Interpersonal communication. Coursework: Interpersonal Relations and Communication
Communication is one of the aspects of a person's lifestyle, no less significant than activity. It is in communication that people physically and spiritually create each other. According to K. S. Stanislavsky, communication involves a "counter current", mutual understanding and interaction between people.
Communication - a special independent form of activity of the subject, which manifests itself in the formation of relations between people, in the exchange of ideas, images, ideas in the very process of communication. Communication reveals the subjective world of one person for another. If people were absolutely identical in mental qualities and properties, communication would not be necessary, and if they were absolutely different, it would be impossible. From the point of view of personality development in the process of communication, two opposite tendencies are dialectically combined:
1. The individual joins the life of society and the social group.
2. There is an isolation of the personality, its individual diversity is formed. A person seeks to preserve and reveal his individuality in the process of communication.
Communication is an extremely subtle and delicate process of interaction between people both by special means (speech, facial expressions, etc.) and by any manifestations of activity. Any action or object can be involved in the communication process. In communication, the individual characteristics of a person are most diversely revealed, and it always absorbs into its fabric the characteristics of another person, time, and circumstances. Communication has its own functions, channels, means, types and types, phrases.
Communication performs three main functions: 1 - information and communication; 2 - regulatory and communicative; 3 - emotional and communicative.
Communication functions. The most obvious function is to convey some information, some content and meaning. This is the semantic (semantic side of communication). But this transfer ultimately influences (in a broad sense controls) the behavior of a person, the actions and deeds of a person, the state and organization of his inner world. The specificity of communication is that it is a means of interaction of the mental worlds of people with each other. Hence, the role of communication in achieving the maximum in the development of the psyche of each person is clear. Through communication, we let the worlds of other people into our inner world. That's why a level in communication mastery is practically important for proper relationship building.
Information and communication function It is also revealed in the processes of transmission and reception of information by communication partners. In real processes of communication between people, information is not just transmitted - received, but also formed, which is a very important moment for creative productive communication. This is not only equalization of differences in the initial awareness of partners, but also the desire to understand each other's views and attitudes, compare them, express their agreement or disagreement, and come to certain agreed or new results.
The second function of communication - regulatory and control - manifested in the impact on the behavior of partners in the process of their communication. Thanks to communication, a person gets the opportunity to regulate not only his own behavior, but also the behavior of other people. There is a mutual "adjustment" of actions. Through the deep psychological mechanisms of communication, which are described in the previous chapter - infection, imitation, suggestion and persuasion, it is possible to exert a controlling influence on a person, the depth of which depends on the individual properties of communication partners.
The third function of communication is emotional-communicative - has a great impact on the emotional state of a person. The whole range of human emotions arises and develops in the process of human communication. The need for communication often arises in connection with the need to change one's emotional state. In the process of communication between people, the intensity of the emotional states of partners can change: either these states converge, or they are polarized, mutually strengthened or weakened. A person in communication can be emotionally discharged or, conversely, increase emotional tension.
Communication with others is closely connected with the possibilities and forms of communication of a person with himself. Autocommunication in some psychological situations, it can sharply weaken. Communication with oneself is a mechanism for the realization of self-consciousness.
Means of communication
Two major classes stand out in the means of communication: verbal and non-verbal.
Verbal - it is speech in its various forms. Non-verbal - these are pantomime (body movements), facial expressions, gestures and other means: spatial (distance, approach, removal, turns “to” and “from”), temporal (earlier, later) and subject (presence, position of objects, etc.) . The practical importance of the ability to "read" non-verbal information should be emphasized. In speech, linguistic means and paralinguistic (extralinguistic) are distinguished. The rate of speech, loudness, transitions in volume and tempo, changes in pitch and color of the voice - all these are means of conveying the emotional state of a person, his attitude to the message being transmitted. A person cannot consciously control the entire sphere of his means of communication, therefore, often even what he wants to hide is manifested, for example, through hand movements, eye expression, leg position, etc. Briefly, verbal communication is characterized by what is said, by whom, to whom, how, for what purpose and under what circumstances. Only by taking into account all these moments and also all the non-verbal "accompaniment", you can correctly understand and correctly perceive (express) something. Therefore, very often people really do not understand each other, although it seems to them that they understand. The role of circumstances is often underestimated. There is such a thing as "silent language". We are talking about the accepted norms of behavior in relation to which the meaning of the message (behavior) is “calculated”. For example, in European culture, the accepted distance between interlocutors (non-verbal factor) is about 70 cm, in Spain and Latin American countries it is about 40 cm. in other countries, on the contrary, it is the norm. If you confuse these norms, then in Europe you will be considered a cheeky, self-confident impudent (respectively, all your messages will be perceived in this vein), and in Latin America - a pompous, prim and cold fool.
Since childhood, the surrounding people, objects, events belonging to a certain culture, in thousands of invisible ways, put into a person a whole network of "for granted" standard circumstances with a standard meaning. In various forms, this network necessarily penetrates the structure of a person's personality, he looks at the world and understands the world, as if sitting behind a lattice of stereotypes of perception and interpretation. This applies not only to the features of a given culture, but also to the features of the family in which a person grew up. These social-family (+random) stereotypes are an obstacle and at the same time a necessary condition for understanding another person. It is difficult to see him behind these barriers. But if you do not see and understand them, you will see yourself: your own characteristics (in a modified form, attributed to another). So this "cage" not only interferes, but also gives stability to the content, as it were, reduces the uncertainty of individual arbitrariness in communication. We dwell on this a little longer, because the most practically important issue in communication is openness. Openness is not as the sincerity of the speaker, but as the ability to perceive the other with an open mind: to be open to what he is trying to convey. Presenting yourself as a monarch, who, as he wants, understands, leads to blindness in communication and primitivism in relationships. A high culture of communication gives confidence that you will be understood correctly. A person who violates socially accepted behavioral standards "loads" the psyche of other people with the task of deciphering the meaning of his behavior. For example, if you are late, then the person waiting for you will inevitably go through several stages (depending on the type of culture). Suppose we are Europeans, and "accuracy - courtesy of kings" - it is customary to arrive on time. The European “waiter” will at first just wait (normal waiting period), then he will start to worry in general, then he will raise a question about you (so-and-so, slob), then about himself (he does not respect me), then about your relationship (I will show him , it's time to finish), then comes to a decisive choice: either you are such and such, or you are OK, something just happened and, probably, something needs to be done urgently. He may not ask himself these questions, but he will have a change of feelings. Here we are faced with the concept of text, subtext, overtext in a different form. Text - This is what we perceive in communication as if everything is the same. Subtext - it's a hidden meaning. Overtext - this is the realm of the supposed consequences of what has been said. In our time of very fast and complex business contacts, laxity in communication puts a limit to the possible advances in technology. Therefore - more attention to etiquette and conventions.
