Question #3

Non-verbal expression is not something that people think about or are conscious of on a daily basis. People communicate through non-verbal expression all the time, sometimes consciously and purposefully, and other times it just feels a little more natural. I find non-verbal communication to be the most interesting form of communication studied in my communications courses thus far because I feel like non-verbal expression is likely to tell the truth about one's disposition rather than what their words may not be saying.

The part I found most interesting in Chapter 5 we the Kinesic Code II. I always thought of facial expressions as being universal. I never really thought about a smile being used differently in different cultures. The text talks about how people follow "cultural display rules"(pg 119), which are not the same universally. In some cultures the smile is to be used at an event such as a funeral. This would not be acceptable here in the United States. The second element I found interesting about the Kinesic Code II, was "professional display rules". I am a waitress and bartender and a corporate restaurant where my profession requires me to be smiling the entire time I am in the building. My guests easily read my facial non-verbal ques when I am upset or irritated. Usually I am walking about with a smile the entire time, so when my face contains something other than a smile, people are quick to ask what is wrong, even if nothing is wrong. Even though I am sending and unintentional non-verbal message to other people in the restaurant, I am still communicating on certain levels with them.

Week 2 Q#2

There is no doubt in my opinion that men and women use language differently. This chapter focused a lot on how language affects the way we see the world, and I think that the world is seen differently between men and women. The text talks about how gender roles effect language, and that language effects thinking. Throughout history, gender has been a huge factor in oppression and domination for women. Gender values differ for men and women in order for them to be socially accepted. Women generally place more emphasis on inclusion with their use of disclaimers, tag questions, and qualifiers. They want to make sure that nobody is offended in the interaction. I think it is safe to say that women were being seen as submissive because of their style of language. On the other hand, gender roles have appropriated masculinity to involve competitiveness and autonomy. Therefore language use by men is often evasive and directly to the point. With men wanting to talk about basics, and women wanting to talk about details, a gap in communication between men and women can occur.

The areas in which men and women use language differently can vary. The text talks about how women use language differently in an interpersonal relationship such as a husband or a wife. A husband may sit and wonder why his wife is nagging him about his day, while the woman is trying to use language and conversation to build a stronger relationship or bond to her husband. Women's cultural backgrounds provide them with a different use of language than men, and throughout history men's use of language has been deemed dominate or "better." The text suggests that this is changing, and that women's use of language is becoming more acceptable, but only time will tell if there can be a middle ground found in the construction of gender roles and the subsequent language differences.

Week 2 Q#1

After reading Chapter 3, I have come to the conclusion that listening and interpreting are much more complex processes than I had imagined. Perception of others seems to always have a judgmental or categorizing element attached. Whether judgment is intended or not, schemata is working in the background to shape our perception of the interaction or experience. If our past experiences and interpretations are always used to understand current situations, then I don't think that it is possible to not judge or categorize others when you speak or see them. "Person prototypes" described on page 51 makes me think about how I would judge a person if they walked into a room wearing a football uniform compared to how I would judge someone walking into a room wearing all black. Because of my past experience and my "personal constructs" (pg 51) I would automatically expect certain behavior or personality.

I am not saying that that my judgment or categorization of the football player or the person in all black would be correct, all I am saying is that are certain assumptions I would have about them because of my own personal constructs. In order to make my judgments of these two people more fair, myself or others who judge like me, would have to become more mindful. Instead of relying automatically on "old routines and mental habits", I would need to create a new understanding of these people by maybe sitting and actually getting to know who they are while putting their "person prototype" aside. The chapter talks a lot about how we cannot just rely on scripts or our own schemata to interpret situations correctly and fairly. In order to not categorizeand judge, people need to be more conscious of their automated system of perception, and open up their minds to other possibilities or meanings of a given person, situation, or interaction.

Response to Q3

This chapter encompassed everything that I learned in my public speaking course last semester. As I mentioned in my first blog about myself, I am a senior and I saved my public speaking course for the very end of my college career due to the fear and anxieties I felt about speaking in front of an audience. I found that my text last semester and some of the tactics mentioned in Chapter 10 relating to speech anxieties gave me an outlet to let the fear of public speaking subside.

