Developing Confidence Coping with Insecurities about Inte.docx

Developing Confidence:
Coping with Insecurities about
Interpersonal Communication
Learning Objectives
In this chapter, readers will explore the fear and anxiety that
some communicators experience
during communication situations. By the end of this chapter,
readers will be able to
• Define the concept of communication apprehension and
identify the various types of com-
munication apprehension
• Explain how communication apprehension is related to a
number of personality factors
and interpersonal consequences
• Describe both broad and specific interpersonal effects of
communication apprehension
• Use strategies to reduce communication apprehension in
interpersonal interactions
5
Sigrid Olsson/The Image Bank/Getty Images
Communication Apprehension Chapter 5

Introduction
Michael, a 25-year-old man, has a great deal of trouble
communicating in certain situations.
When he is talking with his friends, his family members, and his
girlfriend Jane, he is perfectly
comfortable: He seeks out interactions with those he is close to
and fully engages in and partici-
pates in conversations with them. But he quickly becomes
overwhelmed when he is in situations
where he is meeting new people or participating in a group
situation with those he does not know
very well, which happens frequently for him at school and at his
job as a marketing assistant. He
gets nervous; he starts to sweat, and his hands become clammy,
which makes him even more
uncomfortable with introductory handshakes; he avoids talking
unless he absolutely has to, and
he stumbles over his words and sounds unsure and tentative
when he does have to speak. Overall,
he is generally not himself in such situations. As a result he
routinely avoids certain communica-
tion situations because he does not want to experience such
discomfort.
Michael’s trouble communicating in these new interactions has
been detrimental to him: He
has had job interviews where he did not get hired because of his
difficulty communicating con-
fidently, he has not impressed his classmates or coworkers
because he shuts down in group situ-
ations, and he is too afraid to ask his boss for a raise or to speak
with his professor about a grade
that he thinks is incorrect. Michael doesn’t think that he is shy,
because once he gets to know
people, he is very eager to interact with them and does so
competently. In fact, what Michael has

is communication apprehension, and as we will see in this
chapter, this is a common communica-
tion challenge that can make you a less confident or competent
communicator.
Like Michael, you likely experience some insecurity in at least
one aspect of your communication
with others. Maybe you get nervous when speaking with
someone who has a great deal of power
and influence, experience apprehension when talking with your
romantic partner about a diffi-
cult issue, or get jitters while speaking in public or performing
on stage. A major goal of this text
is to help you understand and improve your interpersonal
communication. Identifying specific
communication challenges and insecurities, and then addressing
these issues, is the main hur-
dle in this process. Throughout the book we have discussed
communication competence as an
important and easy-to-implement strategy for improving
communication. Chapter 5 thus exam-
ines a number of challenges that can arise in interpersonal
communication situations, introduces
and describes the concept of communication apprehension, and
examines how communication
apprehension is related to a number of personality factors and
interpersonal consequences. We
will also discuss several strategies for reducing communication
apprehension in interpersonal
interactions.
5.1 Communication Apprehension
Communication apprehension is one of the most frequently
researched concepts in the com-
munication discipline and, on a more specific level, is
commonly studied in relation to interper-

sonal communication (Daly, 2011; Levine & McCroskey, 1990).
Communication scholar James
McCroskey first identified communication apprehension in 1968
when he proposed it as a broad
concept that encompasses the fear and stress associated with
any form of communication, includ-
ing stage fright and reticence.
Communicationapprehension(CA)specifically occurs when an
individual experiences “fear or anxiety associated with either
real or anticipated communication
with another person or persons” (McCroskey, 1977, p. 78). In
other words, CA can occur during
an interaction or when you expect to take part in an interaction
in the near future. In fact, CA
can compel you to avoid certain interactions altogether.
An individual who experiences CA might
avoid or reduce her participation in com-
munication situations in an attempt to
prevent feeling upset and experiencing
anxiety. In this way, someone with high CA
views communication as a punishment that
should be avoided, whereas people with low
CA will seek opportunities to engage in the
same interaction and find it to be enjoyable
(Daly, 2011). We will use the words high,
moderate, and low to describe CA levels
throughout this chapter because these des-
ignations reflect the categorizations that
researchers often use for their study partic-
ipants in order to make statistical compari-
sons among the three groups. Keep in mind

that CA is a continuum that ranges from
low to high levels, and that there is also a
continuum for each of the different types and forms of CA that
we will discuss below. Everyone’s
CA levels will differ according to the specific type or form of
CA that is relevant, and everyone
will experience some type of CA at different points. For
example, an individual may feel very
comfortable talking with others but become nervous in formal
meeting situations, particularly
when the meeting is a job interview.
McCroskey (1977) describes three propositions regarding
individuals with high communication
apprehension:
1. Those with high levels of CA will avoid and withdraw from
communication whenever they can.
2. Avoidance and withdrawal will lead others to view the high
CA individual less positively than
those with low to no CA.
3. The combination of communication avoidance and less
positive perceptions by others will
cause the high CA individual to experience greater difficulty in
social, academic, financial, and
professional situations.
Individuals can experience communication apprehension as
either an enduring personality trait
or in response to a particular state. We discuss these two
concepts and the different forms of
CA next.
Two Types of Communication Apprehension

It is not unusual for people to experience apprehension in a
specific communication scenario.
Indeed, McCroskey (2009) notes that 70% of Americans
experience CA in anticipation of giving
a speech. This type of CA is known as
statecommunicationapprehension, or an apprehensive
reaction to a specific communication context or situation. If you
have high state CA, you fear or
feel anxious in one communication context but do not feel that
way in others (McCroskey, 2009).
The stage fright that singers and actors describe experiencing,
such as Renée Fleming’s perfor-
mance anxiety described in the Web Field Trip at the end of this
section, is an example of state
CA because they only feel that fear and anxiety in performance
situations. State CA thus occurs
less often, and only when in the midst of the single
communication environment, and it is typi-
cally experienced at only mild or moderate levels. McCroskey
(1977) stresses that experiencing
Michael Blann/Iconica/Getty Images
▲▲ For an individual with communication apprehension, com-
munication situations cause feelings of fear and anxiety.
state CA from time to time is normal for most people, and it is a
logical response to an interaction
that could be perceived as intimidating or intense, such as
giving a speech to hundreds of people
or going into an important job interview.

On the other hand, communication apprehension can also be
something that you are to some extent
born with, and it can affect your life and your relationships.
This traitcommunicationapprehen-
sion is experienced as a broad, consistent personal attribute that
can have multiple implications
and must be dealt with almost daily. It is viewed as a general
pattern along a continuum such that
one can have low, moderate, or high fear or anxiety orientation
across communication contexts
(McCroskey, 2009). For example, someone with high trait CA
may be less assertive, free, and clear
when communicating, and may also feel less powerful,
confident, and brave during interactions
(Hopf & Colby, 1992; Jung, 2013). In contrast, low trait CA
people will communicate in a more
assertive, clear, and free manner and feel confident and in
control when interacting with others.
Consistent effects of high CA can prevent you from achieving
certain personal goals, particularly
ones that involve interacting with others. In addition, the higher
one’s trait communication appre-
hension, the more he or she experiences a self-identity gap,
which is the difference between one’s
present self-concept and his or her perception of how others
view the self (Jung, 2013).
An estimated 15–20% of college and public school students,
adults, and senior citizens have high
trait CA (McCroskey, 2009; McCroskey & Richmond, 1982).
Trait CA is experienced in a variety
of different communication situations, from interpersonal to
organizational to public speaking,
and such interactions can be either real or imagined threats. As
a result, the vast majority of com-

munication apprehension research has focused on trait CA. For
the remainder of this chapter,
when we refer to CA, we are describing trait CA, unless
otherwise noted.
W E B F I E L D T R I P
Stage Fright
In 2008, Renée Fleming, a now internationally famous opera
singer, became the first female to
solo headline an opening night gala at the Metropolitan Opera
House in New York City, roughly 13
years after she had a breakthrough career performance at the
same venue (Metropolitan Opera,
2013a, 2013b). Despite years of professional training and
immense vocal talent, there was a point
in her career when the anxiety of performance could have
prevented her from taking those fateful
steps toward center stage.
Even confident, talented individuals such as Renée Fleming
must cope with anxiety and appre-
hension about one of the most important aspects of their jobs:
performing in front of others. In
interviews, Fleming admits there was an especially trying time
in her career when her performance
anxiety was so severe that her voice coach would physically
usher her from her dressing room to
the performance stage (Morland, 2013). She describes a feeling
of deep, debilitating fear: “We’re
not talking about jitters; we’re talking about deep, deep panic,
and that every fiber of your being
is saying, ‘I cannot be on that stage’” (CBS News, 2013). Visit
the website for The Independent
(http://www.independent.co.uk/), and review Polly Morland’s

(2013) article “Terror Behind a Rising
Curtain: Why Do Talented Performers Get Stage Fright?” Then
consider the following questions.
Critical Thinking Questions
1. Consider the discussions in the article and compare stage
fright and communication apprehen-
sion. What type of communication apprehension does Renée
Fleming experience?
2. Consider the final remarks about risk. How might levels of
perceived risk influence an individual’s
communication apprehension?
Four Forms of Communication Apprehension
There are four different identified forms of CA, and each form
is reflective of the various contexts
in which we can experience CA. These four communication
contexts are
1. Dyadic: communication that occurs between two people
2. Group: communication that involves three or more people
3. Meeting: communication that involves two or more people
and occurs in a business or profes-
sional setting
4. Public speaking: communication that involves one or more
people presenting information to
a larger group

