IPCBook_201410-04F

1
5
2
6
3
7
4
8
Content
CommuniCation BasiCs
Shared Meaning 5
Models of Communication 6
Contexts & Relationships 8
Conclusion 10
self
Understanding Self 11
Presenting Self 13
Conclusion 14
PerCePtion
The Perception Process 15
Contributing Factors 17
Crafting Perceptions 18
Conclusion 19
CommuniCation ComPetenCe
Self-Monitoring 20
Online Competence 22
Intercultural Competence 23
Perception & Culture 24
Conclusion 25
VerBal & nonVerBal
Nonverbal Communication 26
Verbal Communication 29
Conclusion 31
interPersonal influenCe
Persuasion 32
Compliance Gaining 32
Is it manipulation? 36
Conclusion 36
listening
Hearing vs. Listening 37
Five Steps of Active Listening 38
Listening Styles 39
Listening Crimes 39
Conclusion 40
ConfliCt
42
The Power of Self Control 42
42
Managing Your Emotions 44
Conclusion 44

In the “Introduction to Interpersonal
Communication” chapter, you will learn
about the importance of communicating
relationships and contexts, while also
examining different models of communi-
cation. The “Self” chapter will encourage
you to look inward and examine your
habits and tendencies when it comes to
interpersonal communication, and also
includes topics such a presenting your
best self, and exploring when you wear a
mask to hide your true face. The chapter
on “Perception” will break down the pro-
cess of forming and assigning meaning to
what you have experienced and explore
ways to improve the accuracy of your
perception in order to be a more effective
communicator.
Next, you will arrive at the chapter on
“Interpersonal Communication Com-
petence” and learn why we need to be
culturally aware in order to be competent
communicators. Additionally, you will
explore your online communication habits
to ensure they are in alignment with how
you want others to see you. If you haven’t
already noticed, the chapters in this book
are interconnected and work in unison to
help you enhance your interactions, and
ultimately, your relationships with others.
In the Verbal/Nonverbal chapter, you will
learn the impact of both types of commu-
nication in our everyday interactions. You
will learn how your choice of words can
alter the course of a conversation, and just
how much of our communication comes
from everything but our words. This leads
-
W
e’d like to introduce you to this
book, and ultimately to our
class by sharing a real life ex-
ample of the importance of Interpersonal
Communication. The following video is
comedian Rob Schneider’s comedy series
“Real Rob.” Not only was this series shot
on Full Sail’s campus, but also Schneider
enlisted the help of many current students
and recent graduates. Now graduates of
Julian Cabrera were students in this Inter-
personal Communication class in 2013. It
was not uncommon for these two to work
together in a team setting throughout their
education. After graduation, both students
moved away to separate locations to
begin their careers. When Tyler accepted
a position with Real Rob, he was asked
relationship he had formed with Julian
while in school, he knew exactly who to
recommend. While viewing the video,
you may have noticed a theme. Julian and
Tyler were not the only employees of this
production to acknowledge networking
and relationships as the reasons why they
were hired.
The ability to form relationships and net-
works begins with competent interperson-
al communication. If you’re still wonder-
ing how this is related to this course, we
are eager for you to explore the answer
to that very question as you read through
this book. The main goal is to ensure your
success both within your degree program
and your industry as you move out into
the job market.
ter where you will explore effective and
the power of persuasion and compliance
gaining. These tools will surely be useful
to you in both personal and professional
relationships.
In the last two chapters, “Listening”
assess your listening skills to determine
if you are practicing the steps of active
listening on a daily basis. Similarly, you
will explore how you personally handle
available in order to enhance your effec-
tiveness in any given situation. We could
go on and on about the wonderful things
you will learn in this book, but we’d
rather you turn the page and start reading
for yourself!
introduCtion
CC available here

As we begin this journey into interperson-
al communication, you might be asking
yourself a couple of questions. For in-
stance, what is interpersonal communica-
tion and why do I even need to bother with
-
to understand and explain your answers to
both of these common questions, amongst
discuss the concept of interpersonal com-
munication.
interpersonal
communication as “a dynamic form of
communication between two (or more)
people in which the messages exchanged
emotions, behaviors, and relation-
ships”(p.13). Similarly, DeVito (2014)
posits that through our interpersonal
interactions, we reveal information about
ourselves while learning new information
about others. DeVito (2014) also states
that “whether with new acquaintances,
old friends, lovers, family members, or
colleagues at work, it’s through interper-
sonal communication that you estab-
lish, maintain, sometimes destroy, and
sometimes repair personal relationships”
(p.3). For example, think of the most
important relationship in your life and
how that compares to a past relationship
that no longer exists. Whether personal
or professional, interpersonal communi-
cation undoubtedly played a role in the
creation and maintenance of the important
relationship, as well as in the demise of
interPersonal
CommuniCation
BasiCs
01

CC available
the other. Typically, when we think of
effective communication in our personal
relationships, we tend to think of relation-
ships within which we feel safe sharing
our opinions. Even when they go against
the norm, we know those opinions will
be heard and valued. This furthers the
idea that interpersonal communication is
not talking at others; it’s interacting with
others.
Most importantly, interpersonal com-
munication is recognizing that not every
person receives information or sends
information in the same way, and fur-
ther, adjusting our communication habits
accordingly to account for those differ-
ences. For instance, if you know that your
might take that into account when telling
them about your day even though the
details don’t really matter to you. You do
this because you value that relationship
and therefore want to communicate in the
most effective way for the other person
to receive your message, enhancing the
further highlight the nature of interper-
sonal communication when they say,
“interpersonal communication occurs not
just when we interact with someone, but
when we treat the other person as a one-
of-a-kind human being (p.26).”
With this in mind, we invite you to
consider the many relationships in your
life, and explore the ways in which they
might be improved, or simply maintained,
through the practice of effective interper-
sonal communication. The more you are
-
stances and relationships in your everyday
through this book to be.
Shared Meaning
Now that we have a basic understanding
of what interpersonal communication is,
we wonder, is it easy to communicate?
Well, sure it is. We can communicate
face-to-face, and via cell phone, email,
social media, text message, etc. In fact,
as technology continues to advance our
channels of communication continue to
be easy to communicate, but it should be
getting easier each and every day. Right?
Well, kind of.
The act of communicating might be easy
given the many options noted above, but
does that mean it’s just as easy for our
messages to be clearly and accurately
understood by others and vice versa? This
easy to effectively communicate? It can
be, but as you will see in the following
video, it takes some work.
Let’s watch this video.
While the shape that Kelsey
drew in the video was
almost identical to what
Jamie described to her, did
you pay attention to the
details of their exchange?
For instance, each time
Jamie gave Kelsey an
instruction about what to do
on her sheet to ensure that
she understood the message.
Next, Kelsey asked Jamie
clarifying questions such
as, “how far down into the
diamond?” and “how big
is the square?”. Finally,
when Kelsey was confused about an
instruction she was given, she told Jamie
she didn’t understand and asked her to
repeat it. This proved to be successful for
Kelsey in this particular interaction, but
how often do we actually take the time to
ensure we understand the message being
communicated to us by another person,
especially when we are not face-to-face
with them? For example, if you receive an
email that seems a bit unclear do you take
the time to reply and ask for clarity or do
you simply respond to what you think the
intended message was?
In the video there was also a prominent
example of what is called shared mean-
ing. According to Verderber and Verd-
erber (2013), there is shared meaning
“when the receiver’s interpretation of the
message is similar to what the speaker
thought, felt, and intended (p.10).” If you
are thinking of the “top hat” reference,
you are correct! Jamie uses the term top
hat to describe where Kelsey should draw
her next shape, and since Kelsey drew
that shape exactly as it was displayed,
it was clear that they had shared mean-
ing for the term top hat. However, they
did not have shared meaning for what
the word “thin-ish” represented when
drawing the horizontal rectangle through
the diamond. This was evidenced by
Kelsey’s resulting rectangle which was
Jamie was describing. As a result, the two
shapes were a little off and this may seem
like a minor example. However, think
about the implications this might have on
an important conversation. How might
this lack of shared meaning impact how
the message was received and, further, the
overall outcome of the interaction?
interPersonal CommuniCation BasiCs | 5