According to the “audience”, communication is divided into communication between two (dialogue), communication in a small group, in a large group, with a mass, anonymous and intergroup communication are also distinguished. Anonymous communication is communication without the clarity of the source. It is clear that personal contact with all psychological and other (for example, parapsychological and extrasensory) mutual influences plays a very important role in dialogue. In a small group, the possibility of close personal contact with someone or everyone from the group remains, and something new appears in communication. In a large group (for example, a university audience), personal contact is more limited. Experienced lecturers, artists feel the mood of the audience as something independent. At rallies, during mass spectacles, the laws of the "crowd" come to the fore and a new quality appears - emotional contact. Experienced politicians are excellent at manipulating the crowd.
All of the listed types of communication by the type of "audience" refer to direct communication.
Direct communication is a person - a person (group) without intermediate carriers of the message. Mediated communication is carried out through intermediate devices (television, radio, print, etc.). Direct communication is multichannel (speech, movement, etc.). We still do not know much, and, in particular, about the field effects of living things (including people on each other). In direct communication, all natural channels of communication can be involved. Device-mediated communication limits the use of natural channels.
Communication channels
Under the channels of communication understand different things. First of all, channels are distinguished that correspond to different sense organs: visual, auditory, tactile (touch), somatosensory (sensations of one's body) - it is also kinesthetic. Each person has his own characteristics in the perception of the world and another person with the help of the senses. Of the elementary world for a person, another person is the most complex system for perception. In psychology, a special area is distinguished - the perception of a person by a person (social perception). In one of the directions of modern psychology (NLP - neurolinguistic programming), these differences are the basis for the classification of people: visuals, auditory, kinesthetics. These types of people differ greatly in many ways, including the structure of communication. So, visuals they love the visually presented, concreteness, they prefer to rise above the interlocutor, they are prone to accusatory statements, they do not tolerate walking in front of them during communication, etc. Audials everyone perceives through auditory images, music, speech, sounds in nature; kinesthetics- through the state of your body, as if everyone is emotionally experiencing. In general, in the perception of a person by a person, a significant place is occupied by imitation - assimilation. Try, looking at another person, to imagine that he is you, you will feel tension in the muscles of your body: you become like. Now you feel like a difference from him.
On a logical basis, they distinguish three types of communication channels: direct, indirect and managed indirect. The criterion here is the intentional or unintentional communication of something. A direct channel is what the source says explicitly. An indirect channel is that information about what is communicated to you in a direct channel, which you yourself obtain by active observation and empathy with all manifestations of the source. The real psychological basis for this classification is trust or distrust of the source. If you trust the source, that is, you think that he will not intentionally tell you false, then the indirect channel is not used as a control channel, you receive other, additional information through it. If you don't trust the source, then the indirect channel is a controlling take: you consider its content in the sense of matching or not matching the content of the direct channel. Very often, direct verbal content may conflict with intonational, tempo, rhythmic and other non-verbal characteristics of speech and behavior. These are the contradictions of the direct and indirect channels (the person smiles, but his eyes are sad; he says “I am calm” and drums his fingers on the table, as if relaxed and smiling, and the foot rhythmically taps on the floor, etc.).
Finally the third managed indirect channel, when a message perceived as unintentional is uttered quite intentionally. Usually the little things help to see the big and, most importantly, to make sure of it. One can recall many examples from detective stories when a small decisive piece of evidence was thrown up on purpose. A confident tone in a dubious situation, a direct look in a lie, etc. - all this is a deliberate emission of what your addressee considers to be genuine, what he himself found in you. Nature has separated direct and indirect channels. Thus, mimic muscles are simultaneously controlled from the areas of the brain that provide intentional and unintentional movements. So, in principle, there are always supports for judging about uncontrolled radiation, showing the actual state of our partner. We will still turn to a very important factor in interpersonal interaction - human trust. The concepts of mystery and secret from the same area. A secret is understood as such a concealment of something, when there is not even a hint of its existence. Not at all, no one knows about it, no one thinks about it, and there are no “traces” in the fabric of communication. A secret is a situation where it is known that something is being hidden, but what is being hidden is not known. Mystery and secret are revealed in communication. Confidential communication is open, there are no obstacles for it, it is associative: freely arising associations are also expressed freely, there are no delays and silences. Both interlocutors (even if there are two of them) tactfully do not touch on topics that are standard socially closed. Any mystery or secret will disrupt the free flow of communication, and this will be noted by everyone: communication will either collapse or begin to move around these topics until the situation is resolved. Removing socially taboo topics and personal taboos is the way to deepen the openness of communication, if there is no negative reaction. Later, we will touch on the concepts of depth of trust and its allowable depth.
Types of communication
Functional-role communication. This is communication at the level of social roles of partners (boss and subordinate, teacher - student, seller, buyer). There are certain norms and expectations involved. Role masks communicate. The transition from role-playing to interpersonal communication and vice versa is often used in business contacts.
Interpersonal communication. Actually, almost everything that we are considering here is directly related to this type of communication. It is assumed (as the most common model) the participation of two people in interpersonal communication, although the minimum total number of participants in communication is three. The difference between these types of communication is that for the third relationship the other two are objective: he cannot influence them directly, but only through relations with one of them. When two people communicate, the third is always present invisibly, either as a social norm, or as the opinion of a close friend, or other authority.
Business conversation. It can be easily distinguished from the functional-role. Business communication is a type of interpersonal communication aimed at achieving some kind of substantive agreement. There is always a purpose in business communication. It is believed that in business communication the problems being solved do not affect the interests of the “mask”, but the individual himself, and he is mobilized.
Interpersonal communication is extremely multifaceted. But, perhaps, the moments of influence of people on each other are most practically interesting. Psychotherapy and the various schools of applied psychology deal with this most seriously. The concept of trust is central here, and trust is not telling someone something in secret, but accepting information from another without a critical filter, without verification. The extreme form of such communication is rapport.
Rapport communication. This is communication with one-sided trust - the patient trusts. Mutual trust is associated with complete mutual freedom, openness and acceptance of everyone as they are. Trust, having arisen and strengthened, tends to deepen: people reveal to each other ever deeper layers of their inner world. Mutual immersion is an emotionally intense process that can greatly change people. It imposes responsibility for the conformity of behavior to the level of depth achieved. Can you really help? If a person has trusted you, a sense of responsibility should regulate the available depth of trust. If this is not the case, trust easily turns into betrayal with the corresponding consequences. In this regard, the presence of protective barriers is understandable. One-sided use of barriers occurs during interpersonal protection: one person tries to change the personality of another in order to justify his negative qualities and create psychological comfort for himself in communication.