As we noted above, degrees of each of these forms of trait CA
fall along a continuum ranging
from low to high, and an individual with low dyadic CA may
have high public speaking CA. A
self-report measure, known as the Personal Report of
Communication Apprehension, is provided
in the Self-Test feature and can be used to identify your degree
of CA for each of these four forms.
Take the survey and consider your results as you read about
each of these forms of CA, discussed
in the next sections.
S E L F - T E S T
Personal Report of Communication Apprehension
This instrument, often referred to as the PRCA-24, is composed
of 24 statements concerning feel-
ings about communicating with others. Please indicate the
degree to which each statement applies
to you:
1 for strongly disagree
2 for disagree
3 for neutral
4 for agree
5 for strongly agree
1. I dislike participating in group discussions.
2. Generally, I am comfortable while participating in group
discussions.
3. I am tense and nervous while participating in group
discussions.
4. I like to get involved in group discussions.
5. Engaging in a group discussion with new people makes me

tense and nervous.
6. I am calm and relaxed while participating in group
discussions.
7. Generally, I am nervous when I have to participate in a
meeting.
8. Usually, I am comfortable when I have to participate in a
meeting.
9. I am very calm and relaxed when I am called upon to express
an opinion at a meeting.
10. I am afraid to express myself at meetings.
11. Communicating at meetings usually makes me
uncomfortable.
12. I am very relaxed when answering questions at a meeting.
13. While participating in a conversation with a new
acquaintance, I feel very nervous.
14. I have no fear of speaking up in conversations.
15. Ordinarily, I am very tense and nervous in conversations.
16. Ordinarily, I am very calm and relaxed in conversations.
17. While conversing with a new acquaintance, I feel very
relaxed.
(continued)
18. I'm afraid to speak up in conversations.
19. I have no fear of giving a speech.
20. Certain parts of my body feel very tense and rigid while
giving a speech.
21. I feel relaxed while giving a speech.
22. My thoughts become confused and jumbled when I am
giving a speech.
23. I face the prospect of giving a speech with confidence.

24. While giving a speech, I get so nervous I forget facts I
really know.
Scoring
Group discussion: 18 − (scores for items 2, 4, & 6) + (scores for
items 1, 3, & 5)
Meetings: 18 − (scores for items 8, 9, & 12) + (scores for items
7, 10, & 11)
Dyadic: 18 − (scores for items 14, 16, & 17) + (scores for items
13, 15, & 18)
Public speaking: 18 − (scores for items 19, 21, & 23) + (scores
for items 20, 22, & 24)
Group discussion score:
Dyadic score:
Meetings score:
Public speaking score:
To obtain your total score for the PRCA, simply add your
subscores together:
Scores can range from 24–120. Scores below 51 represent
people who have very low CA. Scores
between 51–80 represent people with average CA. Scores above
80 represent people who have
high levels of trait CA.
Norms for the PRCA-24

The following norms are based on over 40,000 college students.
Data from over 3,000 nonstudent
adults in a national sample provided virtually identical norms,
within 0.20 for all scores.
Mean
Standard
Deviation
High
Low
Total 65.6 15.3 > 80 < 51
Group 15.4 4.8 > 20 < 11
Meeting 16.4 4.2 > 20 < 13
Dyad 14.2 3.9 > 18 < 11
Public speaking 19.3 5.1 > 24 < 14
Source: Self-test from McCroskey, J. (1982). Introduction to
rhetorical communication (4th ed.) ©1982. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Printed and electronically reproduced by permission of Pearson
Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Consider Your Results
1. Consider your overall CA score, as well as your scores for

each specific type of CA. Using the
table of norms for the PRCA-24, determine how you compare to
others with regard to your CA
levels.
2. Were there any scores that surprised you? In addition, think
about how your CA levels in a par-
ticular area may have impacted how you communicated in that
situation. Did you do poorly in a
group project because you have high group CA?
3. How might you manage your CA in future situations?
Dyadic Communication Apprehension
Also known as person–partner CA,
dyadiccommunicationapprehension describes the fear
one feels of interactions with one individual and the subsequent
desire to prevent or avoid such
interactions. According to McCroskey (1984), dyadic CA
involves “a relatively enduring orienta-
tion toward communication with a given person” (p. 17). Since
dyadic CA is a response to one
particular individual, the anxiety is a product of previous
negative interactions and the relational
history with the identified individual. Is there someone with
whom you are always nervous to
talk? Perhaps you didn’t make a good first impression and you
feel anxiety every time you have
to interact with this person because you know he does not like
you very much. Or you may be
anxious when talking to someone because you really want him
to like and respect you. The first

time that you meet a romantic partner’s parents or siblings is
probably an instance when you
experienced high dyadic CA, as their opinions of you could
potentially make or break your rela-
tionship. If your partner’s family welcomes you with open arms,
your dyadic CA levels will likely
lower substantially. But if they are not welcoming and seem to
disapprove of you, you will prob-
ably remain apprehensive when you interact with each of them.
Interpersonal communication
scholars most commonly examine this form of CA, as it best
represents the one-on-one nature of
interpersonal interactions, and the one that will be the focus of
this chapter.
Group Communication Apprehension
Individuals can also experience
groupcommunicationapprehension, which causes them to
avoid or withdraw from interactions that involve three or more
individuals. McCroskey and
Virginia P. Richmond (1992) believe that group CA is the most
important predictor of how one
will communicate in a small group situation. American culture
emphasizes teams at work and
in social and athletic situations so this form of CA can be a
great detriment in an individual’s
personal and professional lives. Compared to those with a low
degree of group CA, those with
high group CA tend to speak less, choose seats that prevent
them from being the focus of atten-
tion, and even generate fewer ideas than when they are alone
(McCroskey & Richmond, 1992).
Other group members view them as more nervous, less
dominant, and as providing fewer impor-
tant contributions than those with low group CA. These
characteristics mean that high group

CA individuals will be less effective group members and are
less likely to be group leaders. In
addition, from a more general CA perspective, those with
moderate or high trait CA (i.e., the
combined scores for the four forms of CA measured on the
PRCA-24 scale) were less likely to be
viewed as group leaders than low trait CA individuals (Limon &
LaFrance, 2005). So even if an
individual does not specifically experience group CA, a
significant degree of CA in general can
affect the person’s ability to interact in group environments.
Meeting Communication Apprehension
An individual with meeting communication apprehension
experiences anxiety associated
with participation in formal meetings. This form of CA can have
significant effects in an indi-
vidual’s academic and professional life. In a job interview, for
example, individuals with a high
degree of employment interview CA (a specific form of meeting
CA) reported that they chose to
avoid thinking about and preparing for the interviews and used
minimal communication during
the interviews (Ayres, Keereetaweep, Chen, & Edwards, 1998).
In addition, those with low CA
differed from high CA individuals in terms of how they
approached the job interview: Low CAs
felt confident, prepared, and concentrated on how they were
going to act during the interview
in order to get hired (Ayres et al., 1998). In contrast, high CAs
fretted about being evaluated or
judged, felt pressure about how to act during the interview,
were brief when describing their
qualifications, and were scared of saying the wrong thing
(Ayres et al., 1998).

Factors that Contribute to Communication Apprehension
Chapter 5
High trait CA can be particularly detrimental because job
interviews are typically required for an
individual to be hired for an employment position. For example,
researchers found that high CA
could prevent the apprehensive person from fully preparing for
the interview (Ayres et al., 1998).
Such lack of preparation could preclude the individual from
learning more about the company or
creating a list of questions to ask during the interview. This
feeling of unpreparedness can then
generate more apprehension, creating a communication
apprehension cycle that significantly
diminishes the chances that the person with high trait CA will
present herself well in the inter-
view, which then reduces her chances of being hired. Not being
hired could then reinforce the
person’s belief that she cannot get a job, meaning she is less
likely to prepare for future interviews.
Public Speaking Communication Apprehension
The final form of CA is
publicspeakingcommunicationapprehension, or fear one feels
when
asked to give a speech or presentation to a group of individuals.
Public speaking apprehension is
often the strongest form of CA. It is thus not surprising that
those with public speaking CA avoid
public speaking situations and demonstrate lower competence
when they do have to speak to a
group of people (Behnke & Sawyer, 1999; Scott & Timmerman,
2005). Consider the possible cor-

relation between master of business admin-
istration (MBA) students and experienced
levels of CA. John Burk (2001) found that
students in a MBA program had high levels
of both meeting and public speaking CA.
This is an interesting correlation because,
after graduation, MBAs will likely pursue
professions that require them to participate
regularly in meetings, lead discussions, and
present speeches to groups of colleagues.
In response to this unusual finding, Burk
(2001) recommends that MBA programs
incorporate more communication courses
in their program curriculums in order
to reduce these forms of CA experienced
among their students. As we will discuss
later in the chapter, taking courses or
engaging in formal training can be a helpful
way to reduce or alleviate communication
apprehension.
5.2 Factors that Contribute to Communication
Apprehension
A number of factors can affect communication apprehension. As
stated in the previous section,
trait CA, for example, is identified as a stable personality
characteristic that is present from birth.
State CA, in addition, can emerge from a single upsetting
experience. But there are also a number
of other individual and communication factors that can
contribute to CA or make one’s CA more
severe. Three of these most prominent factors are shyness,
introversion, and willingness to com-
municate, and these factors are related to branches of research

that aim to determine why some
people do not communicate. Each of these factors is discussed
next.
Digital Vision/Photodisc/Thinkstock
▲▲ Public speaking apprehension, or fear one feels when
asked
to give a speech or presentation, is often the strongest form of
communication apprehension.
Chapter 5
Shyness
Shyness can be at least partially genetic or can emerge from
upsetting and traumatic childhood
experiences such as physical or emotional abuse. Much like trait
CA, shyness is considered a
relatively stable personality trait and describes an individual’s
feelings of apprehension, timidity,
discomfort, and awkwardness in social situations. One
observable behavior that is indicative of
shyness is talking less than others (McCroskey, 2009). New
situations or interactions with unfa-
miliar people can make shyness even more pronounced.
But are shyness and CA two different concepts? Identifying the
motivations behind each indi-
vidual characteristic can help us understand the differences
between CA and shyness. Shyness
is primarily motivated by anxiety of what others might think. In
other words, if you are shy, you