As you move on to the next section and
explore the models of communication,
remember that effective communication is
possible, but it takes work from all parties
involved in the interaction. Lastly, with-
out shared meaning you might just be the
only person understanding the messages
you are sending to others.
Models of Communication
As time and technology progress, so
do the ways in which we communicate,
leading us to more advanced and progres-
sive models to account for said changes.
To fully understand the basis of three
of communication, let’s take a brief look
at the history of the most frequently refer-
enced communication model, credited to
Shannon-Weaver in 1948. Please read this
brief article before continuing.
Now that you have a basis for the differ-
ent elements that make up a communi-
cation event, let’s explore the three most
commonly cited models in communica-
tion literature today. We will spend the
least amount of time on the linear model,
as this model least represents our interac-
tions in today’s world. More time will be
spent on the interactive and transactional
models as they more accurately account
for the advances in technology and how
they impact our interpersonal interactions
on a daily basis.
Linear ModeL
The linear model (Lasswell, 1948; Shan-
non & Weaver 1949) comes out of the
Shannon Weaver Model and is the most
basic of the three models. The compo-
nents of this model include the sender,
receiver, message, channel, and noise.
The sender is the person who generates
the message. The receiver is the person
who the message is generated for, and
ultimately the person who receives the
message. The message is what is being
sent, with the channel being the medium
through which the message is sent (i.e.
that prevent a message from reaching
its receiver as intended (Engleberg and
Wynn 2013). Noise can include anything
from volume of voice, to a bad Internet
connection, to the receiver being dis-
tracted when they receive the message.
Simply stated, the linear model helps us
imagine an interaction where one person
sends a message to another person and it
gets there as intended, without unintended
distractions/interruptions, or noise.
Have you ever been bowling? This is a
simple way to understand the basics of the
linear model of communication. You have
your bowler (the sender) releasing the ball
(message) down the lane (channel) to hit
the pins (the receiver). If the lanes have
been recently polished, the ball will travel
faster, hitting the pins harder. However,
if the lanes have not been polished, it
will take the ball a longer time to travel
its course, which can interfere with the
impact it has on the pins. The amount of
polish on the lanes would be the noise in
the linear model of communication, as the
amount of polish impacts the speed of the
ball just as noise interferes the impact of
the message as it gets to the receiver.
The oldest of the three models, the
linear model is quite simplistic and no
longer adequately depicts the bulk of
our interpersonal interactions taking
place on a daily basis. This is due to the
models depicts, which may imply that the
receiver is a passive participant who will
not be impacted by the message in a way
that warrants a response (Wood, 2010).
Think about it. With technology as it is in
today’s society, how often are we sending
messages without expecting some sort
of response in return? Whether it’s a re-
sponse to our Facebook post, a comment
on our Instagram, or a tweet in response
to one of ours, technology now allows us
to interact with others regardless of the
channel of communication. Sure, some
would not. For example, if your boss
sent an email informing your team of a
new policy change, that email might not
warrant a response from anyone since the
intention was merely to inform everyone
of the change. In this scenario, the email
would be an example of the linear model
criteria in that the sender (boss) composes
the message (email) and sends it to the
receiver (employees) through a channel
(cyberspace). In this example, our noise
can be a number of things, including

speed of delivery and what kind of envi-
ronment the receiver is in when reading
the email. However, if you send an email
to your boss to request a vacation day
and your boss responds to approve your
request, that would not be an example of
has now become an interaction and would
will discuss next.
Interestingly as technology changes, so
do the examples we consider for these
models. For example, an instant message
model. However, now that many phones
and chat programs include ellipses (…) to
signify that the other person is typing, this
would no longer be considered a linear
message. Rather, this is more in alignment
with the interactive model. You will learn
why in the following section.
While the linear model is part of the his-
tory of communication research, it doesn’t
adequately account for the dynamics of
face-to-face interactions or the advances
in technology affecting our interactions.
interactive and transactional.
interactive ModeL
Similar to the linear communication mod-
el, which includes a sender, receiver, mes-
sage, channel, and noise, the interactive
model includes these same components,
while adding the components of feed-
back and (Schramm,
1954) to further explain and understand
the dynamics of our interactions. What
is feedback? Let’s imagine that you are
interacting with friends face-to-face, or
perhaps on the phone, telling a story. How
do you know if they are keeping up with
the story and that they understand it?
They respond in some way, right? This is
the feedback component of the interac-
tive model. Feedback can be both can be
verbal (uh huh, go on) and nonverbal (a
simple head nod).
Why is feedback important during an
interaction? Let’s go back to the story
you are telling a friend. If they have a
confused look on their face (nonverbal
feedback) or utter a “huh” (verbal feed-
back), you will likely pause and repeat
something or explain it another way to
ensure they understand your message
before moving on. Without feedback, we
are less likely to alter our message in the
middle of an interaction and more likely
to assume the receiver understands our
message. It’s important to recognize that
feedback comes in many forms and can
send both intentional and unintentional
messages to the person with whom we are
interacting. For instance, if you are telling
your best friend how your job interview
went, and she pulls out her phone and
begins texting someone, that is a form of
feedback you might perceive to mean that
she is disinterested in your story, whether
or not that is the case.
If you go back to our examples for the
linear model of communication for a mo-
ment, the reason instant messages and text
due to the addition of feedback. In other
words, since the presence of ellipses (...)
serves as feedback to our sent message,
we may or may not alter the course of the
interaction based on that feedback, thus
moving from linear communication to
interactive communication.
In addition to feedback, the interactive
Fields of experience “consist of the
beliefs, attitudes, values, and experiences
that each participant brings to a commu-
nication event. Two people with similar
understand each other while communicat-
ing than are individuals with dissimilar
p. 7). Consider you own daily interactions
for a moment. Many Full Sail Universi-
what they are doing in school, it is easier
to have a conversation with one of their
classmates, or someone in the industry,
than with a family member. This can be
attributed to the idea that your classmates
and other industry professionals have
it easier for them to understand and assign
meaning to your message than it would be
-
perience, i.e. your family member. When
experience, they also have more shared
meaning. This further enhances the under-
standing, and ultimately, the interaction.
Let’s go back to our sports metaphor for
moment. While bowling would be good
representation of the linear communica-
tion model due to the one way nature of
communication as depicted in the model,
consider two individuals playing tennis as
a way to understand the interactive com-
munication model. In this scenario you
have your two players (sender and receiv-
er) who are both sending and receiving
messages (hitting the ball), while adapting
their messages based on the feedback they
receive from the other (positioning on
(years they have been playing) also have
an impact on how their message (the ball)
is received. (include picture of tennis
players)
While the interactive model gives us a
better understanding of what takes place
during an interaction, it still limits us to
thinking of one person as a sender and
one person as a receiver during a commu-
nication event. Therefore, when we truly
interpersonal
communication, we look to the transac-
tional model of communication to explain
our face-to-face interactions.
transactionaL ModeL
yourself what the differences are between
the interactive and transactional com-
munication models. The key difference
between these models is that the trans-
actional model of communication views
each person involved in the interaction as
a communicator, moving away from the
idea of senders and receivers. The idea
driving this model is that each person
plays an equal role during the interaction
where both send and receive messages si-
multaneously and collaboratively (Streek
1980).
Let’s revisit our sports metaphors for the
previous models to help us further under-
stand the distinctions between the three
what happens during a linear interaction;
a sender sends a one-way message to
a receiver through a channel with the
possibility of noise affecting how the
message is received. Two people playing
tennis was provided as a way for us to
understand the interactive model where
the sender sends the message, and the
receiver gets the message and sends one

of experience were added to account for
some of the variables effecting our daily
interactions with others. For the transac-
tional model, where we no longer have
sender and receiver, but rather, two com-
municators, we think of two people danc-
ing the tango. Can you picture it? Each
movement of one person directly impacts
the movement of the other, directly
impacting the dance as a whole the same
way each communicator and the messages
he or she sends throughout the interaction
details of the interaction and the outcome
of the interaction.
Think of the last conversation you had
with a close friend where the conversation
both simultaneously communicated mes-
sages to one another, both verbally and
nonverbally. Now think of the last time
you went out to eat. Your server likely
came over and asked you what you want-
ed to eat, and then you responded with
your order. Can you see the difference
the interactive model (server interaction)
(interaction with close friend)?
These three models should give you a
solid foundation of the many different
elements involved in interpersonal com-
munication. The linear model is the most
limited and captures some of our online
interactions while the interactive and
transactional models account for more
of the dynamics involved in face-to-face
interactions. As technology continues to
advance, it will be interesting to see the
next evolution of these models of commu-
nication and the impact on our interper-
sonal relationships.
However, it’s also fair to say that just as a
blueprint of a building will never account
for every detail and nuance of that build-
ing, none of the models will account for
every single element of our interactions.
That being said, they do provide us with
a concrete way to understand just how
many factors affect our communication
with others in order to better prepare us
to be more effective communicators.
Let’s move on to our next section where
we explore the idea that interpersonal
concept.
Contexts & Relationships
Imagine that you just received fantas-
tic news; you landed your dream job!
Amongst the many other things you have
likely do is share your news with oth-
ers. You will want to tell people such as
family members, friends, your romantic
partner, colleagues, etc., but you will need
to tell your current employer that you will
be leaving as well. When thinking about
what you are going to say to these people,
do you envision that your message will be
exactly the same to each of the different
groups of people noted above (friends,
family, employer, etc.)? For instance will
you tell all of these people via Facebook,
or will you tell some face-to-face? Will
you tell your friends about the news with
the same amount enthusiasm that you will
tell your current employer? The answer
here is no, but why is that? Why can’t we
deliver a generic message to every person
we want to share our news with? The an-
swer is simple. Interpersonal communica-
in order to be effective communicators,
we need to constantly be aware of two
major ideas and how they affect our com-
reLationaL context
The above scenario outlined the rela-
romantic, professional, and close personal
(friends and family). While your message
to people in these different groups might
be similar, your relationship with them
is different. For this reason, your mes-
sage needs to match the relationship you
have with them. This is also known as
the
as, “the circumstances and setting in
which the communication takes place”
(Engleberg & Wynn 2013, p.7). When
considering the relationship we have with
the person(s) with whom we are commu-
nicating, we are considering the relational
context. You may be wondering why
is this an important aspect of interper-
sonal communication, and the answer
is simple. We don’t communicate in the
same manner with each and every person.
Therefore, we have to determine how to
communicate effectively on an individual
basis. How much we value an individual
impacts both the relationship and the level
of communication.
We can better understand this by examin-
that when we communicate with some-
one from an I-Thou perspective, we treat
them as a valued individual, thus, making
the distance between us seem “thinner”
through our communication. In turn, this
can enhance the relationship because our
communication with another is crafted
and delivered in such a way as to signify
the value we place on that relationship.
We do this through accepting similarities,
but also acknowledging and being open
minded to differences. However, when we
are communicating with someone from an

