LIT – communication and
leadership
Week 1: communication, mindset & goals
Watzlawick, Beavin & Jackson (1967) – Some Tentative Axioms of Communication
2.2 The Impossibility of Not Communicating
There is no opposite to behavior, one cannot not communicate. Activity or inactivity all send
a message and can influence others.
Communication defined: one communicational unit is a message, a series of messages is an
interaction, which can add up to patterns of interaction.
Communication is almost never singular, but multifaceted and containing model like tone,
posture, context, etc.
2.3 The Content and Relationship Levels of Communication
A communication does not only convey information, but also imposes behavior on the
receiver. Even when one is sitting with their eyes closed and not moving it conveys the
behavior on the other person not to talk to them.
A -> B -> C
Report command
B= both report & command
Report aspect = content of the message (data)
Command aspect = relationship statements (instructions)
(= how you say something defines your relationship, so how the content is defined. In close
relationships more focus is on the content and less on how the relationship should be defined)
Report = data = what you say
Command = instructions = how to understand this (‘I’m just joking’, smiling while saying it,
etc.)
Command = information about the information = metacommunication
2.4 The Punctuation of the Sequence of Events
A series of communication is not one sequence of interchanges, but instead a punctuation.
One item = stimulus, response & reinforcement
Order in conversations
Punctation depends on role acceptance
Ex: The rat who said "I have got my experimenter trained. Each time I press the lever he
gives me food" was declining to accept the punctuation of the sequence which the
experimenter was seeking to impose.
The conversation will appear so one has dominancy, setting up patterns of interchange.
Disagreement on how to punctuate the sequence of events can lead to struggles in
interpersonal relationships. -> different views on joint experiences (who started what),
= infinite, osculating series
,S= a – a + a – a + a – a + a – a +…….
2.5 Digital and Analogic Communication
You can communicate by naming something or by pointing at something/using pictures. One
is by word, the other by self-explanatory likeness.
Word = arbitrary
Words have no meaning of themselves, only by association.
However, by using self-explanatory likeness you can understand, even when you for example
do not speak the language. = analogical communication
Analogic = non-verbal
Content – conveyed digitally
Relationship – conveyed analogically
Analogic communication is more ambigious- > tears can be from happiness or from joy
2.6 Symmetrical and Complementary Interaction
Schismogenesis: a process of differentiation in the norms of individual behavior resulting
from cumulative interaction between individuals.
One’s relationship is not a static good, but can change
Often progressively, the ‘leader’ becomes more dominant and the ‘follower’ more submissive
for example
= complementary schismogenesis: a pattern of interaction where individuals or groups
respond to each other in a complementary or opposing manner. In other words, one party's
behavior triggers a response from the other party that is complementary or opposite in nature.
Another type is symmetrical schismogenesis: a pattern of interaction where individuals or
groups respond to each other in a symmetrical or mirroring manner. In this case, when one
party behaves in a certain way, the other party responds by mirroring that behavior.
Symmetrical & complementary interaction
+ suggested third from metacomplementary: where A forces B to lead them
Metacommunicational axioms:
1. One cannot not communicate
2. Every communication has a content and a relationship aspect such that the latter
classifies the former and is therefore a metacommunication
3. The nature of a relationship is contingent upon the punctuation of the
communicational sequences between the communicants
(= depending on where you think the ‘beginning’ of a repeating communication lies, the
nature of the relationship/issue differs)
4. Human beings communicate both digitally and analogically. Digital language has a
highly complex and powerful logical syntax but lacks adequate semantics in the field
of relationship, while analogic language possesses the semantics but has no adequate
syntax for the unambiguous definition of the nature of relationships.
5. All communicational interchanges are either symmetrical or complementary,
depending on whether they are based on equality or difference.
,O’Keefe (2013) – mindsets and self-evaluation how beliefs about intelligence can create
a preference for growth over defensiveness
The purpose of this chapter is to demonstrate how implicit theories of intelligence (Dweck,
1999; Dweck & Leggett, 1988) invoke distinct self-evaluative motives that reflect or create a
preference for growth or defensiveness—and, ultimately, whether people fully develop their
competencies.