I learned in my public speaking course that people fear public speaking MORE than death itself. When I heard this fact from my professor Michelle Zajac I instantly compared my fear of death to that of my anxiety of public speaking. When I did this I realized that I have had more panic and symptoms of anxiety when knowing I had a speech to give in class that day than I had ever had about the possibility of death. Chapter 10 and my past experience with public speaking material taught me that confidence is a key element in overcoming the fear of public speaking.

"Cognitive Restructuring" mentioned on page 288 of our text was the main way I calmed my anxiety of getting up in front of an audience. When I first started my public speaking course all I could see was myself walking up in front of my class and stuttering, or forgetting where I was at in my speech. Basically, all I could see were the worst embarrassing outcomes coming to life in my imagination. My professor put great emphasis on the idea of cognitively restructuring to alter our way of thinking about how we would do up in front of the class. In order to cognitively restructure, I had to stop picturing the worst and start picturing and telling myself that I would do great, and that I had to recognize that what I was fearing wasn't very likely to happen. Organization and research were also a large element, but for me, confidence and cognitively restructuring the way I imagined my speech going had the most positive results relating to my speech anxiety.

Question #2

I have heard quite a few public speeches throughout my lifetime, but one that truely sticks out to me to this day was a speech given by one of my classmates last semester. Not only did she evoke strong emotion with her audience, she was having an honest conversation with them without anyone but her needing to say a word. My classmate was speaking about physical abuse from an ex-boyfriend, and her sense of urgency and passion about how painful domestic violence can be was projected by her building a community among her audience. At the end of her speech we were all ready to take action against domestic violence, and I went forward and actually did so. She also established her credibility well by not only appearing very professional, but by her research and facts about the topic. After stating a fact, she made sure that her audience knew where she got that information, and those sources were pretty prestigious and usually academic journals. The element that made her speech most memorable was her ability to persuade us as an audience to become active participants in domestic violence resistance. Her personal stories and data made her speech one that will stick out in my mind for a very long time.

The worst speaker I ever heard was actually an anti-abortion speech given in a small community church when I was in Junior High. This speech was terrible because it was one sided, not supported by any kind of evidence such as statistics or facts, the information seemed to only be based on an ideology and not reality. I just remember the message not being supported with data, which made me feel like the speech had no credibility or persuading elements.

Question #1

Response to Question #1

Communication occurs in all populations on earth, but what different cultures value or believe are not usually homogeneous. Worlds are built through not only communication, but through culture. The things we even choose to communicate about are determined by culture. Our ideologies, beliefs, and values all come into play when communication is involved. Our culture has attached meanings and values on something as little as what a basketball means, so when we are talking about a basketball we are talking about the object in terms of what culture has defined it as.
There is a link between culture and communication because communication reproduces culture, and culture creates meaning for communication. Different cultures may have assigned different meaning or value to an ideology, which alters the way communication works compared to the “American Culture”. The American Culture is one that is becoming more popular globally, but some fear that the consumerist and individualistic nature can be a slippery slope. Other cultures, such as poor nations or impoverished communities, may not even talk in terms of what designer Chanel bag should be purchased next or not, or may not give a crap about the Lakers and the Celtics.
If meaning is created and recreated by communication, then culture is usually one of the determiners in what people are actually communicating about. Our happiness and success depends on the way we communicate, and what we are communicating about. If society places quality of life on how much stuff you have, then I believe happiness and success become very difficult to achieve.

Introductory Post

Hello COMM 105!

I am currently a senior at San Jose State University. I have spent 5 years at San Jose State and am ready to graduate in the fall! I am actually a sociology major, but I started college thinking I would be a business major. After one class in sociology, my views about the world changed, and I decided to take a different academic path. This is probably why I have spend 5 years here!
Communication studies is new to me, and I hope to learn a lot from this class. The only communication class I have taken in the past was my public speaking course. I learned a lot from that course, but we didn't really study the importance of communication in society as a whole. This is also my first experience with online classes so I have tons to learn about how this is all works. Although I have not taken a COMM course outside of public speaking, sociology has taught me the value of communication and how it interconnects societies around the globe. Hopefully some of my other studies will provide me with a better understanding of this course.
I guess I could tell you guys a few random things I like to do outside of school stuff. I'm actually a little stressed because I have never taken a summer course, and I can't keep myself away from camping or the lake. The problem with camping and the lake is there is no internet connection! Even though I love the lake, and boating, sometimes responsibility has to reign supreme :) I hope to get to know a little bit about you guys as well, and nice to meet you.