I-It perspective, we treat the person as an
object, neglecting feelings, thoughts and
opinions, thus “thickening” the distance
between us. This can diminish the rela-
tionship since our focus tends to remain
on the differences between individuals
as opposed to the similarities. When
thinking about the ways in which you
communicate with people in the different
relationships you have in your life, are
you communicating with them in the best
way for that relationship?
So what does all of this look like when
considering the opening example of you
getting a new job? Given that many of
your friends live in other cities and/or
to announce your new job on Facebook
to inform as many people as possible.
However, how will your family feel about
hearing the news on Facebook at the same
time as everyone else? Depending on
your relationship, that might be the pre-
ferred way, but then again, your parents
and/or immediate family might appreciate
hearing that news from you personally, ei-
ther face-to-face, on the phone, or through
another channel more intimate than
Facebook. In addition to considering the
mediums through which you are going to
share your news, you must also consider
the verbal and nonverbal aspects of your
message. For instance, how much detail
will you go into about what your new
job entails? Think back to the interactive
communication model and the concept
affect how much or how little detail you
go into about your new position based on
what each person knows about the type
each person and what you know that they
know, you will adjust accordingly.
Finally, while you are likely to display
your happiness about your new position
other, will you maintain that level of
enthusiasm when sharing your news
with current colleagues and your current
employer? Again, this depends upon your
relationships with them, the relational
context. As you read through each of the
chapters in this book, consider how what
you are learning can be applied to the
individual relationships you have, and
how you would alter your messages to be
more appropriate for each relationship. At
the end of the day, how we communicate
with others speaks volumes about how
we perceive our relationship with them
and the overall value we place on that
relationship.
cuLturaL context
As you can infer from the above infor-
mation, context plays an important role
in each and every interaction we have.
Another major type of context we must
consider is the cultural As you
will learn in the Intercultural Chapter, our
individual cultures play a major role in
the ways in which we send and receive
messages, as well as how we assign
meaning to those messages. Therefore,
being mindful of the cultures and micro-
cultures of others is an integral part of
being an effective communicator.
Let’s take a look at an example shared by
Interpersonal Communication instructor,
Jamie Vega, about how the cultural con-
text has impacted one of her relationships.
in together, my family came to visit for
Easter. My family is a fairly traditional
American family, while my husband’s
family is from Venezuela. When I told
him that my family was coming to
celebrate Easter, he had a perplexed look
on his face, but I didn’t think anything
of it. When they arrived we immediately
started talking about dying eggs, making
an Easter basket for my niece, etc. It was
then that I really took notice of my hus-
band’s look of confusion as we went on
with our discussion. When I approached
him about it later he explained that he
didn’t understand what all the fuss was
about Easter, why my family was visiting
we were dipping eggs into food coloring
and vinegar.
The cultural context of our interaction
completely kept him on the “outside” of
things since he had no shared meaning
for these traditions of celebrating Easter.
Growing up, his family and culture never
recognized this as a holiday, let alone the
eggs, candy, bunny, etc.”As a result of
the cultural differences between Jamie’s
family and her husband’s, their communi-
cation had to be adjusted.
situationaL context
We will end our section on relationships
and context with a third type of context
the Just as it sounds,
the situation we are in during an interac-
tion has a direct impact on the message
being communicated. Therefore we must
consider that impact when delivering our
messages. The situational context is de-
termined by “the particular circumstances

surrounding communication, including
social environment, physical place, and
& Weiman 2009, p.27). For instance, let’s
say you are out to dinner celebrating your
recent graduation from medical school
with friends and family. In that situation,
you would likely want to avoid talking
to remove human intestines, only to
reassemble them and then close up the
body. While there is a time and place to
talk about that, sitting at a nice restaurant
with family members who do not share
your love for medicine is not that time,
nor place.
Conclusion
What you should be taking away from
-
loring our message to the person(s) with
whom we are communicating. Stop and
think about why you are communicating
any given interaction? Are you seeking
information? Are you looking to connect
with someone? Are you hoping others
will perceive you a certain way based on
how you interact with them? Taking the
time to consider our relationships and the
contexts surrounding our interactions will
enhance our interactions, and ultimately,
our relationships. After all, communica-
tion is irreversible. Once it’s out there,
it’s out there, regardless of the medium
through which it was communicated.
You can delete the post, retract the email,
or apologize for what you said, but the
impact your message has made (positive
or negative) cannot be undone. When we
take the time to truly consider the impli-
cations of this idea, we are on our way to
becoming more effective communicators.
As we close this chapter, we’d like you to
consider the following scenario. Two or
more people are in a room and are aware
of each other’s existences. Is it possible
for no communication at all to take place?
Consider what you have learned in this
chapter and take that with you throughout
the rest of your journey through the book.
book you will be armed to adequately
answer and explain your position on the
above scenario, and further, that you will
be equipped to assess and respond to the
many different communication situations
you encounter.

The ancient Greek philosopher Socrates
‘know thyself.’ It is not that easy, Socra-
tes! First of all, who are we really? Is our
-
es of our journal entries? The self others
The self that would be described by our
best friend? Our boss?
While the concept of self might at times
feel like a complex juggling act, there
are actually ways to take apart and
examine the subject. In this chapter we
will explore how we arrive at an overall
idea of who we think we are, what other
practices to consider in order to most
effectively present our self to the world…
without dropping a ball.
Understanding Self
Who do you think you are?
No matter how complex our self might
be, somehow we all have a general
knowingness of who we are (McCornack,
2010). This is our self-concept. It might
if someone put a microphone up to your
-
ever, chances are that with some time
characteristics or features that make up
the overall picture of who you are as a
person. Try it right now. If you had to
articulate who you are in just one sen-
tence, what would you write? What would
you include? What would you leave out?
Check out this video from Dan Pink- what
is your sentence?
When you were writing your sentence, it
is probable that you were keeping in mind
how that sentence might sound to others.
In fact, you might have been thinking
about how your sentence would measure
up with others. We live in an evaluative
society where we judge most things as
either “good or bad,” or “positive or
negative”. While this might be helpful
for restaurant reviews or keeping up with
self
02
Watch Michael Estes’s video Public vs. Private Self.

current trends, we actually extend this
type of evaluation to others and ourselves
as well. This process of “evaluating
ourselves in terms of how we compare
with others” is called social comparison
(Adler, 2013). Whether we realize it or
not, we are constantly comparing our-
selves to those around us. This informs
our personal evaluation of our self worth.
The value we decide to assign ourselves
in any moment is called our self-esteem
(McCornack, 2010).
Whether we have high self-esteem or low
self-esteem, we probably have an idea of
the person we wish we could be. We often
feel pressure to be this ideal version of
ourselves and we also receive messages
from others about how they expect us to
be. When we are closely aligned with who
we want to be and who others want us to
be, we typically feel good and have high
self-esteem. However, the self-discrepan-
cy theory points out that when we are not
in alignment with who we want to be and
who others want us to be, we experience
a discrepancy between reality and those
expectations, which can lead to low self
esteem (McCornack, 2010).
Self-esteem is one of those terms we
probably have heard since we were
young. We have been told we should have
know how to achieve that and what the
out that self-esteem has a huge impact on
our ability to effectively communicate
because it often can predict the outcome
of our interactions before they even
happen. It might sound like there’s some
sort of strange fortune telling going on
here, but really this comes down to what
psychologists call a -
cy
something will go, then we take actions
either consciously or unconsciously to
ensure that this prediction turns out to be
correct (Merton, 1968). Here is a story
Alice graduated from college and was im-
mediately offered a job in Arizona, which
was a cross-country move for her since
she grew up in Florida. She was hesitant
to leave because she had many friends in
her current town, but she decided to move
anyway for the job opportunity. As she
was about to leave for the airport, she said
to her parents, “I probably won’t make
any friends out there.” A year passed and
Alice was lonely, having not made any
friends. She decided to quit her job and
when she called to tell her parents she
was moving back home she said, de-
feated, “I told you I wouldn’t make any
friends out in Arizona.” Alice was right.
Yet Alice may have just lived through
the negative repercussions of her own
If you think of it as a cycle, people like
Alice with low self-esteem tend to hold
negative thoughts about what they are
capable of, which leads them to have
negative interactions or negative behav-
iors that then reinforce their previous
negative belief about their overall sense
of self worth. If we look at this from the
other way around, however, we can actu-
advantage. People with positive self-es-
teem typically have positive thoughts
about what they are capable of, which
leads them to have positive interactions
or positive behaviors that then reinforce
their previous positive belief about their
overall sense of self worth. For example,
someone with positive self-esteem might
think they can land their dream job right
Beauty Sketches
by Dove. Take a few minutes to
watch this video from Dove and
consider your self-esteem
The Innovation
of Loneliness
In the age of social networking
we may think we are more con-
nected now than ever. However,
more and more people report
feeling lonely.
In this animation based on Sher-
ry Turkle’ -
impact of social media on our
idea of who we are and our rela-
tion to others in this new “I share
therefore I am” world
self | 12