do not behave how you would like to because you are scared
that others will negatively judge
you by criticizing you, rejecting you, or using disconfirming
messages toward you. In contrast,
though judgment from others can be one reason for CA, there
are other possible reasons for
communication apprehension. CA can also be caused by fear of
a communication context or
situation, a lack of communication skills overall or in a specific
situation, receiving positive rein-
forcement for being quiet as a child, and even difficulty
learning or acquiring a new language
(McCroskey, 1977).
Despite their differences, research (e.g., McCroskey &
Richmond, 1982) consistently finds that a
shy individual is also more likely to have high CA. Someone
who is shy and someone who expe-
riences CA will both exhibit similar behaviors, such as talking
less during communication sce-
narios, withdrawing from interactions, and avoiding social
situations (McCroskey & Richmond,
1982). However, research (McCroskey, 2009) finds that there is
only a moderate correlation
between shyness and CA, suggesting that each is at least
somewhat distinct. In other words, you
can have high CA and not be shy, and vice versa.
Introversion
As a culture, the United States values an individual’s ability to
engage in interactions and a
willingness to speak up. This can be troublesome for the
approximately one-third to one-half
of individuals who have the personality trait of
introversion(e.g., Myers, McCaulley, Quenk,

& Hammer, 1998). Introverted individuals focus their attention
inward, which means that they
pay more attention to their own thoughts and feelings rather
than seek outward for exter-
nal experiences or stimulation. Due to this inward focus,
introverts are quiet, introspective,
serious, reserved, and generally very organized. (The Web Field
Trip feature explores some of
the qualities of introverts in a noisy world.) Similar to CA,
introversion and its counterpart
extroversion are evaluated on a continuum. In contrast to
introverts, extroverts are typically
more sociable, gregarious, energetic, and positive, focusing
their attention on the world around
them. Identifying the distinctions between introversion and
extroversion is an important
step toward understanding an individual’s personality, and as
such it is one component of the
Big Five Factor Model, which focuses on the five basic aspects
of personality. These two ele-
ments are also one of four dimensions of the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator (MBTI) personality
inventory, which is designed to provide explanations of 16
distinctive personality types (MBTI
Basics, 2010).
Chapter 5
As with shyness, introversion shares some similarities with and
differences from communication
apprehension. As you learned, CA is one’s fear or anxiety about
taking part in communication
situations. Introversion, on the other hand, is not about fear of

interactions. Rather than socialize
with others, introverts simply prefer to spend time alone instead
of socializing, and they tend to
feel as if their energy is drained after spending time with
others; thus, they may need to recharge
by themselves for a little while. This emotional exhaustion, not
fear, is often what motivates intro-
verts to avoid social situations. Although both introverts and
those with high CA avoid certain
interactions, their motivations for doing so are different.
As further evidence of the similarities and differences between
these concepts, research has con-
sistently determined that introversion and CA are moderately
correlated (McCroskey, 2009). For
example, Stephanie Shimotsu and Timothy Mottet (2009) found
that maladaptive perfectionism,
which occurs when a person is unable to reach goals or
standards because these goals are exces-
sively high, is an aspect of personality that is related to both
lower extroversion and higher CA.
Take a moment to complete the introversion–extroversion
assessment in the Self-Test feature.
Whatever your score is, consider how your own introversion or
extroversion has impacted your
interactions with others. This self-awareness can help you to
approach interactions in a way that
accommodates your level of introversion or extroversion—for
example, knowing that you are an
introvert can motivate you to not schedule more meetings in a
day than you can handle or to be
aware that you will need some personal recuperation time after
attending a party or interacting
with a large number of people.
W E B F I E L D T R I P

Speaking Up for Introverts
In 2012, the trait of introversion was thrust into the spotlight
with the publication of Susan Cain’s
book, Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can’t Stop
Talking. Cain argues that Western
culture’s preference for extroversion, which she calls the
“extrovert ideal,” means that introverts’
traits and abilities are often misunderstood, undervalued, and
even viewed as inferior or extreme
(2012, p. 4). According to Cain (2012, p. 6), this cultural
emphasis on extroversion has led many
introverts to feel pressured to adopt a “pseudo-extrovert”
identity where they act like extroverts
rather than be their naturally quiet, introspective selves.
Cain’s book works to dispel the extrovert ideal by citing
research from many different academic
disciplines that, together, highlight the multiple benefits and
contributions of introversion, including
a focus on listening, creativity, and being careful rather than
reckless. Visit the website devoted to
Cain’s book (http://www.thepowerofintroverts.com/) to learn
more about The Power of Introverts.
Review information located under “Quiet: The Book,” take a
Quiet Quiz, and view Susan Cain’s
TED Talk.
1. Do you consider yourself an introvert? If not, do you have a
close friend or family member who is
introverted? What are the communication effects of introversion
that you personally experience?

2. Do you believe that our culture is becoming more attuned to
accepting introversion? Why or
why not?
Chapter 5
S E L F - T E S T
Introversion–Extroversion Scale
Below are 12 statements that people sometimes make about
themselves. Please indicate whether
or not you believe each statement applies to you:
1 for strongly disagree
2 for disagree
3 for undecided
4 for agree
5 for strongly agree
1. Are you inclined to keep in the background on social
occasions?
2. Do you like to mix socially with people?
3. Are you inclined to limit your acquaintances to a select few?
4. Do you like to have many social engagements?
5. Would you rate yourself as a happy-go-lucky individual?
6. Can you usually let yourself go and have a good time at a
party?
7. Would you be very unhappy if you were prevented from
making numerous social contacts?
8. Do you usually take the initiative in making new friends?
9. Do you like to play pranks upon others?

10. Are you usually a "good mixer?"
11. Do you often "have the time of your life" at social affairs?
12. Do you derive more satisfaction from social activities than
from anything else?
Scoring
To determine your score on the Introversion Scale, complete the
following steps:
Step 1: Add scores for items 1 & 3
Step 2: Add scores for items 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
Step 3: Complete the following formula:
Introversion = 12 − total from Step 1 + total from Step 2
Your score should be between 12 and 60. If you compute a
score outside that range, you have
made a mistake in computing the score.
Individuals scoring above 48 are highly introverted; those
scoring below 24 have low introversion
(are extroverted). Those scoring between 24 and 48 are in the
moderate range.
Source: Self-test from Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C.
(1998). Communication: Apprehension, Avoidance, and
effectiveness (5th ed.) ©1998. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education, Inc. Printed and electronically reproduced
by permission of Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey.
Consider Your Results
1. Evaluate your score. Did you fall into the introverted or
extroverted side of the spectrum? Or

were you in the middle?
2. How do others potentially view you based on how you behave
in accordance with this trait?
3. What can you do to explore the other side of the spectrum
(that is, if you are introverted, how
can you try to act more extroverted in certain situations and
vice versa)?
Chapter 5
Willingness to Communicate
The final individual factor that can contribute to communication
apprehension is willingnessto
communicate(WTC). McCroskey (1977) defines WTC as “a
global predisposition to avoid com-
munication” for multiple reasons, including apprehension, low
self-esteem, feelings of alienation,
or introversion (p. 79). Indeed, research (e.g., Pearson, Child,
DeGreeff, Semlak, & Burnett, 2011)
consistently finds that low self-esteem is related to being
unwilling to communicate. At a basic
level, someone may be more or less willing to communicate in a
given situation. WTC is one’s
preference to either initiate or avoid interaction. Someone may
be unwilling to communicate
simply because he does not know the information, does not feel
well, or does not know the lan-
guage well enough to understand what is being said. WTC is a
trait that can indicate a consistent
preference to not communicate with others, but it can also be

influenced by prior communication
experiences and one’s culture. For example, someone from a
high-context culture, where most
meaning is derived from subtle nonverbal messages and the
surrounding environment, may be
less willing to communicate because the person’s culture does
not place as much emphasis on
direct, verbal messages. WTC can also be more likely in a
specific context, such as willingness to
communicate in a large group setting.
Willingness to communicate is also related
to a number of aspects of who we are and
how we communicate. According to com-
munication scholar Judee Burgoon (1976),
WTC is based on two related factors. The
first is approach-avoid, which identifies the
anxiety that can accompany small group
and interpersonal interactions and the indi-
vidual’s decision to either seek out or avoid
such situations. In this sense, you are will-
ing to either approach or avoid a commu-
nication scenario. The other factor, reward,
accounts for one’s belief that relationships
with others can offer camaraderie, empathy,
and valuable conversation. These perceived
benefits of relationships combine to offer a
reward value for interactions with others.
So if you believe that a relationship has a
reward value, then you are more willing to communicate with
others. For example, those who
have an approach orientation to communication and who find
interactions rewarding are also
more likely to use humor in a variety of communication
situations (Miczo, 2004). Why would

humor usage be related to the WTC trait? One researcher
(Miczo, 2004) posits that when an
individual feels a greater willingness to communicate, the
person is thus more involved, respon-
sive, and attentive to a conversation, and so also makes
spontaneous jokes and uses humor that
fits with the topic of the interaction. In essence, those with a
high WTC have more experience
interacting with others and are better able to read a situation
when being humorous.
Both CA and introversion can thus affect an individual’s WTC.
However, WTC is not necessar-
ily linked with shyness because WTC is a preference, or a
conscious choice to either approach
or avoid communication, whereas shyness is a behavior, or a
more inherent trait that can initiate
interaction avoidance. Shyness, introversion, and CA are
moderately but consistently related to
WTC. In other words, the shyer, more introverted, and more
communicatively apprehensive you
are, the less willing you are to communicate.
Ian Cumming/Axiom Photographic Agency/Getty Images
▲▲ Previous communication experiences and culture are
factors
that can influence one’s willingness to communicate.
Interpersonal Consequences of Communication Apprehension
Chapter 5
These relationships between CA and CA-related characteristics
have been observed in American,