The orientation in the style of communication can be different - the need for another, self-preoccupation (pliable style); the need to achieve success by controlling others (aggressive style); maintaining emotional distance, independence, solitude (detached style). There are also different types of orientation: altruistic (good and helping others); manipulative (achieving one's own goal); missionary (non-intervention, cautious influence). More about styles: cooperation, compromise, rivalry (I insist on my own), adaptation (I try to maintain relationships); avoidance (of the unpleasant). Communication management can be authoritarian (individual decisions), democratic (group-oriented), liberal (subject to chance) in style.
phases of communication. The preparation phase is the most responsible, if possible. Communication must be planned, the right place and time must be chosen, and attitudes must be determined for oneself on the results of communication. The first phase of communication is making contact. Here is important attunement, it is important to feel the state, the mood of the partner, to get used to it yourself and give the opportunity to navigate to another. There are techniques for joining a partner (up to imitating some of its features, tracking the rhythm of breathing, etc.). It is important to position the partner towards you and ensure a smooth start. This period ends with the establishment of psychological contact. Next comes the phase of focusing on something, some problem, the task of the parties and the development of the topic. The next stage is motivational sounding. Its purpose is to understand the motives of the interlocutor and his interests. Then comes the maintenance phase. It is necessary to return to the methods of maintaining attention (switching, etc.) repeatedly. Then follows the phase of argumentation and persuasion, if there is a divergence of opinion. And finally, the phase of fixing the result. If the topics are exhausted or the partner shows concern, it is necessary to complete the communication. This is always a critical moment in a relationship. Objectively, this is a break, since you will not communicate for some time. It is always necessary to end the communication so that there is a prospect of continuation. The very last moment is very important, the last words, glances, handshakes, sometimes they can completely change the result of many hours of conversation. As opposed to a break, the end of a relationship is the end of contact. A gap is always bad: missed opportunities. Once again, let us remind you of the permissible depth of trust in communication - weigh your desires and possibilities in a relationship.
Business communication has its own peculiarities. For any goal, there are always tasks: 1. Evaluate a person from a business point of view. 2. Receive or transmit information. 3. Influence motives and decisions. Ultimately, in any business conversation, it is important to have specific agreements that a person perceives not as imposed by you, but as a result of their own beliefs. What does it mean to evaluate a partner from a business point of view? This means finding out if he can do the job offered, who he is, what his relationship with others is. Going to the specifics, explain the task, check the understanding, see if he can evaluate the work in progress and see the result in perspective; is able to evaluate the achieved result; whether he wants to do the job, what are the motives and whether there are contradictory tendencies; whether he is capable of more complex work, associated with a greater level of responsibility and freedom ... How many people will be engaged in this work, how much time does he spend on other work.
In any business conversation, three aspects must be kept in mind: business, personal, and dynamics, the spring of conversation development.
Some technical advice. Always set the task specifically - if the proposal is specific, the person is more likely to accept it as his own. Feel the plan of the conversation as a whole - then he will leave the sphere of the conscious and will control. The main time to devote to the main issue, very carefully consider the choice of place and time, take into account the characteristics of the partner. During the conversation, do not lower the level of goals - the responsibility of the partner will fall. You need to be creative, look for options. The results of the conversation should be recorded in any form together with the interlocutor. As soon as the goal is achieved or the impossibility of a solution is determined, the conversation should be completed. At the same time, be careful not to cross out the results. Be sure to evaluate the conversation for yourself immediately after it ends and then in a more relaxed atmosphere, when the results are determined. Pay attention to whether the conversation was formal or confidential, whether the partner is satisfied, what you are dissatisfied with in yourself, what are the prospects for continuing business and relationships, whether the conditions and plan of the conversation were chosen correctly, what impression did the partner have of you. Remember, communication is a great gift of nature, it is also a weapon and a tool. You have to be careful with him.
People in their attitude to the process of communication are divided into sociable and shy. F. Zimbardo specifically studied shy people and described this property in detail in his book Shyness. "To be shy" means to be a person "difficult to communicate with because of his caution, timidity and incredulity". A shy person "avoids interaction with certain persons and objects."
Shyness can be a mental illness, crippling a person no less than the most severe disease of the body. Its consequences can be devastating.
Shyness prevents you from meeting new people, making friends, and enjoying potentially enjoyable experiences.
It keeps a person from expressing his opinion and asserting his rights.
Your shyness does not give other people the opportunity to appreciate your personal worth.
It exacerbates excessive focus on yourself and your behavior.
Shyness makes it difficult to think clearly and communicate effectively.
Shyness is usually accompanied by negative feelings of loneliness, anxiety, and depression.
Being shy means being afraid of people, especially those who are emotionally threatened for some reason: strangers because of their obscurity and uncertainty; bosses endowed with power; members of the opposite sex due to the potential for intimate contact.
Stanford Shyness Questionnaire
Here is a sample questionnaire that has already been completed by over 5,000 people around the world. Fill it out at a fast pace, and then re-read it thoughtfully to understand how shyness really defines your life.
1. Do you consider yourself shy?
1 = yes; 2 = no.
2. If yes, have you always been this way (i.e. were shy before and still are)?
1 = yes; 2 = no.
3. If you answered no to the first question, was there a time in your life when you were shy?
1 = yes; 2 = no.
If you answered yes to at least one of the three questions, continue on.
4. When you are shy, how strong is it?
1 = extremely strong;
2 = very strong;
3 = very strong;
4 = moderately strong;
5 = it is a kind of embarrassment;
6 = I am only slightly embarrassed.
5. How often do you experience (experienced) a feeling of shyness?
1 = every day;
2 = almost every day;
3 = often, almost every other day;
4 = once or twice a week;
5 = sometimes - less than once a week;
6 = rarely - once a month or less often.
6. Compared to people in your circle, gender, age, how shy are you?
1 = much more shy;
2 = more shy;
3 = about as shy;
4 = less shy;
5 = Significantly less shy.
7. How desirable is it for you to be shy?
1 = highly undesirable;
2 = undesirable;
3 = don't care;
4 = desirable;
5 = highly desirable.
8. Is (was) shyness a personal problem for you?
1 = yes, often;
2 = yes, sometimes;
3 = yes, occasionally;
5 = never.
9. When experiencing shyness, can you hide it so that others do not see you as shy?
1 = yes, always;
2 = sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't;
3 = no, I usually can't hide it.
10. Do you consider yourself an introvert or an extrovert?
1 = pronounced introvert;
2 = moderate introvert;
3 = slightly introverted;
4 = neutral;
5 = slightly extroverted;
6 = moderate extrovert;
(11 - 19) Which of the following could be causing your shyness? Mark what applies to you.
11. Fear that I will be negatively evaluated.
12. Fear of being rejected.
13. Lack of self-confidence.
14. Lack of social skills, namely: ...........................…………………………………… ……………….
15. Fear of close relationships.
16. Propensity for solitude.
17. Asocial interests, hobbies, etc.
18. Own imperfection, shortcomings, namely…………………………………………………..
19. Other, namely: .................................................. .........……………………………………………………………………
(20 - 27) Perception of shyness. Do the following people think you are shy? How shy do you think they think you are? Answer, use the following points:
1 = extremely shy;
2 = very shy;
3 = very shy;
4 = moderately shy;
5 = somewhat shy;
6 = slightly shy;
7 = not shy;
8 = they don't know;
9 = I don't know their opinion.