after graduation, so they take the actions
necessary to achieve that goal. This then
helps them actually get the job and thus
reinforces their positive self-esteem.
Presenting Self
are? Returning to the juggling analogy,
we recall that we each have many ver-
sions of our self that we manage simul-
taneously. The interesting thing about
these many versions of our self is that we
chose, moment to moment, what we want
to share with others and what we want to
keep inside. Simply put, there is the self
that only we know which is our private
self and then there is the self that we
present or share with others, which is our
public self (McCornack, 2010).
It is not to say that our private selves and
public selves are always starkly different,
but this varies from person to person.
For example, one person might feel as
though they are an open book and share
every element of their private self with
others publically. Another might inten-
tionally limit what they share with others
and enjoy keeping their personal privacy.
Even the most open and “tell it like it
is” person will admit that when they are
really honest with themselves, there is
still quite a bit that they keep private. We
of maintaining a positive image. For
example, we don’t typically go around
broadcasting all of our insecurities to
and I feel inadequate.” Additionally, we
don’t always disclose the true motivations
to Sally because I want her to recommend
me for that position at Pixar.” Lastly, we
tend to keep some aspects private just to
be polite. For example, most people don’t
share every opinion that runs through
that sweater looks terrible on you.”
So there is this private self that only we
know and there is a public self that we
share with the world. There are many
versions of our public self, however. For
example, you might present yourself at
work as an organized, competitive and
committed employee. Within your social
circle you might present yourself as a
fun-loving and easygoing friend. With
your family you might present yourself
a little more reserved with a focus on
being loving and loyal. Sociologists
use the word face to describe the many
“socially approved images” we construct
in order to present ourselves publically
(Adler, 2013). Some of these faces are
constructed very intentionally and some
we build unconsciously. Sometimes, we
do not realize we have constructed a face
until we accidentally reveal a different
face to someone than they had previous-
ly known. For example, if you present
invite your co-worker out to go dancing
after work they might say something like
“wow, I felt like I saw a totally different
side of you last night.” This is because the
different than the face you would wear
going out socially with your friends. Take
a moment now to make a list of all the
different faces you present to the world.
Yours might include Full Sail student,
child, co-worker, parent, best friend, band
member, etc. Make a note about what
is subtly or even dramatically different
about each one.
We often attempt to control these different
faces through the information we choose
to share and disclose with others. This
concept of revealing different layers of
the self was named the social penetration
theory by psychologists Irwin Altman and
Dalmas Taylor (1973).
So now that we have a list of all the faces
or “socially approved images” we present
to the world, it is also important to ponder
all the parts of our private self that we try
to keep hidden. When we intentionally try
to keep something about our private self
hidden, we wear a mask or a “public self
designed to strategically veil [our] private
self” (McCornack, 2010). An example of
this might be someone who is struggling
know. In order to hide or mask this reality
of their private self, they may take out
credit card debt to be able to purchase
new clothes or go out to dinner with their
friends so they will appear to others as be-
also think about a father
trying to comfort his child
who just fell off a bike.
While he might be scared
and upset at the sight of the
child getting hurt, he might
“mask” his private self and
feelings associated with the
event in order to provide
his child.
When we think about our
private and public selves,
we cannot ignore how the
Internet has impacted the
way we present who we
are. Ten years ago it was
much easier to manage our
various public faces since we were not as
reliant on the Internet to gather informa-
tion about others. Today, everything we
put out on the web is public information
for anyone to access. This can be used
wisely to support the positive image we
want to present. However, this informa-
tion can also run contrary to the image
we intend to present, which may lead to
unintended negative consequences.
and although it was challenging at times,
he was content where he was and would
not dream of leaving since he was about
to be promoted. After a long evening
home and posted “I hate my job” as his
to bed. When he woke up refreshed he
immediately regretted what he wrote so
he went to his Facebook wall to remove
the post. Unfortunately, the damage had
already been done. His coworker, whom
he had as a friend on Facebook, had
self | 13

3 Reasons to Embrace
Your “False” Self
Not knowing who you are is part
of who you are. Published on
December 3, 2013 by Suzanne
We
shared this negative status with his boss,
phone call letting him know he had been
terminated.
percent) hiring managers who current-
ly research candidates via social media
said they have found information that
has caused them not to hire a candidate”
(Ewin,2013). The number of employers
that check social media sites has steadily
risen each year and there is no sign of this
trend going away. Each month during the
Interpersonal Communication lecture on
this topic, a student in class will always
state something like “it’s not fair that
we can’t post what we want on our own
personal Facebook accounts.” Fair or not,
the reality remains the same that in this
digital world what we think is “private”
and for a limited audience only rarely
remains as such. It should be assumed
that everyone can potentially see every-
thing we put on the Internet, and this can
be used to positively enhance our public
image or crumble what we have worked
so hard to construct.
This is not to say we should immediately
go and shut down our Facebook accounts
and vow to never post anything on the
is consistent with the person you want
others to see can reap positive rewards.
out that, “employers also noted that they
came across information on social media
sites that made a candidate more attrac-
percent) said they found something that
has caused them to hire a candidate.”
So which will you be? Hopefully the can-
to check your current online presence is
to Google yourself! Try it right now and
see what images and information comes
up. If you are happy with what you see
then you are doing a great job to manage
your online self-presentation. However, if
that run contrary to what you would want
an employer to see, you might consider
making some immediate changes to your
online presence to help your current and
future self.
Conclusion
If this chapter has helped you to see some
areas where you may need improvement,
then that is a good thing! In order to be
truly self-aware we must see both our
strengths and our weaknesses and be
willing to make adjustments. Just as we
are not the same people we were when
we were 16 years old, we will contin-
regularly checking in with ourselves and
making improvements, we can ensure that
this change will be for the better and in
alignment with the person we want to be,
both inside and out.
self | 14

In our fast-paced world, we have the
tendency to make snap judgments without
realizing the underlying complexities
upon which we base our decisions. This is
where perception comes into play. A part
of our survival is based on our ability to
have a solid understanding of the world
and the people around us. With this in
mind, we are best served by crafting more
accurate perceptions about those around
us so that we may not only survive, but
also thrive. The keener we are in our
perceptions of those we interact with on
a daily basis, the stronger the bonds that
are ultimately formed with others. In this
chapter, we’ll be exploring the process of
creating perceptions as well as the role
those perceptions play in our connections
with others.
Perception is deeply entrenched in our
daily communication and plays a large
role in the ultimate outcomes of our in-
teractions. As you’ll soon learn, having a
greater level of self-awareness can lead to
crafting more accurate perceptions. Since
the main purpose of communication is
connection, on-point perceptions can help
build and strengthen the connections we
make with those in both the personal and
professional realms. On the other hand,
inaccurate perceptions can serve to divide
us, making the process of perception an
important one to grasp.
The Perception Process
In order to create those accurate percep-
awareness as to the process we go through
while creating these perceptions. In this
chapter, we will be talking about percep-
tion as a three-part process. Following a
chronological sequence, these three steps
and interpretation. Let’s break these three
steps down.
PerCePtion
03

PerCePtion | 16
step 1: seLection
selection, you are picking
out pieces of information being commu-
nicated to you so that you can eventually
put the information you’ve obtain into a
whole, cohesive picture. Keep in mind
that in any given moment, we are being
bombarded by information and stimulus
to the point of only being able to select
bits and pieces of the information being
thrown at us. Since we each grab a hold
of different pieces of information - name-
ly, those pieces of information that are
more salient to us (more on that in a bit!)
- you can imagine that our perceptions
about the world around us are going to
differ from person to person. For instance,
what is the image that you see below?
This is an image, sketched by William
Hill (1915), of either a pretty young
woman who is looking to her right and
and a long slender neck upon which a
necklace is placed. Or it’s an image for an
old woman who is looking straight ahead,
or perhaps looking down, and has a large
crooked nose, a long pointed chin, and a
mouth slightly open. Depending on what
(was it the long, pointy chin or the well
away with a very different picture of the
same exact image.
How is it that we make these selections?
What you decide to focus on is dependent
upon salience. This is how
much something is able
to grab your attention.
Something that is high in
salience, or salient, would
However, what is most
grabbing or salient to
you does not necessarily
have the same level of
attractiveness or salience
for someone else. For
instance, when looking
at the picture above, the
necklace may have been
what was most salient or
of this, you selected and
focused on the necklace,
leading to the interpre-
tation of the picture as a
pretty young woman. Yet,
if that necklace did not
grab the attention of an-
other viewer (or it was not
salient), he or she would
not select that as an area of focus and the
perception process would begin much
differently from yours, perhaps leading to
the other person seeing the old woman in-
stead. You can already see how tricky the
process of perception can be, and we’re
only at Step 1!
step 2: organization
Once you have selected pieces of infor-
mation, you then move on to the orga-
nization step of the perception process.
During this step, you put together, or
organize, the various pieces of informa-
tion you’ve selected so that you have
a more cohesive picture of an event.
Punctuation also plays a role here, which
is the process of placing information into
a chronological sequence in terms of what
order you experienced – or perceived –
the events as taking place.
Imagine for a moment you are fed up with
your roommate’s messy lifestyle. You
have become weary of the piled up dishes
in the sink and the trash that’s never taken
out unless you’ve taken it out. On your
yourself anticipating this mess when you
get home and become actively upset. You
pull into the driveway, open your front
door, and look into the kitchen. There
than when you left and the garbage, once
again, has not been taken out. You walk
-
mate playing video games on the couch.
You become even more upset knowing
that your roommate has had free time and
decided not to use that time to tidy up.
scowling. After said scowl, you storm off
into your bedroom and slam your door.
You believe this behavior has accurately
communicated your level of disdain for
your roommate’s behavior. However, let’s
experience that behavior through the eyes
of your roommate for a moment. Your
roommate hears the door open and your
feet loudly and forcefully pounding the
ground. You enter the living room and
your roommate notices an upset look on
your face. You say nothing and then storm
off to your bedroom. The way that your
roommate has organized your behavior
most likely amounts to the assumption
that you have had a rough day and you’re
upset about something that has happened.
You are now in your room believing that
your roommate is aware of how his or
her behavior has upset you while your
roommate is back to playing video games
hoping that you’re ok. These two different
interpretations of the same event amount
to two very different realities due to the
way the behaviors were organized and
punctuated by each individual.
step 3: interpretation
So now that you’re listening, and you’ve
gone through the process of selecting
and organizing that information into a
coherent pattern, you will then interpret
the overall event. This is where you’ll
be assigning meaning, perhaps mak-
ing this the most important step in the
perception process. Think of this as the
“meat and potatoes” of the perception
process, where you’re connecting all the
dots you’ve gathered and made sense
of in order to pull together a clear idea
of what it is that has taken place. For an
example of interpretation in action, let’s
turn our attention back to the young lady/
old woman drawing. Did you see the
young lady or the old woman? If you
saw the young lady, you might have beenImage by cartoonist William Ely Hill