Finnish, Swedish, Australian, and Micronesian population
samples, also indicating that such
trends span multiple cultures (Sallinen-Kuparinen, McCroskey,
& Richmond, 1991). But there
are some cultural differences. For example, Americans had
lower levels of CA and higher levels
of WTC than New Zealanders, and Americans were more
willing to communicate with Chinese
than Chinese were with Americans (Hackman & Barthel-
Hackman, 1993; Lu & Hsu, 2008). Even
though CA and factors that contribute to CA, such as WTC, are
observed across multiple cul-
tures, there are differences within each culture that can affect
observed levels of CA.
5.3 Interpersonal Consequences of Communication
Apprehension
We have described what it means to have communication
apprehension, and we have differenti-
ated CA from the CA-related concepts of shyness, introversion,
and willingness to communicate.
The next step for developing confidence in interpersonal
interactions is to better understand
the consequences or effects of CA and these CA-related
concepts in various communication
situations.
The first broad consequence is internal to the CA individual,
typically involving physical dis-
comfort and high emotional and physiological arousal. If you
find yourself in a high CA situa-
tion, your heart might beat faster, or you might start to sweat or
tremble. Michael’s sweating and
clammy hands that were described at the beginning of this
chapter are physiological examples of

his internal discomfort.
Beyond this immediate internal discomfort, there are other ways
that CA can be experienced. For
example, general anxiety disorder (GAD) is related to
communication apprehension. In addition,
individuals who were diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome
(IBS), a biopsychosocial gastro-
intestinal disorder that is related to stress and anxiety, were
more likely to have dyadic CA than
those who did not have IBS, and for these IBS-diagnosed
individuals, the more extreme their IBS
symptoms, the greater their dyadic CA (Bevan, 2009).
Depressive symptoms are also associated
with high CA (Jung, 2013).
A second broad consequence of CA is the lifestyle and
economic difference between those with
high and low CA. McCroskey’s (2009) review of CA research
found that those with high CA tend
to have a lower chance of being hired for a job, earn less
money, have lower job satisfaction, are less
successful in school, and are even viewed as less credible and
interpersonally attractive than their
low CA counterparts. Based on these findings, it is possible that
those with high CA could suffer
academically, professionally, economically, and relationally.
There are also specific interpersonal
effects of CA on their communication and relationships. Three
such consequences—loneliness,
difficulty in online interactions, and communication
incompetence—are discussed next.
Loneliness
As we described in Chapter 1, loneliness, which occurs when

our actual number of relation-
ships is fewer than our preferred or desired amount, is one
possible consequence if we have dif-
ficulty forming and maintaining interpersonal relationships.
Many of us struggle with loneliness.
Recall from Chapter 1 that Americans have fewer confidants
today than they did 20 years earlier
(McPherson, Smith-Lovin, & Brashears, 2006), that one-third of
Dutch individuals are chroni-
cally lonely (Dykstra, van Tilburg, & de Jong Gierveld, 2005),
and that American college students
Chapter 5
experience chronic loneliness at moderate-to-high levels (Wang,
Fink, & Cai, 2008). If you are
lonely, you can feel alienated, meaning that you feel estranged
or apart from others.
Communication apprehension and the CA-related concepts are
important factors when deter-
mining whether an individual will be lonely or not. Because
those with CA or those who are
unwilling to communicate are viewed as less believable, less
physically appealing, and less satisfy-
ing to interact with in interpersonal situations (e.g., Colby,
Hopf, & Ayres, 1993), they will be less
likely to develop and maintain close relationships with others
(McCroskey, 2009). Their commu-
nication apprehension or shyness means they are less likely to
engage in social interactions and,
as a result, will have minimal interpersonal contacts. For an
introvert, having only a small group

of friends may be preferable because frequent social
interactions can be exhausting. However,
for someone who is shy, who has CA, or who is unwilling to
communicate, the resulting lack of
relationships is not what that individual prefers, thus leading to
loneliness.
These relationships between loneliness, CA, and CA-related
characteristics have been supported
by research. For example, if someone who is less willing to
communicate—the more the person
avoids interactions and find interactions are not rewarding—the
greater the person’s loneliness
(Miczo, 2004). In addition, if older adults have higher levels of
CA, they are lonelier (Downs,
Javidi, & Nussbaum, 1987). One interesting study focused on
individuals who had placed personal
ads in an Atlanta-area newspaper and found that those who
provided uncomfortable and poten-
tially stigmatizing information about themselves, such as
comments about being overweight or
having a criminal record, had higher dyadic and group CA and
were lonelier than those who did
not include uncomfortable information (Lemieux, Parrott, &
Ogata Jones, 1999). These results
suggest that those who struggle with CA and CA-related
characteristics might be more likely to
share information that makes others uncomfortable, possibly
perpetuating existing feelings of
loneliness. Such research findings can help us better understand
loneliness, but unfortunately
loneliness may be viewed as a stigma that few people will
openly acknowledge, and it can thus
become another burden for someone who is already struggling
with a fear of or an unwillingness
to communicate.

Difficulties with Computer-Mediated Communication
There are now countless opportunities to communicate via
mediated contexts. This can be an
exciting opportunity for many people, but how does it impact
those with CA or CA-related char-
acteristics? Craig Scott and Erik Timmerman (2005) found that
individuals with high CA were less
likely to use audioconferencing, speakerphone, and mobile
phone technologies. These researchers
also found that apprehension when using computer-mediated
communication (CMC) was related
to decreased frequency of instant messaging, online chatting,
videoconferencing, and e-mailing.
These forms of CMC all can involve group or public
communication, which may be why appre-
hensive individuals do not embrace these new technologies
(Scott & Timmerman, 2005).
However, the relationship between CA and CMC may not be as
clear-cut as Scott and Timmerman’s
(2005) findings suggest. In one early study on CMC, for
example, researchers considered effects
based on the individual’s specific avoidance characteristic
(Mazur, Burns, & Emmers-Sommer,
2000). Internet users with higher CA, for example, indicated
that their online relationships were
more interdependent and meaningful than their offline
relationships, but introverted individuals
indicated that their online relationships were less central and
significant than their offline rela-
tionships (Mazur et al., 2000). In addition, individuals who
were less willing to communicate had
fewer Facebook friends (Sheldon, 2008). These findings suggest
that those with high CA might

feel more comfortable in online communication situations, but
that introverts and those with low
WTC prefer to keep to themselves both online and offline.
Chapter 5
It is possible that communication appre-
hension and WTC are both associated with
our motivations for interacting with others
online and with the rewards that we gain
from such interactions. Uses and grati-
fications theory is a media communica-
tion theory that attempts to identify and
understand the needs and motives we seek,
and the fulfillments that we receive, from
using a particular medium. This theory has
recently been extended to different forms
of new and social media such as Facebook.
Social media users access such media for
information, to communicate with others,
for self-expression, for entertainment, and
to pass the time. If an individual is more
apprehensive about CMC, then they are
less likely to use Facebook to communicate
with others, express themselves, be enter-
tained, or pass time (Hunt, Atkin, & Krishnan, 2012). Another
study of gratifications that users
obtained from Facebook found that those individuals who were
less willing to communicate in
general were more likely to use Facebook to pass time when
bored and to decrease feelings of
loneliness (Sheldon, 2008). These findings about relationships
between social media use, CA,

and WTC conflict with one another and seem to depend on the
individual’s specific CA-related
characteristic. In fact, there is a debate about whether socially
anxious people indeed prefer to
communicate via CMC—an issue that is considered in more
detail in the IPC in the Digital
Age feature.
Communication Incompetence
As we have discussed, communication competence is an
important interpersonal skill that can
help increase shared meaning between communicators.
However, communication apprehen-
sion can be a significant barrier for those who wish to exercise
communication competence
in an interaction. Why does this occur? Consider those with
high trait CA. They likely avoid
interactions, but when they do communicate with others, they
are more likely to focus on their
internal anxiety about their CA than they are to focus on the
verbal and nonverbal messages
exchanged during the interaction. Each time this occurs,
individuals with high CA miss oppor-
tunities to learn and practice both appropriate and effective
communication. Their drive to
avoid communicating is also likely to overpower their desire to
apply their communication
knowledge and skills.
In short, those with high CA do not give themselves enough
interactive opportunities to practice
communication competence. This lack of competence then
fortifies and justifies these individu-
als’ high CA because they continue to avoid interactions, and
they are not as competent when they

do decide to communicate with others, which then reinforces
their fear and anxiety. Research
examining CA and communication competence consistently
supports these relationships:
• Jason Teven and his colleagues (Teven, Richmond,
McCroskey, & McCroskey, 2010) found
that higher communication competence was linked with
decreased communication
apprehension and shyness, and a greater willingness to
communicate. This inverse relation-
ship between CA and communication competence is consistent
across age and biological
Ryan McVay/Digital Vision/Thinkstock
▲▲ There is a debate among researchers about whether
socially
anxious people prefer to communicate via computer-mediated
communication.
Chapter 5
sex (Donovan & MacIntyre, 2004). This means that as CA levels
increase, communication
competence decreases, regardless of age or sex.
• In a cross-cultural sample, higher levels of communication
competence are associated with
less shyness, introversion, and CA, and more WTC (Sallinen-
Kuparinen et al., 1991).
• In addition, increases in WTC are also associated with greater

