In our everyday face-to-face interactions, nonverbal cues play an important role in enabling the effective transmission of messages and meanings between the communicators. However, in this digital age, the usage of technology like email and social networking sites to replace face-to-face interaction is becoming more commonplace. This has resulted in the younger generation (Generation Y) not having sufficient knowledge and experience of nonverbal cues, and according to the reference article, this scarcity puts them at a face-to-face disadvantage.
The writer, Mr Mark Bauerlein, raises the issue of miscommunication due to the use of nonverbal cues across cultures (federal workers dealing with Navajo Indians) and across generations (older employees versus younger employees).
In the first instance, the miscommunication can be explained using chronemics: the Navajos, being extremely present-oriented, believe in living for the moment. Their happy-go-lucky attitude was probably a source of irritation for the future-oriented federal workers, who perhaps believed in planning and working hard for the future.
Whereas for the second case, the usage of laptops, iPhones and other tools during a meeting or in the middle of a conversation communicates disinterest towards those of the older generation. More adept at face-to-face interaction and the reading of nonverbal cues, those of the older generation perceive their younger counterparts as being socially inept: the decrease in the number of opportunities for the youngsters to engage in face-to-face interaction has caused them to be unable to interpret nonverbal cues in the form of paralinguistics, oculesics and the like; they are unable to communicate effectively due to this indulgence in online and electronic communication systems.
However, what the older generation may see as a breakdown in communication may mean the direct opposite to the younger, because of the different environments and social settings they were brought up in. To the younger, perhaps all these virtual methods of communication only serve to enhance interaction.
For most relationships, face-to-face interaction comes first before any digital methods of communication. There has to be a certain amount of interpersonal communication before the people involved are able to correctly understand and interpret each other’s electronic messages. I believe that with more opportunities for face-to-face interaction, the ability to read the other party’s nonverbal cues will be improved. Along with this, mutual understanding between both parties will increase and the tendency to misread and draw wrong conclusions through the use of the above-mentioned digital communication tools will be reduced.
Being able to communicate face-to-face successfully with the use of nonverbal communication is what makes us human. We are relational creatures; we are social beings. We have an inherent need to be loved, to be understood, to be accepted. And most of the time, the knowledge that we do matter comes through nonverbal communication. For example, a simple “I love you” said to friend through SMS may invoke a sense of love and acceptance, but that same phrase accompanied with a hug in face-to-face interaction speaks volumes more. The use of kinesics (in this case, the hug as an illustrator) serves to accentuate the verbal message. Yes, as digital age global citizens, we should not boycott the influx of online communication methods into our lives. However, we need not and should not allow such avenues to take precedence over the basis of all human relationships – face-to-face interaction.
Reference article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203863204574348493483201758.html
I totally disagree that Gen-Y cannot understand non-verbal cues. I feel that Gen-Y in fact, should be able to communicate using non-verbal cues more effectively than the older generation. The advancement of IT has led to the rise of Internet, SMS, iPhone and so on, for which we convey verbal messages using non-verbal icons, symbols and so on.
ReplyDeletecomment on mine too!
http://commmediadiscourse.wordpress.com
HELLO THERE!
ReplyDeleteI agree that the richest form of communication is still face-to-face! :D
However, I feel that we should give credit to technology because they did realise the downside of just sending a message with "I love you" (whether online or sms). That's why we have programs like "Windows Life Messenger" and "Skype" that allows us to have face-to-face online conference.
That being said, even though we can read non-verbal cues through the facial expression of the person we're communicating to, we cannot fully utilise the other non-verbal cues to illustrate and accentuate the message! (Because we can't hug a person over the internet! [Haptics])
So all in all, technology has its drawbacks on communication, even though it tries to compensate them. Face-to-face communication is still the best way to communicate a message!
http://becauseimacommstudent.blogspot.com
Do visit and comment too!
hello!
ReplyDeleteFace-to-face communication is still the best as it is complemented with non-veral cues such as facial expressions. Non-verbal cues is important as it is helps to empahsis on the message being conveyed.