PerCePtion | 17
interpreting her gaze as lofty, or perhaps
snooty, whereas you may have perceived
the old woman as being a bit grouchy due
to her appearance. This inner dialogue is
all taking place during the interpretation
stage of the perception process.
Contributing Factors
ForMing perceptions
What is it that plays a role in forming our
perceptions, exactly? Unfortunately, there
is no clear-cut answer to this question.
One thing that is certain is that our past
experiences shape our current morals,
belief systems, values, and ethics. Our
personal experience of the world around
us ultimately helps us to create scripts in
our mind about how an interaction could
and/or should play out. These “scripts,”
or the mental structure of preconceived
ideas, are also known as schemata, or the
singular schema.
The schemas we form help us to reduce
uncertainty while forming assumptions
about what we should be expecting from
others. This can aid us in feeling com-
fortable approaching new situations. On
previously held schema, we’re unable to
step outside of our preconceived notions
in order to accept new information. When
this process takes place, our perceptions
are not solely inaccurate; our perceptions
also amount to a division between us
and others, rather than leading to a solid
connection.
In addition, as part of the interpretation
stage, we often make attributions to
explain the behavior of others. Attribu-
tions are explanations for the causes of
behavior or actions (Heider, 2013). These
are often based off of our past experi-
ences or our own actions. For instance,
consider for a moment that you walk
into your classroom and your teacher is
standing in the front of the room. Her
arms are crossed, her brow is furrowed,
and her eyes are slits. When you ask her
if she’s okay, she responds, “oh, I’m just
is that she is angry. You’ve come to this
conclusion based on the fact that when
you cross your arms and furrow your
brow you are usually angry. Or perhaps
you’ve seen that look on the face of your
only mean trouble. You slink toward your
seat and avoid eye contact. You and your
classmates might just be in for it when
class starts. However, once everyone is
settled, your teacher seems rather upbeat.
She then explains that she is freezing and
has been in the same freezing classroom
for 2 hours. She is not, in fact, angry at
made an incorrect attribution about the
meaning of your teacher’s behavior. This
is not uncommon. However, do not feel
like you are incapable of making correct
attributions as well. We are oftentimes
right in our assumptions about the mean-
ing behind other people’s behavior or
communication. Yet, it is important to be
sure that you recognize that error is not
only possible, but also rather common
and can be problematic for successful
communication.
In order to understand this a little bit
better, let’s examine two kinds of attri-
2013). When we make an internal
attribution about people, we attribute
their behavior to an individual character
trait, capability, or attitude; an internal
reason. Conversely, when we make an
, we attribute behavior
to environmental factors or other external
reasons. For example, you are an hour late
to class one day. When you walk into the
classroom, your teacher might think, “that
student is late because he is irresponsible
and does not care about my class.” This
would be an internal attribution because
the teacher is attributing your behavior
to the kind of person you are and your
individual attitude. However, the teacher
and think, “that student is probably late
is an environmental factor, not a character
trait. Returning to why this is problematic
for communication, think about how this
makes you feel. Do you feel it is fair for
your teacher to make an internal attribu-
tion about your tardiness? The important
thing to remember about internal attri-
butions is that the assumption is that the
force or factor causing the outcome was
something the individual was in complete
you can control your attitude towards and
dedication to your class. Considering all
of this information, it is not hard to see
why assigning internal attributions can
lead to issues in communication.
Let’s say that you are not irresponsible
and you do care about your class, but traf-
belief that you are late due to internal
attributions rather than the actual external
would be a fundamental attribution error
(Ross, 1977; Jones & Harris, 1967). We
tend to make fundamental attribution
errors more frequently when we are ex-
amining the behavior of others.
So, if we are more likely to make a funda-
mental attribution error when examining
others, how do these errors come into
play when we are explaining our own
actions? The answer is that it depends.
When the outcome is unpleasant or nega-
tive, we often blame external attributions.
Why is this? Well, it is a little easier to
handle when we can blame our behavior
or mistakes on something external that
was completely out of our control. Yet,
we are not so quick to give others the
-
ing others, it is actually more likely that
when an outcome is unpleasant, we will
blame this on the their actions or atti-
tudes. Essentially, we treat the situation
as if the individual was completely in
control of the outcome. This tendency is
called the actor-observer effect (Jones
& Nisbett, 1971). So, do we assign
internal attributions to our own actions?
Absolutely! We do when the outcome is
pleasant, of course. Naturally, we assume
that pleasing outcomes are a result of our
actions, capabilities, and attitudes. This
is appropriately called a self-serving bias
(Forsyth & Schlenker, 1977). Interesting-
ly enough, this bias is not limited to the
attributions we assign to ourselves.
discuss ingroupers and outgroupers.
Have you ever heard the expression, “I’m
in with the in crowd?” An ingroup, by
feel a part of or to which we feel directly
connected. What do some of your in-
groups look like? Your family might be an
ingroup; you are part of a distinct culture
that is representative of your family and
their characteristics. Perhaps, instead, you
are thinking about your program here at
Full Sail. It is not unreasonable to say that

PerCePtion | 18
the time you have spent with your class-
mates, along with your shared industry
knowledge and skills, has created a sense
of unity or feels like an ingroup.
Opposite of this, an outgroup would be
any social set to which you feel you don’t
belong to or identify with. So, instead of
feeling connected to this group, you feel
outside of the collective. Getting back to
attributions and the biases that can occur,
it is not unusual to allow a little more
leeway where ingroupers are concerned.
We are more likely to assign external
attributions to the behavior of ingroupers
than we are outgroupers. It should be
no surprise by now that this would also
mean that you are more likely to explain
the behavior of outgroupers by assigning
internal attributions. Think about that for
a minute. Do you think it is conducive for
successful communication if we are will-
ing to consider external or environmental
factors when analyzing the behaviors of
those like us, but more likely to attribute
the behaviors of those different from us
to their personal qualities and character-
istics? Hopefully you have reached the
conclusion that this is not fair or good
for communication. These biases and
inabilities to practice empathy for others
lead to miscommunication. It is less likely
that you are able to successfully reach
your interpersonal communication goals
if you are not able to assess the situation
and recognize these occurrences.
So now that we’ve learned a bit about
how we form our perceptions about the
world around us, you might be ask-
ing yourself how it is that we go about
improving the accuracy of these very
perceptions. Part of the answer lies in the
ability to offer empathy to those we inter-
act with on both a daily basis and with the
relationships we craft over the long term.
First, it might be necessary to explore
just what it is we mean by empathy. We
oftentimes confuse empathy with sympa-
thy. However, these are two very different
concepts. When we refer to sympathy,
we’re describing the act of feeling for a
person, which can even be described as
feeling pity for someone in its extreme
form. Empathy, on the other hand, is
when we feel with someone. When we
allow ourselves to step outside of our
own shoes and into the shoes of another
person so that we can experience the
world through his or her eyes – if even for
a moment we are being empathetic.
perhaps, the act of judging. Let’s not
ignore the fact that we make judgments
about other people. We may make snap
decisions about the character, intentions,
or behaviors of others. Just keep in mind
that the perception process is subjective
and we make snap judgments based on
our own set of beliefs, which are both
individual and malleable.
Crafting Perceptions
While perception creation can be prob-
lematic when inaccurate or generalized,
it is, in fact, a psychological process,
of perceptions is an integral part of our
survival, as it allows us to judge our level
of safety as well as appropriate times to
offer trust. The goal here is not to reject
the perception process, but rather, to take
greater control over the crafting of more
accurate perceptions.
Through this process of suspending our
more individualistic outlook, we are put-
ting ourselves in the position of seeing the
world in a different way. The more varied
the perspectives we hold about what
might be taking place, the more accurate
our perceptions will become. Part of this
process lies in our ability to question our
initial reactions to events or, alternatively,
our assumptions about other’s behaviors.
When this process of questioning and
gut-checking pairs with empathy, you’ll
create a more solid and accurate picture of
the intentions, motivations, and behaviors
of others.
With all of this being said, it might not

PerCePtion | 19
be easy to step into the shoes of others
unless a connection has been created. This
is where shared meaning comes into play.
Without having a basis of shared meaning
with others, we’re left without the ability
to effectively communicate.
Imagine for a moment you’re waiting
for the subway and someone comes up
to you speaking a language you’ve never
heard before. We’ll also pretend that we
cannot ascertain the meaning of what’s
being communicated through nonverbal
behavior. So here you are, an English
speaker, attempting to communicate with
someone who is speaking a language
completely unfamiliar to you. Are you
able to effectively communicate? Are you
able to communicate at all? Most likely
the answer is no, because you do not have
any shared meaning upon which commu-
nication, connection, and understanding
can be made.
Conclusion
Not only is shared meaning necessary
for communication to take place, but
this shared meaning will also give each
person the opportunity to be able to step
into each other’s shoes, offer empathy
or understanding, and then check those
perceptions against your previously held
assumptions and expectations of a given
event. The more we work toward creat-
ing stronger connections with others, the
better able we are to question a singular
view of the world which ultimately ex-
pands our evolving perspectives. Moving
through the various stages of the percep-
tion process while offering empathy built
upon shared meaning will dramatically
improve the accuracy of your perceptions.
The more accurate our perceptions, the
greater our connections.