communication competence
for both Chinese and Americans; higher WTC was also related
to more language compe-
tence for the Chinese sample (Lu & Hsu, 2008). Over time,
becoming acculturated to a new
culture can improve communication competence, as well as
increase WTC and reduce CA
(Hsu, 2010).
The relationship between CA and communication competence
also extends to online environ-
ments Lisa Birman and Brian Spitzberg (2006) examined
technophobia, defined as the fear, anxi-
ety, and inability to use a technology that then leads to
resistance or avoidance of the technology
altogether. Based on this definition, technophobia can be
viewed as a technology-specific form
of CA. Birman and Spitzberg (2006) linked technophobia to
knowledge, motivation, and skill
and found that, as each of these aspects of communication
competence increased, technophobia
decreased. Improved communication competence helped
decrease one’s fear and apprehension
about a particular technology. Later in this chapter we discuss
how understanding these relation-
ships can help alleviate CA in mediated and online contexts.
I P C I N T H E D I G I T A L A G E
Introverts and Extroverts Online
As more people communicate online and the number of
mediated interactions increases, research-
ers become more interested in understanding how introverts and
extroverts communicate via
these channels. Two possibilities have emerged. The first,

called the social compensation hypoth-
esis, posits that introverts would primarily benefit from online
interaction. According to the social
compensation hypothesis, the reduced nonverbal and verbal
cues, time delay, and anonymity in
computer-mediated interactions may be appealing to introverts
because there is a lower chance
of being rejected or ridiculed. Introverts might prefer online
interactions more than face-to-face
interactions because the confidence they feel online is
compensation for the deficits that they expe-
rience in their offline interactions. In contrast, the rich-get-
richer hypothesis posits that those who
already easily navigate face-to-face interactions will also take
advantage of opportunities to initiate
online interactions. This hypothesis predicts that extroverts will
thus reap more benefits from an
online interaction because such interactions are extensions of
their offline relationship skills. In other
words, the rich-get-richer hypothesis asserts that individuals
who are sociable or who possess social
skills will use the Internet as an alternative or an addition to
offline interaction.
Over time research findings have revealed greater support for
the rich-get richer hypothesis.
Individuals who are shy, introverted, or socially anxious do not
use the Internet to interact more
frequently or for greater lengths of time. For example,
individuals who are less socially competent
preferred face-to-face to online dating and did not have a
favorable view of dating on the Internet
(Poley & Luo, 2012). In addition, one study (Tian, 2013) found
that high social anxiety bloggers
made fewer new friends, interacted via blogs, and had lower
relational quality with fewer existing

friends than bloggers with low social anxiety. However, this is
not to say that introverts or those
who are shy do not at all benefit from interacting online; they
may merely see it as another form of
(continued)
Strategies for Reducing Communication Apprehension in
Interpersonal Encounters Chapter 5
5.4 Strategies for Reducing Communication
Apprehension in Interpersonal Encounters
Throughout this chapter, we have detailed the difficulties that
individuals with high CA can
encounter in their interactions with others. If you have one or
more forms of CA, are you des-
tined to always have difficulty in those situations? The answer
is no. Identifying that you have
one or more forms of CA (as opposed to, or possibly in addition
to, shyness, introversion, or an
unwillingness to communicate) is the first important step to
becoming a more confident com-
municator. In this section, we go beyond knowledge to offer
three specific strategies that you can
employ to reduce your CA levels.
Understand Your Needs and Develop Communication
Confidence
The first important step for developing interpersonal
communication confidence is to better
understand and acknowledge your own strengths and
weaknesses. Do you believe that you are shy,

or are you perhaps more unwilling to communicate? Use the
self-tests provided in this chapter to
identify your level of communication apprehension, and
pinpoint your place on the introversion–
extroversion scale. Identifying your individual communication
apprehension profile can help you
figure out which elements you need to focus on. If you discover
you have a specific form of CA,
then you can work to decrease your level of CA. If you are an
introvert, you do not have to focus
on allaying your fears, but you may want to decide how to
balance your preference for solitude
with the expectations of social interactions—perhaps by
coordinating your preferences to allow
for more interactions with your closest friends and family
members.
If you do not have communication apprehension, or are not shy
or introverted, you do not need
to focus as much on developing interpersonal communication
confidence. Instead, you can aim
to better understand these different characteristics and how they
may impact your communica-
tion with others. When you communicate with someone who you
believe has CA, you can tailor
your messages to attempt to make the person more comfortable.
You can focus on the other
person when she speaks, nod and smile at her more frequently,
and ask her individual questions
without drawing too much attention to her. Do not be insulted if
she is quiet or excuses herself
early from an interaction or social situation. Remember that
communication is a two-way trans-
action; both communicators must work together to shape and
shift the interaction and to create
shared meaning.

interaction, rather than a more preferred communication
environment. Apply these findings to your
own online interactions, and then consider the following
questions.
1. Do you consider yourself to be an introvert or an extrovert?
Do you have high trait CA, high
state CA, or are you shy?
2. Do you prefer to interact online or offline? Do you think that
your online behavior has anything
to do with your personality characteristics?
3. Do your own experiences in your online interactions fit with
the research findings for the social
compensation or the rich-get-richer hypothesis? Why do you
think that is?
Develop and Practice Communication Competence
We discuss communication competence throughout this text, but
it is particularly important
in the context of communication apprehension. Those with
CA—or who are shy, introverted,
or have low WTC—are less likely to seek out opportunities to
communicate and have fewer
chances to refine and improve their communication competence
skills. Thus one important sug-

gestion for developing confidence in your communication skills,
especially if you have CA or an
individual CA-related characteristic, is to revisit and focus upon
the components of communi-
cation competence. Determine if you have trouble with a
particular aspect of communication
competence: Is it a lack of communication
knowledge or are you unmotivated? Once
you have identified a particular compe-
tence problem area, learn how to improve
your skills and then be sure to practice
them. Try to interact more with others,
or if you do not want to do that, try to be
more aware of how competent you—and
others—are when you do decide to com-
municate. Improving your communication
competence may not entirely alleviate your
CA, but it can give you more confidence
to approach communication situations,
which makes the interactions less stress-
ful and allows you to feel more comfortable
and less fearful. (Everyday Communication
Challenges offers tips for overcoming com-
munication difficulties in a doctor’s office.)
monkeybusinessimages/iStock/Thinkstock
▲▲ Understanding and practicing communication skills can
help
you learn to manage, and possibly overcome, communication
apprehension.
E V E R Y D A Y C O M M U N I C A T I O N C H A L L E N
G E S

Competent Communication in the Exam Room
Some of us don’t enjoy visiting healthcare providers, such as
doctors, dentists, nurses, physical ther-
apists, or even pharmacists. There may be long wait times,
painful procedures, issues with insurance
coverage, or discussions about something that is embarrassing
or private. So if you are faced with a
medical appointment, experiencing anxiety about or difficulty
communicating with your healthcare
provider can only make things more challenging.
A number of communication challenges can occur when
someone with high CA interacts with a
healthcare provider. Interpersonal communication skills, such as
giving and receiving information
and building rapport and a partnership with health providers,
are important skills for receiving high
quality healthcare, but these are some of the very skills that
those with CA or a CA-related charac-
teristic often struggle with. The concept of willingness to
communicate about health (WTCH) spe-
cifically addresses difficulty with communicating about health
and well-being. WTCH emphasizes
the level of comfort and competence when you interact with
healthcare providers, and being active
and open when it comes to health information (Wright, Frey, &
Sopory, 2007). Researchers have
identified several different CA relationships in healthcare
situations:
(continued)

• Someone with high trait CA is likely to have state CA about
interactions with a physician
(Richmond, Smith, Heisel, & McCroskey, 1998).
• Those with higher state or trait CA ask fewer questions, have
lower levels of understanding,
and spend less time in contact with physicians during medical
appointments (Booth-Butterfield,
Chory, & Beynon, 1997).
• High CA individuals also describe their interactions with their
physicians as negative in nature
(Booth-Butterfield et al., 1997). Those with higher levels of
WTCH are more likely to seek health
information, more assertive with their physicians, and more
likely to adhere to their physician’s
prescription or recommendations (Wright et al., 2007).
• Those with higher state physician CA are less satisfied with
their physician and also feel less satis-
fied with the care they receive (Richmond et al., 1998).
However, these relationships do not exist
for people who have high trait CA, which means that someone
with general CA, but who is not
anxious about talking with a physician, is not necessarily less
satisfied with their doctor or their
care (Richmond et al., 1998).
These findings led researchers (Booth-Butterfield et al., 1997)
to suggest that those with communi-
cation apprehension will likely communicate about their health
problems less effectively with pro-
viders, which could then result in lower quality healthcare in
the future.

So what can those with high state physician CA or an
unwillingness to communicate about health
do to ensure that they receive proper healthcare? Because there
is a power differential between
patients and providers, especially during the medical exam,
patients often think that they can’t do
anything to improve communication with their healthcare
providers. However, remember that com-
munication is a two-way transaction, where both communicators
can influence the interaction.
Based on collaborative research by communication scholar
Carolyn Shue and medical education
researcher Louise Arnold (2009), the following list identifies
communication skills to look for in your
healthcare provider and that you can use to increase your health
communication competence:
• Introduce yourself.
• Explain the reason for the exam (for the patient) or the
purpose or goals of the exam (for the
provider).
• Ask and answer appropriate questions to understand symptoms
and other information that is
needed to reach a correct diagnosis (for the physician) or to
understand or clarify what the physi-
cian is saying and what the diagnosis and treatment is (for the
patient).
• Use appropriate listening behaviors, such as not interrupting
and making and maintaining eye
contact.