20. Your mother?
21. Your father?
22. Your brothers and sisters?
23. Close friends?
24. Your spouse (or intimate friend, girlfriend)?
25. Your classmates?
26. What is your current neighbor?
27. Teachers or supervisors, colleagues who know you well?
28. When deciding to call yourself shy, what guided you?
1 = you are shy (or you were shy) always and under all circumstances;
2 = you are shy (or were shy) in more than 50% of situations, i.e. more often than not;
3 = you are shy (or have been shy) only occasionally, but in situations important enough for you, so that you can therefore be considered shy.
29. Has it ever happened that your shyness was mistaken for some other trait, for example, indifference, coldness, indecision?
1 = Yes.
Namely: ............................................... ...........…………………………………………………………………….
30. Do you ever feel shy when you are alone?
32. If yes, please specify when, how and why .................................................…………… …………………………………………..
(33 - 36) What makes you shy?
33. If you are currently or have experienced shyness, please indicate what situations, activities or types of people cause it. (Check all the boxes one way or another.) Situations and activities that make me shy:
any situations of communication;
large groups of people;
small groups performing collaborative activities (for example, a workshop in the classroom, a team at work);
small groups of people communicating (for example, at parties, at dances);
one-on-one communication with a member of the same gender;
one-on-one communication with a member of the opposite sex;
situations in which I am vulnerable (for example, when asking for help);
situations in which I take a lowered position compared to others (for example, when I turn to superiors);
situations requiring the assertion of their rights (for example, when you have to complain about poor service or poor quality of goods);
situations when I am in the center of attention of a large group of people (for example, I am making a report);
situations where I am in the center of attention of a small group of people (for example, when I am introduced to someone or asked for my opinion);
situations where I am judged or compared to others (for example, when I am interviewed or criticized);
any new social contacts;
the likelihood of sexual intimacy;
34. Now go back to the previous question and for each situation note whether it has caused you to be shy during the last month;
0 = yes, to a large extent;
2 = yes, to a large extent;
3 = generally yes;
4 = only slightly;
5 = definitely not.
35. Types of people that make me shy:
my parents;
my brothers and sisters;
other relatives;
elderly people (significantly older than me);
children (much younger than me);
a group of representatives of the opposite sex;
a representative of the opposite sex one on one;
representative of my gender one on one.
36. Now, please return to the previous question and note if you have experienced shyness during the last month when meeting this category of people:
0 = during the last month - no, but before;
1 = yes, to a large extent;
2 = yes, to a large extent;
3 = generally yes;
4 = only slightly.
(37 - 40) Reaction associated with shyness
37. On the basis of what do you conclude that you are experiencing shyness?
1 = based on thoughts, experiences and similar internal symptoms;
2 = based on their actions in this situation;
3 = based on both internal sensations and external reactions.
physical reactions
38. If you experience or have experienced shyness, which of these physical reactions are characteristic of this state of yours? Put 0 against those that are not significant, rank the rest from 1 (most typical, frequently occurring, strong) and above 2 - less frequent, etc.
redness of the face;
increased heart rate;
rumbling in the stomach;
tinnitus;
strong heartbeat;
dry mouth;
hand trembling;
increased sweating;
weakness;
other (please specify) ..........................................................................................……… ………………………………………………………
Thoughts and feelings
39. What are the special thoughts and feelings, characteristic of your experience of shyness? Put 0 against those that are not typical for you, rank the rest from 1 (most typical, frequent and strong) and higher (less typical). Several points can be marked with the same score.
Positive thoughts (for example, self-satisfaction); no special thoughts (for example, empty dreams, thoughts "about nothing"); self-centeredness (for example, extreme concern with one's person, with one's every step);
thoughts focused on the unpleasant aspects of the situation (for example, the thought that my situation is terrible, that I would like to be out of it);
distraction-oriented thoughts (for example, about something else to do, that an unpleasant situation will end soon);
negative thoughts about yourself (for example, feeling that I am stupid, inferior, etc.); thinking about how others evaluate me (for example, thinking about what others think of me);
thoughts about my behavior (for example, what impression I will make and how to improve it) ...
Actions
40. If you experience or have experienced feelings of shyness, in what ways external actions does it come out so that people around you can understand that you are shy? Put 0 for the ones you don't, and rank the rest from 1 (most common, common, and strong) to higher (less common, strong). Several items can be marked with the same score;
I speak very quietly;
I avoid people unable to look into the eyes;
I am silent (I cannot speak);
I stutter
I talk nonsense;
avoid doing anything
I try to hide
other, namely .............................................. ......………………………………………………………………
41. What are negative consequences of shyness? (Check those that apply to you.)
Social problems arise; it is difficult to meet people and make friends, enjoy communication. Negative emotions arise - feelings of isolation, loneliness, depression.
Shyness prevents others from evaluating me positively (for example, due to shyness, my achievements go unnoticed).
It is difficult to achieve one's own, to express one's own opinion, to use the opportunities that are provided. My shyness encourages others to evaluate me negatively (for example, I may be unfairly seen as unfriendly or arrogant). Difficulties arise in mutual understanding and cognitive processes (for example, in public I cannot think clearly and express my feelings).
Shyness provokes a deepening in oneself.
42. What are positive consequences of shyness? (Check what applies to you.)
It becomes possible to give the impression of a modest person, immersed in himself.
Shyness avoids conflict.
Shyness is a convenient form of self-defense.
There is an opportunity to look at others from the outside, to behave in a balanced and reasonable way.
Negative assessments from others are excluded (for example, a shy person is not considered obsessive, aggressive, pretentious).
Shyness allows me to choose among the likely communication partners those who are more attractive to me. It is possible to retire and enjoy loneliness.
In interpersonal relationships, shyness keeps you from humiliating or hurting another person.
43. Do you think that your shyness can be overcome?
3 = not sure.
44. Are you ready for serious work on yourself to get rid of shyness?
1 = yes, definitely;
2 = probably yes;
3 = not sure yet;
G. M. AndreevaCOMMUNICATION AND INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS 1
Place and nature of interpersonal relationships
Now it is fundamentally important to understand the place of these interpersonal relations in the real system of people's life.
In the socio-psychological literature, different points of view are expressed on the question of where interpersonal relations are “located”, primarily with respect to the system of social relations. Sometimes they are considered on a par with social relations, at the base of them, or, on the contrary, at the highest level (Kuzmin E.S. Fundamentals of social psychology. L., Leningrad State University, 1967. S. 146), in other cases - as a reflection in the consciousness of social relations (Platonov K, K. On the system of psychology. M., 1974. P. 30), etc. It seems to us (and this is confirmed by numerous studies) that the nature of interpersonal relations can be correctly understood if they are not put on a par with social relations, but to see in them a special series of relations that arises within each type of social relations, not outside them (be it “below”, “above”, “sideways” or in any other way). Schematically, this can be represented as a section by a special plane of the system of social relations: what is found in this “section” of economic, social, political and other varieties of social relations is interpersonal relations (Fig. 1.1).