04
CommuniCation
ComPetenCe
communication is not black and white. If
we were to replay all of the encounters we
had within one day, this would become
abundantly clear. So, how do we become
competent interpersonal communicators
when we are faced with this constantly
realizing that interpersonal communi-
recognition can lead to the most important
necessity to communication competence,
The Art of Winning in an Age of Uncer-
tainty, author Max McKeown wrote that
“all failure is failure to adapt, all success
is successful adaptation” (p. 19). This
concept rings true for communication as
well. Yet how do we adapt? This chap-
ter will explore steps to adapting your
communication in order to ensure the
most successful outcome, the importance
of online competence, and intercultural
competence.
Self-Monitoring
First and foremost, we must exercise a
certain level of self-awareness and take
the time to observe and monitor our own
communication. We already know that
successful communication starts with an
understanding of self. Adaptability also
begins here. When we actively monitor
our own communication, it is easier to
make sure that we are behaving in a
way that is appropriate and successful.
Researchers know that we are capable
of actively monitoring or controlling our
communication and behavior in order to
maintain self-presentation goals. These
monitoring behaviors can ultimately

CommuniCation ComPetenCe | 21
affect how we choose to act in a moment
and the outcome of this behavior (Snyder,
1979). Individuals usually land some-
where on a spectrum of low self-moni-
toring and high self-monitoring. This can
depend on the individual or the situation.
You are
probably
more likely
to score
farther up
the scale of self-monitoring when you
are on a job interview than when you are
out with your friends. Someone who is
considered a high self-monitor is extreme-
ly adaptable, changing communication
completely in order to present a “self”
in alignment with the situation. Low
self-monitoring occurs when we do not
actively adapt or monitor our behavior.
A low self-monitor might say something
like “well, this is just who I am! Why
should I change?” The truth is that there
is a balance. While you certainly wouldn’t
want your boss to see the same side of
also don’t want to compromise your iden-
tity in order to communicate effectively.
It may be easier to see how low self-mon-
itoring could threaten successful com-
munication by offending someone, but
we don’t want to lose who we are or our
self-concept for the sake of appropri-
ateness. Very high self-monitoring can
lead to deception and compromising our
true values and beliefs. It takes a healthy
amount of self-monitoring in order to
follow the rest of the steps for competent
communication. When considering your
own self-monitoring habits, where on the
scale do you fall? Check out this test!
Consider the context, the content, and
intent. In addition to adaptability and
self-monitoring, communication is very
heavily reliant on the circumstances or
a particular context. Think back to what
you learned in the introductory chapter
about contexts. Part of being appropriate
and successful is to deter-
mine whether or not we are
behaving in line with the
context and circumstances
of each encounter. Remem-
ber, we are often faced with considering
the situation, the relationship, and the cul-
appropriate. Adapt your communication
to the situation, to the particular rela-
Later in this chapter, we will discuss in-
tercultural competence in great detail. For
now, take into consideration that culture is
not limited to race, ethnicity, or nationali-
ty; there are many micro-cultures as well.
are extensive. It is for this reason that this
context deserves such emphasis.
Next, think about the content of your
message. I’m sure many of us can think of
a time when we said something and it was
completely misunderstood. Sometimes
this is due to misaligned perceptions, or
perhaps the other party was not listen-
ing or had too much noise to accurately
interpret the message. However, other
times the problem lies with the sender.
Even when we are certain we have crafted
a clear message, we might not have. In
order to avoid misunderstanding creat-
ed on your end, you must be clear and
organize your thoughts in a manner that
will allow you to articulate your message
clearly. Ask yourself what exactly you
want your listener to do or take away
from the conversation. Are you under-
standable?
Next, let’s look at intention. It could be
said that all communication has purpose.
However, sometimes the result is not what
we may have originally planned. Many of
us have probably been left saying “that’s
not what I meant” a time or two in our
lives. Yes, being clear and understandable
can help with avoiding this. However, so
can ask yourself “what is my purpose?”
when you are communicating, try to be
aware of your goals or what you are try-
that purpose or will you be left explaining
what you really meant?
Honesty is also important where intent is
your message as well as your intentions
can not only create an open line of com-
munication, but it can also expedite the
process of reaching your communication
goals.
Finally, direct communication is very
important where intent is concerned.
Sometimes we engage in indirect commu-
nication as a means to avoid uncomfort-
able or awkward conversations. We might
beat around the bush or drop hints hoping
that other people will understand our true
meaning without having to directly tell
them how we feel. Maybe they will just
instinctively know our purpose or goal.
However, unless the people we speak to
are mind-readers, we cannot expect them
to just infer. You must be direct. Other-
wise, they may see what they hope to get
out of the interaction instead of what you
intended.
“All failure is failure to adapt,
all success is successful
adaptation.” -Max McKeown

Listening & Learning
time you are hearing this, you’re wel-
come. A huge part of competent inter-
personal communication is listening,
truly listening. You will learn more about
active listening later in this book. For
what you will say next; it’s about what
adapting your message if, after listening,
you are able to realize it is needed. Stay-
ing the course is not always successful.
Are you being proactive or reactive?
Allow yourself a moment to process. You
may not be able to control your emotions
completely, but you are 100% in control
of your communication. Take advantage
of that. Try to avoid reacting. This is not
just something that can be applied when
tensions are high.
It’s not fair to say you have to get it right
every single time. If you’re a human
being, you know this is not possible.
However, there is great value in mis-
takes and past experiences. Some of the
greatest lessons of life are learned through
mistakes. Change your approach, adapt,
and store the info away for the next time
you encounter that scenario. If you know
something doesn’t work, ditch it. Try
something new. It might take you a few
times to get something right, but you’ll
learn a lot in the process!
Online Competence
So, what does competent communication
look like when we move it online? To
in a room with a group of people and we
say something or behave in a certain way,
those who are present at the time are the
only people who experience this interac-
tion directly. Even if they talk about this
later, it is then being viewed secondhand
and according to their perception. How-
ever, what about online? Is our commu-
nication that easy to leave behind? Not
so much. Sadly, there is no true guarantee
of a ctrl+z or command+z option for our
online postings (thank you screenshot!).
Online mediums pose an interesting new
quandary for communication. This can be
problematic when you think about how
tumultuous communication can be. Would
you really like for the world to know what
you said, thought, or felt when you were
16 years old? Probably not, as noted in
the chapter about self, we are constantly
evolving and changing as we age and
-
ed when we communicate in real-time.
However, what you say or pictures you
post online remain in existence well into
later phases of your life. When we sign
on to our online outlets, it is important
that we don’t forget what we know about
competent communication. Do you feel
adaptability is as important online as it is
in other communication interactions?
Just as in a face-to-face encounter, online
communication requires a degree of
self-monitoring, and of course, we must
also consider the context, the content, and
the intent, as noted above. Further, it is
important to consider these tips provided
by graduate Charles Gartner from the
•If you wouldn’t want your mom to see it,
don’t post it.
•Consider how it will come across to the
reader (perception).
•Could you be impacting a future job
with your post?
•How many people will like your post?
There are other ways to be vigilant in our
online self-monitoring. Think back to the
chapter about self when we suggested a
quick Google search of your name. Were
you happy with what you found, or did
you make adjustments? If you took a mo-
ment to look for your name, congratula-
tions! You just practiced online self-moni-
toring. Continuing to monitor your online
presence is vital in the ever-changing
atmosphere of the Internet. Also remem-
ber that search engines such as Google are
aware of your browsing history and often
-
ly. That being said, try having several of
your friends search for your name based
off of their unique browser history. What
do they see? Is it the same or different?
We must not forget adaptability when we
move our communication online; con-
text is still important. Think of all of the
outlets you use for communication online.
Are the situations, relationships, and
cultural norms of your favorite gaming
website the same on a site such as Linke-
dIn? Probably not! Your relationship with
your World of Warcraft guild is complete-
ly different than the professional relation-
ships you may be trying to cultivate on
LinkedIn. Once again, we must adapt.
Remember, we discussed that in order
to avoid misunderstanding created on
your end, you must be clear and under-
standable. This is arguably one of the
biggest struggles for online communica-
tion. Communication can lose so much
when we strip away dimensions such as
nonverbal communication or real-time
interaction where the other party can ask
-
proofreading your messages for gram-
matical errors and clarity. Also, it may
be tempting to use abbreviations or text
speak, but not everyone has shared mean-
ing for this kind of slang. This might be
appropriate in a close/personal relation-
ship, but how might this be perceived by
a potential employer?
When it comes to the purpose of your on-
line communication, you should still take
into account what goals you are trying to
accomplish. However, it may also be ben-
to be tempted by the anonymity of online
postings, and may seem even easier to
abandon all communication competence
when we think nobody is watching. How-