• Express understanding verbally and nonverbally by nodding,
smiling, and rephrasing what has
been said.
• Show interest in what the other person is saying.
Healthcare providers are increasingly aware of the importance
of competent communication, and
most medical schools now include communication in their
curriculum. You should expect that your
provider communicates with you using most of the skills
outlined above. You also should strive to
use these skills yourself.
1. Can you recall a frustrating interaction with a healthcare
provider? Was the communication com-
petent for both parties? Why or why not?
2. With which of the specific communication skills discussed
above do you think that healthcare
providers have the most difficulty? What could they do to
improve that skill?
3. With which of the specific communication skills discussed
above do you think that patients have
the most difficulty? What could they do to improve that skill?
Summary and Resources Chapter 5
Seek Assistance from Others
Communication apprehension is a perfectly normal, and often

expected, reaction to stressful
or high-pressure interactions. In fact, McCroskey (1977) points
out that experiencing a certain
degree of CA is more normal than never experiencing CA in any
situation! There are many ways
to reduce or at least manage CA. First, though it may be
uncomfortable, it can be helpful to seek
out and take part in situations where you are particularly
apprehensive. This approach allows
you to treat CA by working on your communication behaviors.
For example, an important first
step is taking an interpersonal communication course. The
concepts covered in interpersonal
courses, such as CA and communication competence, can help
you to identify areas or situa-
tions where you need to develop more confidence in your
communication. In addition, you can
practice and refine your skills by participating in group and in-
class discussions and presenta-
tions. Your discomfort is likely to decrease as you become more
familiar with or educated about
such situations.
If you remain extremely or overwhelmingly apprehensive or shy
even with practice, a next step
is to seek more formal help, including training or therapy. This
CA treatment approach can help
you focus on your thoughts about your own communication
behaviors (McCroskey, 1984). Stress
reduction exercises such as successive relaxation techniques,
meditation, and yoga, and clinical
treatments for anxiety, including cognitive behavioral therapy
and systematic desensitization,
can assist with CA as well (Daly, 2011).
However, it is important to note that not everyone should feel

the need to lower their CA or
CA-related characteristic. Having CA is not always a negative
thing and does not always need to
be “fixed.” In fact, you can use your CA to your advantage by
channeling it productively so that
you use that anxiety to become energized by and prepared for
interactions that you know can be
stressful for you. If you are adjusted and happy with who you
are and how you communicate with
others, do not feel pressured to change.
Summary and Resources
Many of us experience some form of anxiety or insecurity when
communicating with others.
This chapter explores a variety of challenges that can arise in
our interpersonal communication,
the primary one being communication apprehension (CA),
which occurs when fear or anxiety
is associated with communication with others. Take a moment
to review the information sum-
marized in Table 5.1. Each person has a CA level that spans
from low to high on a continuum,
and these CA levels differ in type and form. There are two types
of CA: state, or a temporary,
situation-specific anxiety; and trait, or an enduring, consistent
attribute of anxiety. Almost one-
fifth of individuals have high trait CA.
Communication apprehension can also take four forms: (1)
dyadic, or in relation to interpersonal
interactions with a particular person; (2) group, or when
communicating with three or more
individuals; (3) meeting, or in formal group business and
professional settings; and (4) public
speaking, or when one presents to a group. An individual can
have high levels of one or more of

these forms of CA. Having these forms of CA can be
detrimental in a number of ways, includ-
ing being less prepared and competent and being viewed as
more nervous and offering fewer
contributions.
Table 5.1: Summary of CA types, forms, factors, and
consequences
Category Item Description
Two types of CA
Trait communication apprehension
(trait CA)
State communication apprehension
(state CA)
A broad attribute regarding anxiety about
communication that spans situations
Anxiety about communication that occurs
only in relation to a specific communication
situation or context
Four forms of CA
Dyadic communication apprehension
(dyadic CA)
Group communication apprehension

(group CA)
Meeting communication apprehension
(meeting CA)
Public speaking communication apprehen-
sion (public speaking CA)
Anxiety about communication in relation
to interactions with a particular individual
Anxiety about communication in situations
where three or more people are interacting
Anxiety about communicating in a formal
meeting situation
Anxiety about communicating to a large
group of people in a public setting
Three factors that
contribute to CA
Shyness
Introversion
Willingness to communicate (WTC)
Discomfort and timidity about communi-
cating as a stable personality trait
A trait where individuals focus attentions
inward and are thus quiet, introspective,
and less sociable

A global predisposition to avoid commu-
nicating and to find interactions less
rewarding, which can occur for multiple
reasons such as apprehension, introversion,
or low self-esteem
Consequences of CA
Loneliness
Difficulties with computer-mediated
communication
Communication incompetence
Occurs when we have fewer relationships
than we desire to actually have
Disinclination to communicate or discom-
fort communicating with others via
mediated channels
Being ineffective or inappropriate in one’s
interactions with others
In addition, there are three factors that can contribute to CA.
First, shyness is a personality trait
that describes an individual as timid and uncomfortable with
interaction. Shy individuals talk
less than others who are not shy; the main motivation behind
shyness is anxiety about what
other people think of you. Second, introversion is also a stable
personality trait; it involves focus-
ing attention internally rather than externally. This inward focus
is a preference that predisposes

introverts to be quiet, serious, and to feel worn out after an
extended period of interacting with
others. Third, willingness to communicate (WTC) is a global
preference for avoiding interactions
and is negatively related to low self-esteem. CA is consistently
associated with greater shyness
and introversion and a lower willingness to communicate.
A number of consequences can arise from having CA. One can
experience psychological and
physical discomfort. Further, those with high CA have more
difficulties professionally, eco-
nomically, academically, and relationally. For example, high
CA individuals earn lower salaries
than those with low CA. High CA people are also more likely to
experience loneliness and have
difficulty communicating online and via new technologies.
Finally, greater communication
apprehension is associated with decreased communication
competence in both face-to-face and
mediated channels.
Key Terms
approach-avoid A factor related to willingness to communicate
that identifies the anxiety
that can accompany small group and interpersonal interactions
and the individual’s decision to
either seek out or avoid such situations.
communicationapprehension(CA) Fear and stress, either real or

imagined, associated with
the anticipation of interpersonal communication.
dyadiccommunicationapprehension Fear one feels of
interactions with one individual and
the subsequent desire to prevent or avoid such interactions. One
of four forms of communica-
tion apprehension; also known as person–partner CA.
extroversion The counterpart to introversion, a factor related to
communication apprehen-
sion, that emphasizes an individual’s focus on external
experiences or stimulation rather than
having an inward focus.
groupcommunicationapprehension Fear one feels of interactions
with three or more
individuals and the subsequent desire to avoid or withdraw from
such interactions. One of four
forms of communication apprehension.
introversion A factor related to communication apprehension
that emphasizes an individual’s
focus on one’s own thoughts and feelings rather than turning
outward for external experiences
or stimulation.
loneliness A characteristic related to communication
apprehension that occurs when an indi-
vidual’s actual number of relationships is fewer than the
preferred or desired amount.
meetingcommunicationapprehension Fear one feels of
participation in formal meetings.
One of four forms of communication apprehension.

publicspeakingcommunicationapprehension Fear one feels of
speeches or presentations to
a group of individuals and the subsequent desire to avoid such
situations. One of four forms of
communication apprehension.
reward A factor related to willingness to communicate that
accounts for an individual’s belief
that relationships with others can offer camaraderie, empathy,
and valuable conversation.
shyness A factor related to communication apprehension that is
considered a relatively stable
personality trait and describes an individual’s feelings of
apprehension, timidity, discomfort,
and awkwardness in social situations.
statecommunicationapprehension A type of communication
apprehension associated with
a specific interpersonal communication context.
usesandgratificationstheory A communication theory that
attempts to identify and under-
stand the needs and motives users seek, and the fulfillments
they receive, from using a particu-
lar medium.
traitcommunicationapprehension A type of communication
apprehension associated with
interpersonal communication experiences as a broad, consistent
personal attribute.

willingnesstocommunicate(WTC) A factor related to
communication apprehension that
identifies an individual’s preference to avoid communication
situations.
Critical Thinking and Discussion Questions
1. Think about a situation when you experienced communication
apprehension or were unwill-
ing to communicate. What was it about the situation that made
you feel that way? How did
you communicate in that interaction and how was it different
from a situation where you felt
comfortable?
2. In what forms (if any) do you have communication
apprehension or a CA-related characteris-
tic? Which of these do you think is most important or primary
in your own interactions with
others and why?
3. How do you think the CA-related characteristics of
introversion, shyness, and willingness to
communicate have impacted your interactions with others?
Which CA consequences dis-
cussed in this chapter have you experienced in your interactions
and relationships?
4. How do you think communication apprehension and CA-
related characteristics are linked
to how you view yourself? How does cultural background, self-
concept, self-image, and self-
esteem relate to apprehensiveness when communicating?
5. Based on the information in this chapter, what would you
recommend to a friend who comes

to you and tells you that he or she wants to decrease his or her
communication apprehension?
Introduction
The Topic I picked is to design and deploy wireless solution for
a new premises, Fix the blind spots in the existing premises,
Increasing the security of the network, Fix the slow streaming
of videos and managing the whole network in single console for
an organization. Fix slow wireless network issues. The company
USA Technology is expanding from one floor office to three
floors office so they want to implement wireless network in
their new premises as the Application which they have
developed is successful and is almost used by half a million
people in just a month of the release of the app. Their security
internally in the present office is very basic they want to
implement security in such a way that only authorised persons
should enter into the network as well as they are keen on
implementing high security network as their application deals
with payment gateways also. The company deals with high
quality videos for marketing and advertising purposes they have
a problem of slow streaming of the videos which needs to be
fixed. IT manager had problems in monitoring the network and
as they are growing he would have to deal with more network
components and connections so they wanted to have a single
console be implemented in order to monitor the network. As a
IT consultant would have a design and deploy a solution which
would address all the above concerns of the organization.
Introduction (30 points)