Rice. 1.1. Interpersonal relationships and social relations
With this understanding, it becomes clear why interpersonal relations, as it were, "mediate" the impact on the personality of a broader social whole. Ultimately, interpersonal relations are conditioned by objective social relations, but it is precisely in ultimately. In practice, both series of relations are given together, and the underestimation of the second series prevents a truly deep analysis of the relations and the first series.
The existence of interpersonal relations within various forms of social relations is, as it were, the realization of impersonal relations in the activities of specific individuals, in the acts of their communication and interaction.
and public relations
An analysis of the connection between social and interpersonal relations makes it possible to place the right emphasis on the question of the place of communication in the entire complex system of human relations with the outside world. However, first it is necessary to say a few words about the problem of communication in general. The solution to this problem is very specific within the framework of domestic social psychology. The term “communication” itself does not have an exact analogue in traditional social psychology, not only because it is not quite equivalent to the commonly used English term “communication”, but also because its content can be considered only in the conceptual dictionary of a special psychological theory, namely the theory of activities. Of course, in the structure of communication, which will be discussed below, such aspects of it can be distinguished that are described or studied in other systems of socio-psychological knowledge. However, the essence of the problem, as it is posed in domestic social psychology, is fundamentally different.
Both series of human relations - both public and interpersonal - are revealed, realized precisely in communication. Thus, the roots of communication are in the very material life of individuals. Communication is the realization of the whole system of human relations. “Under normal circumstances, a person’s relationship to the objective world around him is always mediated by his attitude to people, to society” (Leontiev A.A. Communication as an object of psychological research // Methodological problems of social psychology, 1975. P. 289), vol. e. included in communication. Here it is especially important to emphasize the idea that in real communication not only interpersonal relations of people are given, i.e. not only their emotional attachments, hostility, etc. are revealed, but also social, i.e. impersonal by nature relations are embodied in the fabric of communication . Diverse relationships of a person are not covered only by interpersonal contact: the position of a person outside the narrow framework of interpersonal relations, in a broader social system, where his place is not determined by the expectations of individuals interacting with him, also requires a certain construction of a system of his connections, and this process can also be implemented only in communication. Without communication, human society is simply unthinkable. Communication acts in it as a way of cementing individuals and, at the same time, as a way of developing these individuals themselves. It is from here that the existence of communication follows at the same time both as a reality of social relations and as a reality of interpersonal relations. Apparently, this made it possible for Saint-Exupery to draw a poetic image of communication as "the only luxury that a person has."
Naturally, each series of relations is realized in specific forms of communication. Communication as the realization of interpersonal relationships is a process more studied in social psychology, while communication between groups rather studied in sociology. Communication, including in the system of interpersonal relations, is forced by the joint life activity of people, therefore it must be carried out in a wide variety of interpersonal relations, that is, it is given both in the case of a positive and in the case of a negative attitude of one person to another. The type of interpersonal relationship is not indifferent to how communication will be built, but it exists in specific forms, even when the relationship is extremely aggravated. The same applies to the characterization of communication at the macrolevel as the realization of social relations. And in this case, whether groups or individuals communicate with each other as representatives of social groups, the act of communication must inevitably take place, is forced to take place, even if the groups are antagonistic. Such a dual understanding of communication - in the broad and narrow sense of the word - follows from the very logic of understanding the connection between interpersonal and social relations. In this case, it is appropriate to appeal to Marx's idea that communication is an unconditional companion of human history (in this sense, one can speak of the importance of communication in the "phylogenesis" of society) and, at the same time, an unconditional companion in everyday activities, in everyday contacts between people (see. A. A. Leontiev, Psychology of Communication, Tartu, 1973. In the first plan, one can trace the historical change in the forms of communication, i.e., their change as society develops along with the development of economic, social and other social relations. Here the most difficult methodological question is solved: how does a process appear in the system of impersonal relations, which by its nature requires the participation of individuals? Speaking as a representative of a certain social group, a person communicates with another representative of another social group and simultaneously realizes two types of relations: both impersonal and personal. A peasant, selling a product on the market, receives a certain amount of money for it, and here money is the most important means of communication in the system of social relations. At the same time, this same peasant bargains with the buyer and thus “personally” communicates with him, and the means of this communication is human speech. On the surface of phenomena, a form of direct communication is given - communication, but behind it is communication, forced by the very system of social relations, in this case, the relations of commodity production. In socio-psychological analysis, one can abstract from the “second plan”, but in real life this “second plan” of communication is always present. Although in itself it is the subject of study mainly of sociology, in the socio-psychological approach it must also be taken into consideration.
Unity of communication and activity
However, with any approach, the question of the connection between communication and activity is fundamental. In a number of psychological concepts, there is a tendency to oppose communication and activity. So, for example, E. Durkheim eventually arrived at such a formulation of the problem, when, arguing with G. Tarde, he paid special attention not to the dynamics of social phenomena, but to their statics. Society looked to him not as a dynamic system of active groups and individuals, but as a set of static forms of communication. The factor of communication in the determination of behavior was emphasized, but the role of transformative activity was underestimated: the social process itself was reduced to the process of spiritual verbal communication. This gave grounds for A. N. Leontiev to note that with this approach, the individual appears rather “as a communicating than practically acting social being” (Leontiev A. N. Problems of the development of the psyche. M., 1972. P. 271).
In contrast to this, domestic psychology adopts the idea unity of communication and activity. Such a conclusion follows logically from the understanding of communication as a reality of human relations, assuming that any forms of communication are included in specific forms of joint activity: people do not just communicate in the process of performing various functions, but they always communicate in some activity, “about” it. Thus, an active person always communicates: his activity inevitably intersects with the activity of other people. But it is precisely this intersection of activities that creates certain relations of an active person not only to the object of his activity, but also to other people. It is communication that forms the community of individuals performing joint activities. Thus, the fact of the connection between communication and activity is stated one way or another by all researchers.
However, the nature of this relationship is understood differently. Sometimes activity and communication are considered not as parallel interrelated processes, but as two sides social life of a person, his way of life (Lomov B. f. Communication and social regulation of the individual's behavior // Psychological problems of social regulation of behavior. M., 1976. P. 130). In other cases, communication is understood as a certain side activity: it is included in any activity, is its element, while the activity itself can be considered as condition communication (A. N. Leontiev. Activity. Consciousness. Personality. M., 1975. P. 289). Finally, communication can be interpreted as a special kind of activity. Within this point of view, two varieties of it are distinguished: in one of them, communication is understood as a communicative activity, or communication activity, acting independently at a certain stage of ontogenesis, for example, in preschoolers and especially in adolescence (Elkonin, 1991). In the other, communication in general terms is understood as one of the types of activity (meaning primarily speech activity), and in relation to it all the elements characteristic of activity in general are found: actions, operations, motives, etc. (A. A. Leontiev. Communication as an object of psychological research // Methodological problems of social psychology. M., 1975. P. 122).