However, face-to-face communication is not always possible especially if the other person is in overseas. That's when technology comes in to aid us in communication at a low cost (as compared to the money and time needed to go overseas just to speak to the person)
In all, it'll be better if we can make use of all the different ways of communications to our greatest benefits. :)
Yes indeed, face-to-face communications is I think the best form of communication. However, sometimes we may be too busy to even meet up with our friends and using these other forms of communication is an alternative to keep in contact with them. I don't really see a disparity or disadvantage in the lack of face-to-face communication. Yes I miss my boyfriend if I do not get to see him so often, and I also miss my best friend's company because the phone and MSN doesn't give amply attention to her and myself that we need. However we cannot deny that these alternative forms of communication has its own advantages. Furthermore it is too harsh to say that gen-Y is not skilled in NV comm. With communication through the phone, we are more sensitive to ones tone. And with msn conversations, we are also sensitive to tone through the choice of words. Not to mention it isn't as if we are NOT meeting people face-to-face. Hence with such communication mediums, we are exposed to more forms of communications and hence it complements our face-to-face communications.
ReplyDeleteIn another study (I forgot the source) cited, the findings suggest that the newborn learns nonverbal cues from birth primarily through mirroring the expressions of the parents. They also demostrate considerable ability to use nonverbal facial gestures as heuristics to “manage their image” (in the vein of Erving Goffman) and gain favorable responses from their caretakers.
ReplyDeleteTo characterise such behavior as manipulation is a tad too harsh, for we are still unsure if the infant’s conduct is conscious or instinctive. This however indicates that humans are wired (from birth) to communicate on nonverbal terms. The decrease in nonverbal communication may be henceforth a “departure” from human nature, and seen in normative terms as an “unhealthy” trend for human society.
This may however be an exaggerated concern because the absence of nonverbal communication - though worrying - does not have sufficient empirical proof that it negatively alters our physiology and/or damage our psychology. Hence more remains to be seen.
Hi Liyin!
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with you that face-to-face interaction is important. Especially now with the discussion of replacing the current education system to a system entirely computerised, there will no longer be face-to-face interaction, except with a computer. I feel that face-to-face interaction brings non-verbal communication, such as oculesics (as you mentioned) for the communication to be more sincere, and reduce possibility of miscommunication, and this simply cannot be detect by computers.
Non verbal cues are important, although it varies in different societies. They help us fully communicate as compared to relaying on verbal communication alone. For example, through SMS and emails, where the message intended can be vastly misinterpreted.
imagine living a life without nonverbal cues. life would be so boring! nonverbal cues are a complement to our daily language use. it is an art that is highly appreciated.
ReplyDeletef2f communication is definitely the best form of communication as one can see the hints and facial expressions which is important to minimize misunderstandings. however, f2f is not always feasible especially when the two persons are living in different time zones.
hey!
ReplyDeletei think non verbal cues spice up the process of communication. With the different aspects such as oculesics, haptics, kinesics etc, it conveys message in more abstract yet interesting way.
As for face-face interaction, it is important as words cannot deliver the exact meaning without expressions accompanied with.
About the communication between an older generation and us, I can say, from my experience, that it can be sometimes quite awkward. For example, sometimes my granny does not know what I'm blabbing on and on about :)
ReplyDeleteI totally agree that nothing beats face-to-face communication! Although an SMS saying "i love you" is sweet, you will never know whether the person truly means it unless you see his/her facial expression (eyes speak better than words).
Haha, I LOVE YOU sis.
I agree that face-to-face communication is still the best. There are much to be said in non-verbal cues, much to be picked up.
ReplyDeleteFor example, that's why we never do shepherding through webcam or MSN .___. Because there's just so much more value in face to face meetings even in this highly digitalised world with a generation so familiar with IT.
One thing you pointed out I found interesting is that non verbal communication is ambiguous. We can never be sure that others understand the meaning we intend to express with our non-verbal cues. Also, meanings change over time.
If even face to face communication is so ambiguous, what more MSN or sms? I know of many situations where misunderstanding result and deepen, causing a lot of emotional hurt due to misreadings over MSN and smses. I felt offended with my friend for a very long time because we had a quarrel over MSN which was really just a very petty argument.
yes i agree that face-to-face communication is still the most effective method of communication because the chances of misunderstanding are higher if we communication through other means such as email or phone. It is disheartening to see that the advancement of technology has taken over the traditional form of communication until the extent where we do not know where to draw a line. For example, there was a case reported a few years back about a Malay who decided to divorce his wife by smsing "I DIVORCE YOU." so that he can avoid any head-on arguments or fights with his wife. such a way to communicate a person's ideas is not very ethical and it shows how much humans have devalued face-to-face communication.
ReplyDelete