Describe the topic you selected, identify the specific wireless
management issues, and present background/facts that will
enable the reader to clearly understand the topic. A draft of
your introduction (worth 15 points) is due at the end of Week 3.
Problem Statement (30 points)
Identify and clearly state the problem(s) and issues. If there
appears to be more than one problem/issue, decide if they are
separate or related issues. Keep the problem statement short and
concise. A draft problem statement (worth 15 points) is due at
the end of Week 4.
Analysis (110 points)
Provide a detailed analysis of the causes of the problem/issue.
Be sure the causes you identify relate directly to the
problem/issue. You must effectively apply course material.
Integrate your findings from your review of the literature in
your analysis. Discuss the concepts, ideas, or insights that are
most valuable in helping you make sense of your project. This
is not a course in applied common sense, so support your
analysis with reference to appropriate research. You must use
no fewer than eight resources outside your textbook. Cite all
sources.
Recommended
Solution
and Implementation (55 points)
Explore the solution(s) that could be appropriate to solve the
identified problem/issue. Be sure the solution(s) is/are logical
based on your analysis and that the solution(s) would
effectively treat the problem, not the symptoms. Also, discuss
the anticipated outcomes (both positive and negative) of

implementing each of the possible solution(s) you identified.
Describe exactly what should be done and how it should be
done, including by whom, with whom, and in what sequence.
References (5 points)
All references must be cited in two places: within the text and
on a reference list. Choose references judiciously and cite them
accurately. Refer to Writing a Research Paper Manual to
understand how to cite sources appropriately.
I have written the Introduction already write the rest without
plagarism that is problem statement, Analysis,, recommended
solution and implementation, references with network diagram
and solution diagram
Interpersonal Communication
in the Workplace
Learning Objectives
In this chapter, readers will explore interpersonal
communication in business and professional
settings. By the end of this chapter, readers will be able to

• Identify workplace communication behaviors
• Explain how interpersonal communication can enhance
professional success
• Understand the different types of formal and informal
workplace relationships
• Describe how new and emerging technologies continue to
change workplace
communication
• Apply suggestions for successful interpersonal business and
professional communication to
interactions
6
Jupiterimages/Goodshoot/Thinkstock
Introduction Chapter 6
Introduction
To illustrate the intricacy of communication in a business and

professional setting, consider the
following scenario that takes place between two coworkers,
Patrick and Megan, and their boss,
Suzanne:
Patrick and Megan work as lawyers in a mid-sized law firm in
Memphis, Tennessee. Neither
of them is from the area, so once they were hired, they
immediately forged a close friendship.
They found that they both had common interests, such as
watching football, baking, and
talking about their partners and kids. Because Patrick and
Megan do not practice the same
type of law, they do not work together very frequently;
however, they attend many of the same
meetings and are both sometimes a part of cases that their firm
takes on. Though they do not
collaborate at work very often, they do frequently talk about
their coworkers, the policies at
the firm, and their boss, Suzanne.
Suzanne is actually a frequent topic of conversation between
Patrick and Megan. Sometimes,
they do not understand her managerial style, and they find
themselves commiserating with

each other about decisions that she has made or policies that she
has introduced. They feel
that talking to each other is better than complaining to Suzanne
because, overall, they do
enjoy their jobs. Patrick and Megan are also careful to rarely
have these conversations at
work; instead, they will e-mail, text, instant message, or chat on
the phone about Suzanne.
Suzanne, however, has picked up on the fact that Patrick and
Megan are very close and
believes that their friendship is actually a detriment to the
organization. She sees their close-
ness as reducing overall employee morale, such as when she
(and other employees) notice
them rolling their eyes at each other during meetings, or when
she finds them frequently
talking in each other’s offices with their doors closed. Because
of this, Suzanne has cautioned
newer attorneys in the firm from getting too close to Patrick and
Megan, because she does
not want them to engage in the types of behaviors that they do.
Think about this situation from both sides. Patrick and Megan
see their friendship as harmless. It

does not directly affect their work, and it offers them something
to look forward to when they go
to work each day. They enjoy having someone else at work who
understands and can empathize
when things get stressful or overwhelming. But from Suzanne’s
perspective, Patrick and Megan’s
friendship is a threat to her and to the organization. She views
them as talking about her behind
her back and as undermining her leadership. Who is right? How
can this issue be best resolved?
Should Suzanne talk about this issue with Patrick and Megan?
In this situation, we see the importance of a number of business
and professional communica-
tion concepts, including formal and informal communication,
conflict management, relationship
maintenance, and expressing negative emotion. We will touch
on each of these specific aspects of
business and professional communication, and many more, in
this chapter.
In this text, you will have the opportunity to examine
interpersonal communication in a range of
contexts, including everyday conversations, friendships, family
interactions, romantic relation-

ships, and mediated settings. In Chapter 6, we focus specifically
on interpersonal communication
in business and professional settings such as in the workplace
and in the classroom. We examine
the requirements for effective communication in this
environment, consider the types of formal
and informal relationships that we can have, and we explore
how communication in such envi-
ronments differs from interactions in your personal life. This
chapter will end with a discussion
about suggestions for successful interpersonal business and
professional communication.
Business and Professional Communication Chapter 6
6.1 Business and Professional Communication
Almost everyone will be employed at some sort of job during
his or her lifetime. It may be a
part-time summer job between school semesters, a volunteer
position with a charity or nonprofit
organization, or a full-time career. Consider the various types of
jobs available to you, how would
you respond if someone asked you, “Why do you work?” Many

people would say, “I work because
I have to,” or, “I work to pay the bills.” Although these are our
primary reasons for working, and
are certainly important, most of us derive additional, important
benefits from our work. The non-
monetary rewards from our jobs fall into two main categories:
self-fulfillment—the feelings of
competence, recognition, and personal reward from knowing a
job and doing it well—and social
interaction—the feeling of being part of a team and the social
relationships with coworkers. We
maintain these business relationships through communication,
which we also use to seek and
share information, make decisions, coordinate and complete
tasks, and influence and motivate
others in business and professional contexts (Myers, Seibold, &
Park, 2011).
Business and professional communication (BPC) is a broad
communication context that
includes all of the different forms of messages exchanged in the
workplace or in a professional
setting. This definition can include written and oral
communication, both verbal and nonverbal,
and can also take place in digital or mediated contexts. BPC

also encompasses the gathering and
dissemination of information that is relevant to that particular
business setting, as well as the
promotion of a specific product, service, or organization.
Advertising, public relations, market-
ing, crisis and reputation management, human resources, event
planning, and corporate com-
munications are all areas of BPC, and BPC in all of these
specific areas involves how coworkers or
members of a professional organization interpersonally relate to
one another.
Communication in these professional settings is not solely about
the work that we do. We also
communicate with our colleagues at work because we like them.
We build interpersonal rela-
tionships with them that we wish to maintain, and we want to
give and receive social support
from them. In fact, the interpersonal component of our business
and professional relationships
is vital. For example, a study examining the demands of work
found that support from peers in
the workplace buffered employees from the negative health
effects of job stress and strain, which
then reduced employee mortality (Shirom, Toker, Alkaly,

Jacobson, & Balicer, 2011). Arie Shirom
and colleagues also found that this colleaguesupport, which
involved immediate coworkers
being friendly and helpful with solving problems, reduced
symptoms of depression and anxiety
(Shirom et al., 2011). Our interpersonal relationships in the
workplace thus can positively impact
our health in multiple, important ways, and this chapter will
focus on this and other interper-
sonal aspects of BPC.
The Importance of Interpersonal Communication in the
Workplace
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2013), Americans
age 25–54 who have children
spend an average of 8.8 hours working during a typical
workday. This significant time devoted
to working drives home the importance of competent
communication in business and profes-
sional settings. Interpersonal and written communication skills
are some of the most important
skills you can develop to help you achieve your academic and
professional goals. In business,
government, and other professional fields, people communicate

to share information, to per-
suade others, to reach goals and obtain results, and to form
positive relationships with clients
and customers (Picardi, 2001). A number of career and
employer organizations conduct surveys
of employers to determine which skills are particularly
important for employers and find that
various forms of communication are consistently rated as
important. For example, each year,
the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE)
surveys its employer members to
project the job market for new college graduates. Each year
employers rate the most in-demand
bachelor’s degrees. The 2013 survey indicates that
communication degrees, as a broad category,
are the fifth most in-demand degree, with almost 33% of
employers surveyed indicating that they
would hire individuals who majored in communication (NACE,
2012).

In addition, NACE employers are asked to rate the importance
of 10 skills and qualities on a scale
of 1 through 5, with 1 representing “not important” and 5
representing “extremely important.” The
top two skills are verbal interpersonal skills and teamwork
skills, both abilities that are directly
related to interpersonal communication (NACE, 2012). The
skills of obtaining and processing
information, writing reports, and selling or influencing others
are also an integral part of inter-
personal communications with others in the workplace. Time
and again employers also report
that they value listening, leadership, management of others, and
multicultural awareness and
sensitivity (Hansen & Hansen, n.d.). A similar employer survey
asked business executives about
the top 10 softskills, or the intangible interpersonal qualities
and personal attributes that job
seekers need, in addition to the hardskills, or the technical
knowledge and expertise, required
for a particular job (Robles, 2012). Three of these 10 most
important soft skills directly involve
interpersonal communication skills: communication (ranked
second), interpersonal skills (fifth),
and teamwork skills (ninth) (Robles, 2012).