It is hardly essential to elucidate the advantages and disadvantages of each of these points of view: none of them denies the most important thing - the undoubted connection between activity and communication, all recognize the inadmissibility of their separation from each other in analysis. Moreover, the divergence of positions is much more obvious at the level of theoretical and general methodological analysis. As for experimental practice, all researchers have much more in common than different. This common feature is the recognition of the fact of the unity of communication and activity and attempts to fix this unity.
The allocation of the subject of communication should not be understood vulgarly: people communicate not only about the activities with which they are associated. For the sake of highlighting two possible reasons for communication in the literature, the concepts of “role” and “personal” communication are divorced. Under certain circumstances, this personal communication in form may look like a role-playing, business, “subject-problem” (Kharash A.U. To determine the tasks and methods of social psychology in the light of the principle of activity // Theoretical and methodological problems of social psychology. M., 1977 pp. 30). Thus, the separation of role-playing and personal communication is not absolute. In certain relations and situations, both are associated with activity.
The idea of “weaving” of communication into activity also allows us to consider in detail the question of what exactly in activity communication can constitute. In the most general form, the answer can be formulated in such a way that through communication, activity organized and enriched. The construction of a joint activity plan requires each participant to have an optimal understanding of its goals, objectives, understanding the specifics of its object and even the capabilities of each of the participants. The inclusion of communication in this process allows for “coordination” or “mismatch” of the activities of individual participants (A. A. Leontiev. Communication as an object of psychological research // Methodological problems of social psychology. M., 1975. P. 116).
This coordination of the activities of individual participants can be carried out thanks to such a characteristic of communication as its inherent function. impact, in which the “reverse influence of communication on activity” is manifested (Andreeva G. M., Yanoushek Ya. The relationship between communication and activity // Communication and optimization of joint activity. M., 1987). We will find out the specifics of this function together with the consideration of various aspects of communication. Now it is important to emphasize that activity through communication is not just organized, but enriched, new connections and relationships between people arise in it.
Structure of communication
Given the complexity of communication, it is necessary to somehow designate its structure, so that each element can then be analyzed. The structure of communication can be approached in different ways, as well as the definition of its functions. We propose to characterize the structure of communication by highlighting three interrelated aspects in it: communicative, interactive and perceptual. The structure of communication can be schematically depicted as follows (Fig. 1.2).
Rice. 1.2. Structure of communication
Communicative side of communication, or communication in the narrow sense of the word, consists in the exchange of information between communicating individuals. Interactive the other side lies in the organization of interaction between communicating individuals, i.e., in the exchange of not only knowledge, ideas, but also actions. Perceptual the side of communication means the process of perception and knowledge of each other by partners in communication and the establishment of mutual understanding on this basis. Naturally, all these terms are very conditional. Others are sometimes used in a more or less analogous sense. For example, in communication there are three functions: information-communicative, regulatory-communicative, affective-communicative (Lomov B.F. Communication and social regulation of individual behavior // Psychological problems of social regulation of behavior. M., 1976. P. 85). The challenge is to carefully analyze, including at an experimental level, the content of each of these aspects or functions. Of course, in reality, each of these aspects does not exist in isolation from the other two, and their selection is possible only for analysis, in particular, for building a system of experimental studies. All aspects of communication indicated here are revealed in small groups, that is, in conditions of direct contact between people. Separately, it is necessary to consider the question of the means and mechanisms of influence of people on each other and in the conditions of their joint mass actions, which should be the subject of a special analysis, in particular, in the study of the psychology of large groups and mass movements.
A. Dobrovich
SYSTEMATICS OF COMMUNICATION 2
1) General model
When building a general communication model, it is advisable to use the scheme of R. Jacobson (1964):
where BUT -"addresser" B -"addressee" of information.
Connection it can be direct (in human communication - speech and gestures in the broad sense of the word, including, for example, “vocal gestures”; intonations) or indirect (telephone, teletype, etc.).
The code - the rules of the language (or “bundle” of languages) used to convey the message; context- a predetermined "semantic field" in which the message becomes informative.
2) Contact
By “contact” is meant a case of communication with feedback:
K. Buhler (1927) understands “contact” exactly as the “mutual orientation” of partners. For him, contact is “a process of coordinated co-changes in behavior”.
The sender not only communicates information, but also receives a response. In other words, the addresser, having made a message, becomes the addressee; he, having received the message, becomes the addresser. This process can continue indefinitely.
From our point of view, the concept of “formal” (or “informal”) communication is applicable specifically to contact, and not to communication in general. “Formal communication” we will call a contact on which certain restrictions are imposed. The meaning of this definition will be explained later. For now, let's continue with the contact.
3) Contact unit
A sends B one “communicative stimulus” (or “communicat”) and receives one response; B receives one stimulus and transmits one in response; communication takes place. Following the psychotherapist E. Berne (1964), we will call such an exchange a “transaction”.
Examples. A gave B a contemptuous look. He defiantly turned away - there was a transaction. The same, but B simply looked the other way and did not notice the sign of contempt - the transaction did not take place (there was no contact). A told B some news, B smiled without saying a word - the transaction nevertheless took place, since a smile is a “gesture”, a communicative stimulus. And as an actor, he delivered a spectacular line, the auditorium (as the addressee) held its breath - the transaction took place. The same - if the audience indignantly shushed, burst out laughing or burst into applause. Human transactions almost always involve the use of several codes at the same time, i.e., a "bundle" of languages. The language of words is combined with the language of pauses, intonations, postures and facial expressions.
4) The content of the communicative stimulus
As can be seen from the examples just given, a communicator is capable of carrying both elementary and highly complex information. An example of an elementary one is the so-called “stroking”: information about belonging to one community, about a benevolent attitude towards a partner. An example of highly complex information is the verbal-musical-pantomimic transmission of mystical experience by a priest or shaman.
Let us single out the “emotional radical” of the communicative stimulus in particular. If we agree, according to Berne, to call the elementary “positive” stimulus “stroking”, then the elementary “negative” stimulus deserves the name “kick”, “bite” or “prick”. "Prick" is preferable in terms of style.
5) Contact partners. masks
Further development of the scheme concerns contact partners. Since we are talking about people, each of them has:
a) a set of masks for "impersonal" communication;
6) personality for “interpersonal” communication. Let us now turn to the contact of the masks.
Mask - this is a set of signs (speech, gestures), the supply of which ensures “smooth” and safe interaction in a human group. Examples: politeness mask. In a public place, the absence of such a mask (an angry or distracted facial expression, a rude tone, too loud laughter, etc.) entails group sanctions: criticism, ridicule, aggressiveness. And at the same time, to appear in a mask of politeness among tipsy revelers means to cause their irritation or resentment; here another mask is required: benevolence or loyal non-intervention. The mask of sorrow is suitable for funerals, but not for weddings, etc. People change masks almost automatically, according to circumstances.
