All communication has two parts: a

All communication has two parts: a sender and a receiver. The sender has a message he or she intends to transmit, and s/he puts it in words, which, to her/him, best reflect what s/he is thinking. But many things can intervene to prevent the intended message from being received accurately.



Frank Blechmanstates that surprises offer the intervenor a chance to re-assess the assumptions he/she has made about a conflict.
If the communication is verbal, tone of voice can influence interpretation. The boss's words, "Hey, I noticed you were taking an especially long break this morning," could be interpreted as an attack if she or he said that in a disapproving tone, while the comment might be seen as a minor reminder about office rules if it was said in a friendly way. If the employee has a health problem that sometimes requires long breaks, the comment might have even been a friendly inquiry about what was happening and whether the employee needed any help. Here, tone of voice as well as situational and relationship factors would influence the interpretation of the message.

Nonverbal cues also are important. Is the sender's posture open and friendly, or closed and cold? Is her facial expression friendly or accusatory? All of these factors influence how the same words will be received.

In addition to how the message is sent, many additional factors determine how the receiver interprets the message. All new information we learn is compared with the knowledge we already have. If it confirms what we already know, we will likely receive the new information accurately, though we may pay little attention to it. If it calls into question our previous assumptions or interpretation of the situation, we may distort it in our minds so that it is made to fit our world view, or we may dismiss the information as deceptive, misguided, or simply wrong.

If the message is ambiguous, the receiver is especially likely to clarify it for him or herself in a way which corresponds with his or her expectations. For example, if two people are involved in an escalated conflict, and they each assume that the other is going to be aggressive and hostile, then any ambiguous message will be interpreted as aggressive and hostile, even if it was not intended to be that way at all. Our expectations work as blinders or filters that distort what we see so that it fits our preconceived images of the world. (Conflict theorists call these filters "frames." See the essay on Frames, Framing, and Reframing for more information.)

An analogy can be made to an experiment that tested people's interpretation of visual cues. When people were given eyeglasses that turned the world upside-down, they had to suffer through with upside-down images for a week or two. After that, their brains learned to reverse the images, so they were seeing things right-side up again. The same thing happens when we hear something we "know" is wrong. Our brains "fix" it so that it appears as we expect it to.

Cultural differences increase the likelihood of misunderstanding as well. If people speak different languages, the danger of bad translation is obvious. But even if people speak the same language, they may communicate in different ways.

Common differences are between high-context and low-context communication. Low-context communication stands on its own; it does not require context or interpretation to give it meaning. High-context communication is more ambiguous. It requires background knowledge and understanding (context), in addition to the words themselves, for communication. While everyone uses both kinds of communication, Western cultures tend to use low-context communication more often, while Eastern and Latin American and African cultures tend to use high-context communication. If such differences are not understood and adjusted for, misunderstanding is almost inevitable.[1]

Culture also affects communication by influencing the recipients' assumptions. As described above, our minds try to twist incoming information to make it fit in our worldview. Since different cultures have very different worldviews, cross-cultural communication is especially likely to change meaning between sender and receiver, as the sender may have a very different worldview from the receiver.

Given our tendency to hear what we expect to hear, it is very easy for people in conflict to misunderstand each other. Communication is already likely to be strained, and people will often want to hide the truth to some extent. Thus the potential for misperception and misunderstanding is high, which can make conflict management or resolution more difficult.

Results (English) 1:

All communication has two parts: a sender and a receiver. The sender has a message he or she intends to transmit, and s/he puts it in words, which, to her/him, best reflect what s/he is thinking. But many things can intervene to prevent the intended message from being received accurately.Frank Blechmanstates that surprises offer the intervenor a chance to re-assess the assumptions he/she has made about a conflict.If the communication is verbal, and tone of voice can influence interpretation. The boss's words, "Hey, I noticed you were taking an especially long break this morning," could be interpreted as an attack if she or he said that in a disapproving tone, while the comment might be seen as a minor reminder about office rules if it was said in a friendly way. The comment might have even been a friendly inquiry about what was happening and whether the employee needed any help, and if the employee has a health problem that sometimes requires long breaks. Here, the tone of voice as well as situational and relationship factors would influence the interpretation of the message.Nonverbal cues also are important. Is the sender's posture open and friendly, or closed and cold? Is her facial expression friendly or accusatory? All of these factors influence how the same words will be received.In addition to how the message is sent, many additional factors determine how the receiver interprets the message. All new information we learn is compared with the knowledge we already have. If it confirms what we already know, we will likely receive the new information accurately, though we may pay little attention to it. If it calls into question our previous assumptions or interpretation of the situation, we may distort it in our minds so that it is made to fit our world view, or we may dismiss the information as deceptive, misguided, or simply wrong.If the message is ambiguous, the receiver is especially likely to clarify it for him or herself in a way which corresponds with his or her expectations. For example, if two people are involved in an escalated conflict, and they each assume that the other is going to be aggressive and hostile, then any ambiguous message will be interpreted as aggressive and hostile, even if it was not intended to be that way at all. Our expectations work as blinders or filters that distort what we see so that it fits our preconceived images of the world. (Conflict theorists call these filters "frames." See the essay on Frames, Framing and Reframing for more information.)An analogy can be made to an experiment that tested people's interpretation of visual cues. When people were given the eyeglasses that turned the world upside-down, they had to suffer through with upside-down images for a week or two. After that, their brains learned to reverse the images, so they were seeing things right-side up again. The same thing happens when we hear something we "know" is wrong. Our brains "fix" it so that it appears as we expect it to.Cultural differences increase the likelihood of misunderstanding as well. If people speak different languages, and the danger of bad translation is obvious. But even if people speak the same language, and they may communicate in different ways.Common differences are between high-context and low-context communication. Low-context communication stands on its own; It does not require the context or interpretation to give it meaning. High-context communication is more ambiguous. It requires background knowledge and understanding (context), in addition to the words themselves, for communication. While everyone uses both kinds of communication, Western cultures tend to use low-context communication more often, while Eastern and Latin American and African cultures tend to use high-context communication. If such differences are not understood and adjusted for, misunderstanding is almost inevitable. [1]Culture also affects communication by influencing the recipients ' assumptions. As described above, our minds try to twist incoming information to make it fit in our worldview. Since different cultures have very different worldviews, cross-cultural communication is especially likely to change meaning between sender and receiver, as the sender may have a very different worldview from the receiver.Given our tendency to hear what we expect to hear, and it is very easy for people in conflict to misunderstand each other. Communication is already likely to be strained, and people will often want to hide the truth to some extent. Thus the potential for misperception and misunderstanding is high, which can make a conflict management or resolution more difficult.

Results (English) 3:

All communication has two parts: a sender and a receiver at The sender has a message to transmit intends he or she, and S / he puts it in words to her / him,, which best reflect, thinking about what s / he is many things can But James Hegarty to prevent the intended message from being received accurately.Frank surprises the intervenor Blechmanstates that offer a chance to assess the assumptions he / she has made about a conflict.Verbal communication is the, If tone of voice can influence interpretation about the boss's words. The, Hey, would I noticed you were taking an especially long break this morning could be interpreted as an attack if she or he said in a tone that disapproving, while the comment might be seen as a reminder about the minor office rules if it was said in a friendly way If the employee has a health problem that sometimes requires long breaks, comment whether the employee might have even been a friendly inquiry about what was happening and the needed any help Here, tone of voice as well as situational and relationship factors would influence the interpretation of the message.Nonverbal cues are also important Is at the sender 's posture open and friendly, or closed and cold? Is her facial expression or friendly accusatory? All of these factors influence how the same words will be received.In addition to how the message is sent, many additional factors that determine how the receiver of the message interprets All we learn new information is compared with the knowledge we already have it confirms what we already know If, likely we will receive the new information accurately, though we may pay little attention to it If calls into it. Our previous assumptions question or interpretation of the situation, we may, off it in our minds so that it is made to fit our world view, or we may dismiss the information as, misguided, deceptive or simply wrongThe If ambiguous message receiver is the, is especially likely to clarify it for him or herself in a way which corresponds with his or her expectations about For example, if two people are involved in an escalated, conflict each other and they assume that is going to be aggressive and hostile, then any ambiguous message will be interpreted as aggressive and hostile, even if it was not intended to be that way at all. Our expectations or work as blinders filters that what we see off so that it fits our preconceived images of the world of Conflict theorists call these filters See frames when the essay on Frames, Framing, and Reframing write for more informationAn analogy can be made to an experiment that tested people's interpretation of visual cues. When people were given eyeglasses that turned the world upside down and they had to suffer through, upside down with images for a week or two. After learned that their brains to reverse the,, images so they were seeing things right The side up again. The same thing happens when we hear something we know is wrong Our brains. Fix it so that it appears as we expect it to.Cultural differences increase the likelihood of misunderstanding as well If people speak different languages, the danger of bad translation is obvious. But even if people speak the same language, they may communicate in different ways.Common are differences between high-context and low context communication at Low high-context communication stands on its own. It does not require interpretation context or to give it meaning. High high-context communication is more ambiguous. It requires background knowledge and understanding differences in addition to context study uses the words themselves, While for communication. Everyone both kinds of communication, Western cultures tend to use more often, low context communication while Eastern and Latin American and African high-context cultures tend to use such communication. If are not understood and adjusted for the, misunderstanding is almost inevitable inCulture also affects communication by influencing the recipients. Assumptions As described above., our minds try to twist the incoming information to make it fit in our worldview. Since different cultures have very different meaning worldviews, cross cultural communication is especially likely to change between sender and receiver, as the sender may have a very different from the worldview the receiver.Given our tendency to hear what we expect to hear, it is very easy for people in the conflict to each other. Misunderstand Communication is already likely to be strained, and people will often want to hide the truth to some extent and the potential for misunderstanding Thus misperception is high, which can make management more difficult or conflict resolution v.