ever, as competent communicators, we
have a social responsibility to continue
practicing what we have learned. You’ll
feel better in the end. More importantly,
there is never a guarantee of anonymity;
if you’re going to be caught, wouldn’t it
be better to get “caught” being compe-
tent?
Intercultural Competence
Now that we know the importance of
competent communication in person and
online, it’s time to examine a new dimen-
-
tence. To introduce this topic, let’s look at
a story shared by Interpersonal Communi-
cation instructor, Melissa Looney. “While
studying abroad in Europe, I found
myself engaged in an interesting conver-
sation regarding culture with my friend
Apoorv from India. He became very
confused when I expressed
an interest in visiting
Ireland and Italy because
I was “Irish-Italian.” His
confusion stemmed from
Irish-Ital-
ian. To his knowledge, I was from the
United States and had never even been to
either country. How in the world could I
identify myself as either, let alone both?”
Consider for a minute what cultures you
identify with. If you were born in North
are Italian, Japanese, Jamaican, German,
etc? Think about that for a minute. Have
you or your parents actually lived in
these countries? It might even be safe to
say you have never even visited these
countries. It is not unusual to hear people
born in the United States claim that they
belong to other cultures without ever
having stepped foot in a different country.
This melting pot nation should theoreti-
cally provide citizens with a certain level
of cultural competence that is in some
ways unparalleled.
However, in many ways our level of com-
petence is restricted by our lack of knowl-
edge. When you consider how pervasive
intercultural communication really is, it is
not hard to understand the importance of
intercultural communication compe-
tence. This is especially true within the
scope of interpersonal communication. A
lack of intercultural competence can lead
to misunderstandings that may damage
relationships.
recognizing Micro-cuLtures
-
cultural competence, it is important to re-
member that intercultural communication
is not limited to an interaction between
individuals from differing nationalities.
Intercultural communication happens
just as often within families as it does be-
tween strangers. The generational divide
between a child and a parent or grand-
parent can present cultural differences.
Your identity as a Full Sail student creates
a cultural identity for you that may not
be present for your siblings (unless they
attend Full Sail as well). Think about the
last time one of your friends attending a
traditional university complained about
each month! There are even individual
cultures within Full Sail University. In
Anastacia Kurylo’s book Inter/Cultur-
al Communication,
culture as “any group of people that share
a way of life” (2013, p. 3). Think about
your program here at Full Sail; would
you say you and your classmates within
your program share a way of life that
verbal chapter, we will discuss communi-
cation in regard to slang and the language
-
self throwing around titles like Crafty or
st
/2nd
, 3rd AC. Your
fellow classmates may know exactly
what you mean when you say sup-guy,
might think you are talking about some
awesome super hero! If you belong to the
in statements like “I heard scripting caus-
es blindness!” An IPC instructor might
just stare blankly instead of laugh. This
is because you and your classmates have
a shared meaning based on your culture
that may not be familiar to other Full Sail
students or faculty.
These smaller cultures are often referred
to as micro-cultures or subcultures (Neu-
of micro-cultures is important when con-
sidering the importance of intercultural
communication competence. The pres-
ence of different cultures is all around us
every day. When part of an interpersonal
interaction, it is almost impossible to not
need some sense of cultural competence.
This is why it is so important to learn the
necessary steps to improving your own
intercultural communication skill set.
intercuLturaL incoMpetence
intercultural
competence as the ability to commu-

nicate with individuals from diverse
backgrounds in an effective, appropriate,
and ethical manner. However, this can be
-
ent concept of appropriate, effective,
and ethical. Perhaps you are aware of
what is appropriate, effective, and ethical
amongst teenagers, so you are highly
competent while communicating with that
particular culture. Yet maybe you have no
concept of what is appropriate to anyone
over the age of 50. In this case, your lack
of effective communication would result
in intercultural incompetence.
We can be aware or unaware of our
cultural incompetence or competence.
Conscious incompetence occurs when we
communicate in a manner that is not ef-
fective, appropriate, or ethical and we are
such can allow us to adjust our communi-
cation in order to correct our mistakes. If
we are aware of our inability to effective-
ly communicate with older generations,
we can make an honest effort to attain the
necessary knowledge to adjust our com-
munication to be more positive.
In contrast, a lack of awareness of our
unconscious incom-
petence. This kind of incompetence is
hazardous to interpersonal relationships.
If you are unaware that there is a problem,
you are unaware that you need a solution
(Kurylo, 2013).
Conversely, conscious competence refers
to someone who actively attempts to ad-
just his or her message according to cul-
ture in order to deliver the most effective
message possible. Continuing with the
age example, if you actively adapt your
message to be more appropriate for an
older generation, you would be exercis-
ing conscious competence. On the other
hand, unconscious competence occurs
when we have reached such a high level
actively adjust our messages. Rather, we
are so familiar with a culture that we can
communicate effectively with little to no
effort (Kurylo, 2013).
steps in intercuLturaL coMpetence
Step 1: Awareness
Pedersen (2000) suggests that there are
three main components to intercultural
skills. Awareness is the recognition that
you have your own set of beliefs and
attitudes and others may not share the
same. Awareness also allows us to evalu-
ate our own cultural norms and views of
the world in order to understand how and
why we react to other cultures. For in-
stance, think about Melissa’s conversation
with Apoorv regarding
her cultural background.
It was important for her
to be aware of her own
feelings regarding her
heritage. Yet, being aware
of these feelings also allowed Melissa
to consider how she reacts when some-
one from outside of her culture does not
understand them.
Step 2: Knowledge
Melissa also shared, “Once I was aware
of my own attitudes and how I was
reacting to Apoorv’s take on the situation,
I tried to offer him some perspective. He
-
er been to Italy or Ireland. I’m Indian
because I’m from India. You’re United
States American because you’re from
the USA.’ I explained that in the United
States, we still hold onto many of the
cultures and traditions of our immigrant
families. My mother’s grandparents came
from Italy, so my mother often cooks
the Italian recipes passed down from her
father. So in a sense, we are Italian due to
our feelings of connection to the culture.”
This conversation did not change Me-
lissa’s feelings of connection to Irish or
Italian culture nor did it change Apoorv’s
view that she was United States American
did provide was the second component
of intercultural competence, knowledge
(Pedersen, 2000). Apoorv may not agree
is now equipped with new knowledge
regarding culture in the United States.
Melissa also acquired new knowledge
regarding how cultures outside of the US
interpret the meaning when she claims to
be more than just American.
Step 3: Skills
Finally, Pedersen (2000) names skills
competence. Skills are a direct result
of our awareness and knowledge. They
allow us to form and interpret messages
more clearly and ultimately strengthen
interpersonal relationships. Next time
Apoorv hears an American friend claim to
be Japanese or French, he will understand
why and possess the necessary skills to
interpret the meaning and competently
communicate. For Melissa, she now
knows that when referencing her heritage,
it may be less confusing to say, “I’m
One must be aware in order to seek
knowledge and one must attain the
knowledge necessary to establish
skills.
from Irish-Italian descent,” rather than
claiming to be Irish or Italian. All three of
Pedersen’s components are subsequently
affected by one another. One must be
aware in order to seek knowledge and one
must attain the knowledge necessary to
establish skills.
Perception & Culture
In addition to the steps in intercultural
competence, it’s important to think back
to the chapter on perception. Remem-
ber that we all have schemata or mental
scripts that allow us to make sense of a
situation or how something should play
out. These are often based on past expe-
riences and can be helpful in reducing
uncertainty. This is ever-present in our
attempts to understand different cultures.
We often allow our past experiences and
previously constructed schemata dictate
our expectations and explanations of peo-
ple, whether it is their actions or overall
characteristics. Do remember that per-
ception is an individual process and your
schemata are heavily reliant upon our
and Chung’s Understanding Intercultural
Communication, the authors remind us
that intercultural communication often
entails a certain degree of biased inter-
group perceptions (2012, p. 33). We allow
ourselves to see characteristics of other
cultures that hold true to our own sche-
mata and tend to ignore evidence of the
contrary.
For instance, say you and your family
took a vacation to New York City. Upon
arrival, you found that your luggage was
lost. When you approached the custom-
er service representatives at the airport,
they seemed annoyed and were rude
when you asked for assistance. After

sorting out this ordeal, you hailed a taxi
only to be greeted by a loud, angry taxi
driver uninterested in helping you with
your luggage or carrying on a conversa-
tion during the 25-minute drive to your
hotel. After discussing your trip, you and
your family decide that all New Yorkers
must be rude. Flash-forward a few years
greeted by your manager who has a heavy
New York accent and proudly wears his “I
heart NYC” t-shirt. As he raises his loud
already made the decision that he is rude.
This is an over-generalization of a partic-
ular group/culture or a biased intergroup
perception.
This occurs when our perception of a
particular culture causes us to over gen-
eralize and ignore the individual’s unique
characteristics or attributes (Ting-Toomey
& Chung, 2012). This is, in other words,
perception process, selection. When we
stereotype other cultures, we tend to enter
into interpersonal encounters expecting
certain behavior based upon our past
experiences. When the conversation with
your boss began, the rude aspects of his
communication, such as a loud volume,
were salient to you (or caught your
attention) because you were expecting
him to be rude or loud based on your
past experiences with New Yorkers. You
chose to select or focus on the volume
of the conversation. However, what you
did not allow yourself to notice was that,
while loud, your boss was very warm in
his greeting. While it is important to learn
about other cultures, it is of equal impor-
tance to allow for perception checking
and avoid over-generalizations. Allow-
ing new information in and practicing
empathy are also key during competent
intercultural communication.
Conclusion
It is unreasonable to say that you must
possess knowledge of every culture
in existence in order to be culturally
competent. It is always helpful to have
knowledge when possible. However,
when this is not possible, being sure you
possess world-mindedness and avoid
ethnocentrism can enhance your intercul-
tural competence. World-mindedness is
a simple concept with a very strong mes-
considering the cultures of others. This
includes beliefs, values, and customs.
On the other hand, ethnocentrism occurs
when we feel our own cultural attitudes
and characteristics are superior to those of
others. This inhibits the ability to exercise
world-mindedness or empathy. Remem-
ber that respect, empathy, and acceptance
go a long way on the path to becoming a
competent intercultural communicator.