If only the contact of masks is allowed in the communication of partners, i.e., a restriction is imposed on participation personalities in conversation, then before us first case of formal communication.
The specified restriction can be different in nature. Let us note four types of restrictions imposed on a contact. a) Conventional restrictions. In this social group, there is a "convention" - the custom according to which it is not customary to ask personal questions to a random companion on the bus ("You must have slept badly today?") Or to communicate anything from your personal sphere ("You know, I disappointed in life. Only impersonal communicative stimuli of the type are accepted: “Allow me? - Please”, “Sorry! “It's okay,” etc. The convention, therefore, forces the partners to “impersonal” contact, to the communication of masks.
b) Situational restrictions. They are close to conventional. Here are special situations in which participation personalities as contact partners only “spoils” the matter. Examples: the ceremony of handing over the shift or divorce of the guard, the Japanese tea ceremony, etc.
c) Emotional limitations. Communication partners are emotionally cold or hostile to each other and, in an effort to prevent conflict, use only masks in contact.
d) Violent restrictions. One of the partners may be ready for interpersonal communication, but the other, for one reason or another, stops these attempts, putting on a mask and forcing his interlocutor to do the same. Restrictions of this kind, as we see, differ from emotional ones only in some nuances.
Contact restrictions, according to D.S. Parygin (1970), create “psychological barriers between people”, replacing genuine communication with “stereotypes”, “standard behavioral reactions”.
Any case of mask contact can be explained by the listed limitations or a combination of them.
6) Personality and position of the person in contact
Personality is a structure of extreme complexity, and we will consider it only in particular aspects that are of the greatest importance in contact. A person as a “communicator” has at least three personal positions. They, according to E. Berne, coexist within the same personality, complementing each other.
a) The position of the child, "child" (position D). Preserved from an early age. It focuses on the strengths and weaknesses of children's nature. The “strong”, apparently, should include looseness, creative impulses, impulsive cheerfulness, fantasy, curiosity. To the “weak” - fearfulness, uncertainty, helplessness, gullibility, intemperance.
b) The position of the parent (position P). Assimilated in childhood due to the adoration of elders and imitation of them. Her strengths: confidence in the correctness of moral requirements, the ability to have an authoritative tone, to patronize and protect the weak. Less attractive features: categorical attitude, dogmatism, consciousness of superiority and the right to “punish”.
c) The position of an adult (position B). Calculation of actions, control over them, sobriety in assessments, understanding of the relativity of dogmas. At the same time, excessive skepticism, constraint (lack of spontaneity), poverty of imagination, underestimation of the emotional side of life.
If a person is deprived of any of these positions, his behavior would become "maladaptive": either too rigid, or too loose and careless. However, in some unit of time (in the course of contact) one of the positions is leading; the next moment the other may prevail.
From what has been said, it follows that not two, but six partners actually participate in the contact:
Addressee Addressee
D D
This circumstance requires a more detailed taxonomy of transactions. They are subdivided as follows:
7) Complementary transactions
The communicative stimulus is sent by the addresser from position X and received by the addressee at position Y; the response stimulus is sent from position Y to be received by the partner in position X.
And in a n about in. What happened to the young people? They completely loosened up.
D a m a Yes, but I don't have time to spend an hour on the phone ordering a taxi.
The fourth guest. So ask your husband about it.
D a m a What are you, a helpless person...
The conversation falls into an awkward silence. The lady secretly triumphs: the guests gave her a whole bunch of “strokes”, sympathizing, or at least pretending to be sympathetic. At the same time, she is not obliged to “give back” their strokes in return.
Manipulation IF IT WOULD NOT BE YOU. The husband constantly tells his wife that “if it weren’t for you,” he would have finished his dissertation long ago. One fine day, the wife is going to live with her children for two weeks with her relatives. The husband, however, is not enthusiastic about this idea. He is forced to undertake a new manipulation (for example, IMAGINARY SICK) in order to detain his wife. In fact, he needed to clear his conscience, and at the same time maintain a sense of guilt in his wife, which makes it easier for him to “add on from above”.
Manipulation HOME SAGE. Someone accustoms his environment to the idea that he is able to disinterestedly give wise advice. Skillfully encouraging the pilgrimage of those thirsty for advice, he keeps a secret account of his victories - "outbuildings from above." The manipulative nature of such actions is revealed by the fact that the "wise man" himself cannot stand anyone's advice. An extension “beside” or “below” is considered by him as a loss.
Another manipulation. Its children's version is presented in Ch. Dickens's novel "Great Expectations". A girl in a clean, starched dress comes out onto the porch and asks the boy, her admirer, to make her a sand cake. The boy rushes to comply with this request, after which the girl winces; “Fu, how dirty, nasty you are - covered in sand.” Manipulation can accordingly be called a SAND PIE. Its adult version is often associated with the sexual negativism of one of the spouses. A woman can reproach a man for being an “animal” and experiencing only attraction for her, but not love. Under this pretext, she provokes a long cooling in the relationship. Nevertheless, after some time, she resorts to coquetry, caresses, etc., giving the man a reason to be more persistent. However, in response to his more determined claims, she bursts into tears: "What did I say - you're just an animal!" Thus, she manages, on the one hand, to avoid relationships that are unpleasant for her, on the other hand, to maintain the appearance of marriage, to keep the man “with her”.
A simple manipulation model might look like this:
P e tr o v. Now I will give you the floor. (I can imagine how you will deal with them!) Petrov's covert transaction carries "stroking" in it.
And in a n about in. Excellent. (I'll give them some pepper.)
P e tr o v. Well, get on the podium. (Don't mumble, for God's sake!)
Petrov's hidden transaction is an offensive “prick”.
And in a n about in. I'm coming.
Option: Huh? .. (Ivanov, not finding what to answer, obediently goes to the podium.)
In the variant "I'm going, I'm going," Ivanov accepts a forced extension from below; in option "A?" he does not have the opportunity to inflict a response “prick” and involuntarily finds himself “in the stalls”. Witnesses of this scene hold back laughter.
Manipulators are often psychologically perverted people (sadistic tendencies). They are dangerous for the partner and force him to be on his guard in the future, that is, to apply formally - up to the contact of the masks. Moreover, one of the “pleasures” of the manipulator is to again, at any cost, extract the partner “from under the mask”, in order to then again inflict a humiliating “prick” on him.
If the contact as a whole is a series of manipulations and nothing more, we certainly have the sixth case of formal communication. Here one of the partners forcibly restricts the actions of the other.
