Lauren Malone

Com 491
September 11, 2017
Discussion Prompt #1
In class last Thursday, we were asked to write down our answers to What is

Communication? While writing down my answer, I thought I took the very safe and

scholarly approach by recalling a definition I was given freshmen year. Then when the

class was asked to share our answers I realized there were more definitions of

communication than I had realized. A few days later when I opened my textbook to

chapter one and began reading, I found myself both confused and fascinated by all the

different ways communication can be defined.

The chapter describes in detail that the definition of communication can vary

based on setting, context, or other variables. It starts with Dances three variations to

consider when looking at the various definitions of communication. These variations

include the issues of message type, intentionality, and accuracy. I became confused

while reading these because some of the definitions of communication given

contradicted each other.

An example of this is the issue of intentionality. One definition states that the

message needs to be intentional for communication to occur while another states that it

does not. This was something we discussed while giving our definitions of

communication in class. Are both definitions correct? Is one more correct than the

other? When thinking about this, my mind immediately went to nonverbal

communication and I thought about the issue some people have with angry resting
face. This is the idea that someone looks angry or annoyed even when they are not.

When I went through training for work at an amusement park, they told us to work on

avoiding angry resting face because it sends a message that you are unapproachable

and do not want to be there at all. This face is often unintentional which makes me

question the definition that states a message has to be intentional for communication to

occur. At this point I was still confused as to whether all the definitions mentioned were

correct, but decided to keep reading.

Eventually I got to the section evaluating different theories and the entire chapter

started to make more sense. The section states that theories should not be evaluated

based on whether they are good or bad, but on how useful they are. While this section

is aimed at theories and not the definitions that were confusing me it still made sense

because these communication theories are all based on different definitions of

communication. I had spent this entire chapter stressing about whether I was supposed

to think all these definitions/ theories were correct when really I needed to be thinking

about if they were useful to me in my own life.

The section then challenges us to broaden our scope on the usefulness of

communication theories not only in our own lives, but in the lives of others and the

professional world which again made me think back to our discussion on Thursday.

Even if we were unable to name the specific theory many of the ones given as an

example in this chapter were mentioned in class. For example, when interviewing for a

job both parties are participating in uncertainty reduction theory. I am trying to figure out

if this particular job is a good fit for me and the employer is trying to determine if I am a

good fit for them. I feel like knowing this is the basis of every job interview makes me
somehow feel more comfortable and prepared for the types of answers I should give

and the questions I can ask.

Another section of this text that really made me think was the section about

communication competence which talks about the idea of communication being both

effective and appropriate. I had heard about this before in a previous communication

class but I had not thought about it again until now. After reading this, I went back and

thought about some of my more recent conversations and thought about whether they

both effective and appropriate. When I am at work, my friends joke around with me that

I have a customer voice meaning that my demeanor changes when interacting with

customers. In many of these conversation I believe I use the appropriate tone and

voice, yet some guests are still unhappy with the information I give them, leaving the

conversation ineffective. When Im not at work, I feel like I could work on the

appropriateness of my communication. Ive learned a lot through communication class

about effective delivery, but I feel as though I only think about appropriate tone or

delivery in a formal setting.

Discussion Questions

1. When the book discusses theories as a type of lens, it states that this lens could

distort your view. How do you think communication theories are distortive? Give

an example.

2. Is one definition of communication given in this chapter better than another? How

is that distinction made?