also think it is possible that nonverbals account for huge parts of communication without people even realizing it. The topics and tones of conversations may be set through non-verbals without either party of the conversation consiously thinking about them.
The waterfall metaphor is an interesting one. I picture the land as the teacher who is "shaped" by the message or water. We the students are the pool and are collecting the message from the teacher. These messages also shape how we are and interpret the message. I agree with a lot of the other students when they say that some of the message could mist away resulting in some of us interpretating the message slightly differently. Those messages help us grow and we will also spread what we learned to others. The medium in which communication takes place has a big influence on how someone is sending or recieving a message. I like to think that when communicating I am constantly sending and recieving messages like in the transactional process. However this is something that is hard to do when using something like e-mail. This medium creates more of a transfer communication because those nonverbals cannot be seen through a computer which is why I would rather communicate face to face. Getting back to the metaphor I think that the students do most of the recieving, however, the teacher can look to nonverbals to see if the students are confused, bored, or interested in what is being talked about. Resulting in a more transactional communication between the teacher and the students.
As I mentioned in class, when we look at a communication model, we must remember that in order for us to communicate we have to have shared or at least overlapping frames of reference. In order for us to communicate anything no matter how simple or complex we have at least the same idea or a similiar set of experiences in order for it to be comprehensible.
For instance, it would be almost impossible to explain to a moonman what water is for they would have no previous experiences with any like substance. Not even descriptors like wet, flowing, etc would prove enough. We would have to physically show them it and then tell them what it is for them to begin to gain an understanding. As far as the waterfall example goes, I think it is a good metaphore, but it seems to work more for interference (the diverging water) than for an inclusive look at comm in general
My model of communication is not very conducive to understading or participating in communication. Even the waterfall metaphor is very simplistic. Communication is a very complex process. My biggest problem is that I don't see communication as going in one direction. I think the waterfall analogy is bad in this respects also. The water is only going one way. At least the waterfall erodes a bit of the cliff back, otherwise there is not much for multi-directional communication. To pull a metaphor off the top of my head (weird that I would be keeping it there), I would say catching a fish would emphasis this point. You are trying to catch this fish, and it is responding to you by either taking the bait or not. Wow, so that was kinda lame. But I think a good metaphor is one that is simplistic in nature (like the waterfall), but call be delved into and multiple dimensions can be found about it.
We are constantly finding more and more ways to communicate. Businesses are changing forms. In chapter one we found that information and networking are becoming ever more important.
I find it interesting that a lot of times we get caught up in how we are communicating and lose track of what we are communicating or even vice versa. In our society communication is natural because that's how we've been taught to act. However, we all are better and worse than each other at it.
Whatever the metaphor or model, I think we are all better off when we consciously think about what we are doing.
I think the water at the top is the message that the prof is trying to relay to all of us at the bottom. What get relayed will be changed by the factors on the way down. In a relationship matter, I'd say the closer you are to the waterfall, the more you are will to let the waterfall effect you. The mist can cool you, but maybe you dont what to be cooled, but then again maybe you do, so you move even closer. If its a realationship you dont care to be apart of, you simply move away from the fall. I think this is a great metaphor, because everyone of us who thinks about there interpretation, will think of it differently, leading us all to communicate a little differently.
Post a Comment