05 VerBal &
nonVerBal
CommuniCation
When you think about communicating
that comes to mind is talking. As we have
learned from prior chapters, communica-
tion is so much more. In this chapter we
will explore two important components
of communication, verbal and nonver-
bal, and how each of these components
impacts the messages that we send daily.
You might be surprised to learn that very
little of what we “say” is actually com-
municated verbally. In fact, up to 93% of
our communication is actually nonverbal.
Who would’ve thought?
Nonverbal Communication
day. Maybe you woke up, showered, got
dressed, grabbed a bite to eat, nodded at
-
cant other goodbye and then headed out
to work or school. As you were going
through this routine, were you thinking
about how showering would impact your
communication? Or your clothing choice
and the message it might send to those
around you? Did you think about that nod
or kiss and what this may have meant to
the receiver of your message? If you left
without waving goodbye, doesn’t this
send a message as well? On an interper-
sonal level, we interpret this information
not even be aware of or pay attention to
when we send and receive messages. The
into how our sense of sight, smell and
touch all impact our morning routine. You
may be able to think of several instances
when your senses are stimulated. What
goes through your mind when someone
sits next to you at the movies when the
entire row is empty, or touches your
shoulder when they greet you? These are
all examples of nonverbal communica-
tion. And remember, the way that each

VerBal & nonVerBal CommuniCation | 27
of us interprets this information is based
on our individual perception. Nonverbal
communication is all around us in every
way, every day.
Let’s break nonverbal communication
down in more detail to provide a clearer
understanding. The section below takes an
in-depth look at the nonverbal codes and
how our interpretation impacts meaning.
How much of our communication is
actually nonverbal?
During nonverbal interactions we are still
sending and receiving messages but en-
gaging in wordless communication. Think
of nonverbal communication in the literal
we think about it this way, we realize that
our verbal communication is minimal by
comparison. In fact, according to various
scholars, anywhere between 67% and
93% of our communication is nonverbal.
Learning to interpret this form of commu-
nication can be intriguing, interesting and
First, we must consider how these
messages are interpreted and how often
they can easily be misinterpreted. Again,
keep in mind that everyone views the
world through his or her own lens. We all
interpret via our senses and our personal
perceptions. Some common misconcep-
tions and overall miscommunications
develop as a result of mixed messages.
Albert Mehrabian (1967) concluded that
we send “mixed messages” when our
verbal, vocal, and visual messages are not
united. In other words, a person might be
saying one thing with his or her mouth,
but something entirely different with his
or her body language and tone. These
inconsistencies cause confusion during
conversations. Perhaps you can relate to
the following scenario.
You are having a discussion with your
or she made that hurt your feelings. He
or she apologizes, and you respond by
saying “it’s okay. I’m not mad at you.”
However, your arms are crossed and you
eye when you speak. Instead of saying
“I’m not mad at you” in a quiet voice and
gentle tone, you may speak in a sharp
tone with the emphasis on the word “not”
thereby negating the words even further.
Verbally you have communicated that you
are not mad, but nonverbally you have
communicated quite the opposite. As a re-
what to believe because you’ve just sent
a mixed message. If you were on the re-
ceiving end of this message, which would
message? In general, nonverbal messages
are more telling and accurate.
When considering nonverbal communica-
tion and mixed messages, shared meaning
had differing life experiences that cause
them to perceive the world around them
in a manner unique to themselves as
individuals, we cannot assume that we
interpret verbal or nonverbal communi-
cation in the same way. Think about who
and what has impacted you. Perhaps you
were raised in a culture where making
direct eye contact meant that you were
challenging the other person or being
disrespectful. Then you moved to the US
where direct eye contact is expected and
viewed as a component of active listen-
ing. Obviously there is no shared mean-
ing. This holds true for both verbal and
nonverbal expressions. A person who ap-
proaches you and is speaking a language
that you do not know is not effectively
communicating because you do not share
his or her meaning.
8 nonverbaL coMMunication codes
Now think about what exactly constitutes
nonverbal communication. Communica-
tion scholars have determined that there
are eight codes for nonverbal communi-
cation that can help us interpret meaning
more clearly and accurately. Think of
these eight codes as the standards or rules
we use to interpret nonverbal behaviors.
They are kinesics, vocalics, haptics, prox-
emics, chronemics, physical appearance,
artifacts, and environment.
Kinesics
Kinesics -
whistell (1952), is used to describe the
language of our bodies; in other words
how we communicate through our facial
expressions, the way we sit and stand,
how we move our hands. Eye contact,
facial expressions, posture, and gestures
all fall in this category. William Arthur
Ward said “a warm smile is the universal
language of kindness.” Now one only
has to determine whether or not the smile
is indeed “warm.” Remember, we all
interpret through our own lens but we
also generally accept some kinesics, like
smiles, universally. Facial expressions
such as smiles, frowns, raised eyebrows,
or wrinkled noses all communicate a
certain message. They can also be used to
reinforce a verbal message. Eye contact,
mentioned earlier, also impacts our mes-
sage. Typically, in American culture, if a
person makes direct eye contact during
a conversation we assume that they are
listening and attentive. Dependent upon

VerBal & nonVerBal CommuniCation | 28
the person and the subject matter, direct
eye contact may magnify the intensity of
the conversation while the lack thereof
might communicate disinterest or avoid-
so much more than just what is written
all over our face. Posture speaks vol-
umes. Walking upright may communicate
-
nicate upset or low self-esteem. Finally,
the gestures we use can reinforce, adapt,
regulate our communication, or replace
our words completely. Some gestures are
used to illustrate a verbal message, while
others are used to regulate a conversation.
If you is anxious about something, you
may demonstrate this by twisting your
hair or wringing your hands in an attempt
to adapt to your immediate situation. If
you are in a hurry to end a conversation
and leave, you may look at your watch.
I’m sure that most of you are familiar
with classroom regulators like packing up
your laptops and backpacks to indicate
that it is time to go. A gesture, for exam-
ple – a hug, can also communicate space
boundaries as we will explore next with
proxemics.
Proxemics
is a nonverbal code that
dictates how we communicate via the
use of space. The term was coined by
researcher Edward Hall during the 1950’s
and 1960’s and has to do with the study of
our use of space and how various differ-
ences in that use can make us feel more
relaxed or anxious. Do you value your
personal space? Have you ever consid-
ered how you use space to communicate
how you are feeling? When you are in
a professional setting you probably put
more space between yourself and others
than you do in a personal situation where
you are spending time with family and
friends. The way we communicate via
space is highly evident when we think of
our experience in certain scenarios like
enter an elevator and go to a respective
corner if one is available. Only when we
are forced do we stand close to one anoth-
er in the center. The same is true in most
waiting rooms. Although several rows of
chairs are available, most people will not
sit aside another person unless no other
space is available. This video will give
you a better understanding of they ways
in which we use space.
Haptics
We also communicate through touch
on a daily basis. Again, hugs can be an
example of haptics. Haptics is how we
use touch to communicate meaning.
We hug people for a number of reasons.
Perhaps we want to communicate that
we love them, miss them, or are happy
to see them, or maybe to provide some
moral support. Another example would
be a handshake. We shake hands when
we meet someone new as a greeting in a
social situation or to extend congratula-
tions. The intensity of our touch changes
the perspective as well. You may give
with a prospective employer to convey
to show condolence. In the opposite vein,
we also withhold touch to communicate
certain messages. When we do not know
someone well, we are less likely to hug.
Likewise, you may steer clear of touching
someone with whom you have a close
personal relationship if you are upset with
them.
Vocalics
Speaking of being upset with someone…
this brings us back to that earlier exam-
ple of “I’m not mad at you.” Vocalics
(or paralanguage) is another nonverbal
behavior that can completely change your
message. The way that we use our voices
to express ourselves makes all the differ-
ence. Vocal cues are shared through rate,
pitch, volume, and tone. Sometimes, when
people are nervous, their rate changes and
they will speak very quickly. This can
also indicate that they are in a hurry. Per-
haps they are excited to share some news,
so they raise their rate and their volume.
Again, messages can be misinterpreted
when we assume or lack understanding
based on our past experiences and percep-
tions, which may not always be accurate.
Physical Appearance
Now, let’s revisit the scenario in the
beginning of the chapter and discuss the
clothing you chose to wear. All of us
would like to think that we can just wear
whatever we want to express who we are.
We are free to do so in some cases, but we
need to keep in mind that these choices
dictate the way we present ourselves to
others.
How many of us truly realize that the
way that we look communicates certain
inevitable messages to those around us?
Physical appearance (self presentation) is
what we communicate by the way we ap-
pear or look. This includes height, weight,
skin, hair and eye color, body type, etc.
While we do not have control over some
factors such as our height, body type or
skin color, we do have control over things
like hair color and style.
Artifacts
We also make choices about the items
that we wear, such as clothing, footwear,
jewelry, or other accessories. While these
items do contribute to the message we
communicate via our physical appear-
ance, they can also be thought of as arti-
facts or personal possessions. Everything
we possess is ultimately a representation
we drive, houses we live in, and material
items within those houses are all artifacts.
If you wear a wedding band on your left

IPCBook_201410-04F

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to IPCBook_201410-04F

Similar to IPCBook_201410-04F (10)

IPCBook_201410-04F