Though employers consistently rate com-
munication as an important skill, job seek-
ers, especially Millennials (between the ages
of 19 and 26), may not be doing an effective
job presenting such skills to prospective
employers. A recent survey conducted by an
online career network, Beyond.com (2013),
polled 6,000 job seekers and veteran human
resource (HR) professionals, finding a sub-
stantial difference between how members of
the Millennial generation view themselves
as employee prospects and how HR pro-
fessionals perceive such prospective candi-
dates. Though 66% of the Millennials rated
themselves as team players, only 22% of HR
people agreed that the Millennials would
work well in a team (Beyond.com, 2013).
In addition, 65% of the Millennials felt that
their interpersonal communication skills were strong, but only
14% of the HR professionals agreed
with this assessment. These perceptual differences may be
discouraging for job seekers, but one
way to overcome such hurdles is to learn more about

interpersonal communication, which can give
job seekers an important advantage because they will know how
to better communicate who they
are and what skills they can offer employers. The simple fact is
that employers need and want peo-
ple who have good communication skills and are competent
communicators in a variety of ways.
Workplace Communication Behaviors
BPC research aims to identify and understand the types of
communication that occur in the
workplace. A recent study (Keyton et al., 2013) helped pinpoint
four routine forms of work-
place communication that can help evaluate employee
effectiveness. The researchers sought to
Goodshoot/Thinkstock
▲▲ Employers need and want employees who have good
communications skills in a range of interpersonal and group
situations.

determine which communication behaviors individuals use
frequently in the workplace and how
these messages are evaluated by coworkers (Keyton et al.,
2013). This study defined workplace
communicationbehaviors as social behaviors that employees
engage in with coworkers, which
then create connections between the individual employees and
the larger organization. There are
a few key purposes of such behaviors. Workplace
communication behaviors
• Serve important functions
• Are undertaken to accomplish goals
• Are interactive because they involve other individuals
• Are learnable
• Are observable
Joann Keyton and her colleagues (2013) argued that it is
important to identify these behaviors
because they are relevant to how organizations evaluate
employee performance, competence,
and skill.

To identify these behaviors in the workplace, Keyton and
colleagues (2013) conducted two stud-
ies. The first study helped researchers generate a list of
workplace behaviors that were commu-
nicative in nature. The second study then allowed researchers to
organize the list of behaviors
into broader categories and examine each category in relation to
effectiveness—an employee’s
perceived ability in that particular area—and communication
competence. Four broad workplace
communication behavior categories emerged from Keyton and
colleagues’ analysis:
• Informationsharing: task-related behaviors such as explaining,
solving problems, giving
feedback and advice, and asking and answering questions
• Relationalmaintenance: interpersonal relationship-focused
actions such as creating rela-
tionships, engaging in small talk, and being humorous
• Expressingnegativeemotion: complaints or frustrations about
work or the workplace
frustration

• Organizing: administrative-type behaviors such as scheduling
and planning, personnel
management, and problem solving
There are elements of each of these four behavior categories in
the scenario that was described
at the beginning of the chapter. Patrick and Megan each share
information about the policies of
the firm where they work, and each also expresses negative
emotions about their boss, Suzanne.
Suzanne is organizing as she attempts to understand the
friendship between her two employees
and its possible influence on their coworkers and the
organization. Throughout the scenario,
Patrick, Megan, and Suzanne are also independently attempting
to maintain workplace relation-
ships by trying to work through the situation (though it might be
more constructive if they com-
municated and worked through concerns as a team). Of these
four workplace communication
behavior categories, information sharing, relational
maintenance, and organizing were associated
with increased self-reported communication competence,
whereas expressing negative emotion
was unrelated to self-reported competence (Keyton et al., 2013).

In other words, engaging in
information sharing, maintaining relationships, and organizing
were perceived by participants
as appropriate and effective workplace communication
behaviors. Further, though information
sharing and maintaining relationships are often viewed by
researchers as important factors in
workplace communication processes, organization behaviors
and the expression of negative emo-
tion are important additional behaviors that help communication
scholars understand how indi-
viduals in business and professional settings communicate.
Everyday Communication Challenges
elaborates on expressing feelings in the work environment.
How Interpersonal Communication Can Enhance Professional
Success Chapter 6
6.2 How Interpersonal Communication Can Enhance
Professional Success
Though BPC tends to focus on how colleagues communicate
with one another about business

and professional matters, interpersonal messages and
relationships among colleagues are also
integral to workplace success. As we have seen, social support
from our colleagues helps buf-
fer against negative health effects that stem from work, and
employers recognize and seek out
the value of interpersonal communication when hiring new
employees. In addition, maintaining
relationships with colleagues is also an important aspect of
BPC. The next sections will explore
additional ways that interpersonal communication can enhance
your success at work and your
career advancement.
E V E R Y D A Y C O M M U N I C A T I O N C H A L L E N
G E S
Expressing Feelings in the Workplace
Every day you are surrounded by people who interact in ways
that are different from yours. You col-
laborate with them and share informal and formal messages with
them. Have you ever been frus-
trated by something a coworker said? Has your boss not paid
attention to you when you thought

he or she should? Has a client made your life a little more
difficult? As you just read, workplace
communication behaviors that express negative emotions by
complaining or venting frustration are
unrelated to communication competence. This means that
consistently expressing feelings that are
negative does not contribute to how effective and appropriate
you are in your business and profes-
sional communication.
Most people do want to build and maintain good relationships
with their coworkers, so a well-
thought-out conversation about your experiences may make the
workplace more pleasant for
everyone. First, be sure not to respond too hastily. The best way
to deal with a strong emotional
response is to let that emotion die down so you can approach
the topic rationally. Second, try to
figure out why you felt that emotion in the first place. Was it
because you didn’t feel respected?
Was it because you felt frustrated because you had to say or do
the same thing over and over
again? Was it because you felt like no one listened to you?
Identifying the source of the emotion
can help you figure out what to do to alleviate it. Third, jot

down a list of things you might want
to say, and then reread it after a short break, imagining that you
were on the other side, hearing
those things about yourself. Does your list make sense? Does
your list make you mad? Does your list
say what you really want to say and assist you in doing so in a
competent manner? Finally, ask the
person involved for a good time to discuss your feelings. It’s
never helpful to spring a difficult con-
versation on someone, particularly when he or she is busy doing
something else. If you follow these
rules and keep your complaining and venting to a minimum,
everyone will hopefully be happier in
the long run.
1. Do you think that expressing negative emotions is an
essential form of informal communication
in the workplace? What potential functions might this form of
communication serve?
2. Have you had a similar experience in a business or
professional setting? If so, how did you handle
it? What information from this chapter may have altered how

you responded?
3. How might you consider the situation and approach the
person involved differently if this was a
situation that occurred in a mediated setting (i.e., over e-mail or
during a videoconference)?
Success Chapter 6
Professionalism
The term professional is applied to occupations or activities
related to work or career that require
certain skills, competence, or character. The related concept of
professionalism refers to the
principles of behavior and communication that are appropriate
and effective in these more formal
settings. Professionalism is an important soft skill in the
workplace (Robles, 2012). The Center for
Professional Excellence (CPE), which conducts an annual
survey on professionalism in the work-
place, reported in 2012 that HR professionals and managers

designate a number of components
of professionalism, including interpersonal skills,
communication skills, appearance, time man-
agement, knowledge, confidence, ethics, and productivity. Many
of these components are directly
related to verbal and nonverbal communication skills necessary
to communicate with others in
business and professional settings.
The communication skills discussed thus far in this text apply to
professional settings just as
much as they do to other environments. However, the context of
a professional environment,
such as the college classroom or the workplace, imposes some
specific requirements on the ways
that individuals communicate. Some of the most important
requirements for conveying profes-
sionalism to others are outlined in the following sections. Many
of the elements are central in
business and professional settings but are important in our
personal lives as well.
Formal Language
Formal language is more careful, articulate, and mannered than
everyday speech. It is used to

express serious thought and is clear, accurate, and not overly
emotional. Formal language is
the standard speech of the academic world and the appropriate
language in most professional
workplaces, with clients or customers, in professional writing,
and in public speaking situa-
tions. Formal language avoids colloquial-
isms, slang, verbal fillers such as “like,” and
biased language. In these ways, using for-
mal language conveys professionalism.
If we have established a familiar relation-
ship with someone, we often use slang
expressions in our conversations, e-mails,
and text messages, and we worry less about
using correct punctuation, grammar, and
sentence structure. It can be argued that
everyday conversations, social network
posts, text messages, and personal e-mails
have conditioned us to respond quickly and
briefly to messages via both mediated and
face-to-face channels. Specifically, Larry
Rosen and his colleagues (Rosen, Chang,
Erwin, Carrier, & Cheever, 2010) found that
individuals with no or some college educa-

tion who used more brief language in their
electronic interactions created formal writing that was of lower
quality. This was also the case for
individuals who had some college education and who also sent
more text and instant messages.
As a result, when we must deliver an oral presentation at work
or send a well-written letter or
e-mail to a customer, we may be unsure how best to proceed.
Failing to recognize the necessity of
a more formal communication style in a professional setting is a
significant mistake that people
James Woodson/Photodisc/Thinkstock
▲▲ We often use informal language when we have a familiar
relationship with someone, but formal language should be
used in academic and professional settings.
Success Chapter 6
make in the classroom and the workplace. However, formal
communication matters: Poor verbal

Developing Confidence Coping with Insecurities about Inte.docx

Developing Confidence Coping with Insecurities about Inte.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Developing Confidence Coping with Insecurities about Inte.docx

Similar to Developing Confidence Coping with Insecurities about Inte.docx (15)

More from duketjoy27252

More from duketjoy27252 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Developing Confidence Coping with Insecurities about Inte.docx