Entity theory – intelligence is limited and fixed -> performance goals
Incremental theory – intelligence is malleable & improvable -> learning goals
Your beliefs regarding intelligence change your goals. For someone who believes that
intelligence is fixed at some level, it may seem that effort will not yield any improvements
after a certain point. For someone who believes that intelligence is malleable, it stands to
reason that he or she can become smarter and more competent.
Intelligence is fixed: failure = I am inadequate
Intelligence is changeable: failure = I did not use the right strategies, or I need to further
develop my skills
Entity theorists tend to avoid appearing incompetent and avoid situations in which they may
fail. Incremental theorists, in contrast, focus on learning & developing abilities.
Entity = prove abilities
Incremental = improve abilities
Types of self-evaluative motives:
1. Self-assessment = motivated by the goal of accurately diagnosing one’s own ability
Entity: assess compared to others
Incremental: subjective standards, self-referential standards = assess compared to (past) self
2. Self-improvement = motivated by the goal of improvement
Entity: tend to see evaluative situations as threatening
Incremental: seek information and evaluate abilities in a way that helps improvement, ex.
learning new strategies – fits with incremental
3. Self-enhancement
Fits with entity, blame external causes to protect self-esteem when a task is failed
Incremental = self-referential self-assessment + self-improvement = desire for growth
Entity = self-evaluative self-assessment + self-enhancement = desire for defensiveness
As demonstrated in numerous studies an incremental theory (and the learning goal it
fosters) is associated with a focus on growth and improvement.
People have a type of psychological defensive system that helps them maintain a positive,
consistent self-image. However, this can come at a cost of learning and the development
of abilities.
Self-handicapping, sabotaging your own performance, and feedback avoidance,
avoiding feedback and evaluative situations
+ self-serving bias, downward social comparison
Week 2: nonverbal communication & embodiment
, Guerrero (2014) – interpersonal functions of nonverbal communication
Building on principle set by Watzlawick et al. (1967) -> messages convey a content and
relational component.
This chapter focusses on the relational side of messages by focussing on four primary
functions of nonverbal communication: (1) forming impressions, (2) developing and
maintaining relationships, (3) sending messages related to dominance, and (4) expressing
emotion.
How to define nonverbal communication:
1- Any behaviours that are sent with intent or interpreted as meaningful by a receiver
2- By codes: kinesics, proxemics, haptics, vocalics, appearance and adornment,
environmental features and artifacts, and chronemics.
3.Forming impressions
People decode/interfere when meeting someone -> impression formation
There are static cues (height, attractiveness) & dynamic cues (expression, vocal tone)
- Static cues: physical attractiveness (halo-effect, matching hypothesis)
- Dynamic cues: interaction appearance theory, interaction can modify people’s
impressions about attractiveness, thin slice impressions (basing judgments about a
person a short sample)
4.Developing and maintaining relationships
- Positive involvement behaviours = the nonverbal cues that communicate liking and
intimacy
‘Lose proxemic distancing, touch, direct body orientation, open posture, increased or
sustained gaze that is evaluated as friendly rather than intimidating, smiling, and vocal
qualities that communicate warmth, expressiveness, and relaxation’
+ importance of reciprocity
Pattern: These findings support a principle of nonverbal escalation, in that nonverbal
immediacy cues tend to increase as a romantic relationship escalates toward commitment and
sexual involvement, but then decrease and level off after the relationship is fully committed.
- Flirtatious behavior= expresses sexual and romantic interest. Often begins safely
and throughout the interaction increases and becomes bolder.
5.Communicating dominance
Dominance = a set of interactional behaviors that are used to gain power and influence.
+partners are able to influence each other: (a) poise and self-assurance, (b) panache or
dynamism, or (c) skill in interaction management
+appearing dominant can lead to attraction
-using intimidation & control to get what you want
-power imbalances within a relationship
-intimate terrorism: using threats and violence to control your partner + the chilling effect
(less powerful person being afraid to speak out)
Theory of relative power: people with more power in a relationship do not need to display
dominant behavior, because they already have control = dyadic power theory