However, one should not forget that manipulations are sometimes resorted to out of unconscious cunning or intuitively pursuing mutually beneficial goals. So, SLAMMING THE DOOR is sometimes provoked by a loving woman. Following the manipulation, her communication with a man becomes formal for some time. But this is unusual for a man and extremely burdensome to him. Feelings of guilt, attachment to a woman, or at least boredom prompt him to take the first step towards reconciliation, which turns out to be all the more ardent, the colder the formal relationship was. So sometimes a dull marriage is “revived”. The formalization of contacts serves in this example the task of more complete informal (intimate) communication.
1 G.M. Andreeva. Social Psychology. M.: Astok-Press, 1998. S. 89-99.
2 A. Dobrovich. Communication: science and art. M.: JSC "Yauza", 1996. S. 53-65. 71-75.
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/
Communication and interpersonal relationships
Introduction
Man is a social being, His life and communication is impossible without interaction with people. Social psychology studies how people communicate and interact with each other. What they think of each other, how they influence each other and how they relate to each other reveals how social conditions affect people's behavior.
At present, it is no longer necessary to prove that interpersonal communication is an absolutely necessary condition for the existence of people, that without it it is impossible for a person to fully form a single mental function or mental process, not a single block of mental properties, a person as a whole.
For interpersonal communication, such a situation is typical when the participants in communication, entering into contacts, pursue in relation to each other goals that are more or less significant for them, which may coincide in their content, or may differ from each other. These goals are a consequence of the action of certain motives that the participants in communication have, their achievement constantly involves the use of various ways of behavior that each person develops as he develops the qualities of the object and subject of communication. All this means that interpersonal communication in its main characteristics is always a type of activity, the essence of which is the interaction of a person with a person. It is about interpersonal communication, as one of the main factors in the formation of personality, that I would like to tell further.
1. Functions and structure of communication
Communication is a non-specific form of human interaction with other people as members of society; in communication social relations of people are realized.
There are three interrelated sides in communication: the communicative side of communication consists in the exchange of information between people; the interactive side is the organization of interaction between people; the perceptual side of communication includes the process of perception of each other by communication partners and the establishment of mutual understanding on this basis.
The following stages are distinguished in the communication procedure: the need for communication - encourages a person to make contact with other people; orientation for the purpose of communication, in a situation of communication; orientation in the personality of the interlocutor; planning the content of his communication - a person imagines what he will say; unconsciously, a person chooses specific means, phrases that he will use, decides how to speak, how to behave; perception and assessment of the specific reaction of the interlocutor, control of the effectiveness of communication based on the establishment of feedback; adjustment of the direction, style, methods of communication.
If any of the links in the act of communication is broken, then the speaker fails to achieve the expected results of communication - it will turn out to be ineffective.
The following communication strategies are distinguished: open - closed communication, monologue - dialogical, role-playing (based on the social role) - personal (heart-to-heart communication).
Types of communication:
- "Mask contact" - formal communication, when there is no desire to understand and take into account the personality of the interlocutor, they use the usual masks - a set of facial expressions, gestures, standard phrases that allow you to hide true emotions, attitude towards the interlocutor. In the city, the contact of masks is even necessary in some situations so that people do not “hurt” each other unnecessarily in order to “isolate themselves” from the interlocutor.
Primitive communication, when they evaluate another person as a necessary or interfering object: if necessary, they actively make contact, if it interferes, they will push away or aggressive rude remarks will follow. If they get what they want from the interlocutor, then they lose interest in him and do not hide it.
Formally, steering communication, when both the content and means of communication are regulated, and instead of knowing the personality of the interlocutor, they manage with knowledge of his social role.
Business communication, when the characteristics of the personality, character, age, mood of the interlocutor are taken into account, but the interests of the case are more significant than possible personal differences.
Spiritual. Interpersonal communication of friends, when you can touch on any topic and it is not necessary to resort to the help of words - a friend will understand you by facial expressions, movements, intonation. Such communication is possible when each participant has an image of the interlocutor, knows his personality, interests, beliefs, attitude, can anticipate his reactions.
Manipulative communication is aimed at extracting benefits from the interlocutor using various techniques (flattery, intimidation, “splurge”, deceit, demonstration of kindness) depending on the characteristics of the interlocutor’s personality.
Secular communication. The essence of secular communication is its pointlessness, i.e. people do not say what they think, but what is supposed to be said in such cases; this communication is closed, because the points of view of people on a particular issue do not matter and do not determine the nature of communications.
2. Place and nature of interpersonal relationships
In the socio-psychological literature, different points of view are expressed on the question of where interpersonal relations are “located”, primarily with respect to the system of social relations. Sometimes they are considered on a par with social relations, at their foundation, or, on the contrary, at the highest level, in other cases - as a reflection in the consciousness of social relations in the system of psychology, etc. It seems (and this is confirmed by numerous studies) that the nature of interpersonal relations can be correctly understood if they are not put on a par with social relations, but if they are seen as a special series of relations that arise within each type of social relations, not outside them (be it "below", "above", "side" or whatever). Schematically, this can be represented as a section by a special plane of the system of social relations: what is found in this “section” of economic, social, political and other varieties of social relations is interpersonal relations.
With this understanding, it becomes clear why interpersonal relations, as it were, "mediate" the impact on the personality of a broader social whole. Ultimately, interpersonal relations are conditioned by objective social relations, but in the final analysis. In practice, both series of relations are given together, and the underestimation of the second series prevents a truly deep analysis of the relations and the first series.
The existence of interpersonal relations within various forms of social relations is, as it were, the realization of impersonal relations in the activities of specific individuals, in the acts of their communication and interaction.
At the same time, in the course of this realization, relations between people (including social ones) are again reproduced. In other words, this means that in the objective fabric of social relations there are moments emanating from the conscious will and special goals of individuals. It is here that the social and the psychological collide directly. Therefore, for social psychology, the formulation of this problem is of paramount importance.
The proposed structure of relations generates the most important consequence. For each participant in interpersonal relationships, these relationships may appear to be the only reality of any relationship at all. Although in reality the content of interpersonal relations is ultimately one or another type of social relations, i.e. certain social activities, but the content and even more so their essence remains hidden to a large extent. Despite the fact that in the process of interpersonal, and hence social relations, people exchange thoughts, are aware of their relationships, this awareness often does not go beyond the knowledge that people have entered into interpersonal relationships.
Separate moments of social relations are presented to their participants only as their interpersonal relationships: someone is perceived as an "evil teacher", as a "cunning merchant", etc. At the level of everyday consciousness, without a special theoretical analysis, this is exactly what happens. Therefore, the motives of behavior are often explained by this, given on the surface, picture of relations, and not at all by the actual objective relations that stand behind this picture. Everything is further complicated by the fact that interpersonal relations are the actual reality of social relations: outside of them there are no “pure” social relations somewhere. Therefore, in almost all group activities, their participants act as if in two qualities: as performers of an impersonal social role and as unique human personalities. This gives grounds to introduce the concept of "interpersonal role" as a fixation of a person's position not in the system of social relations, but in the system of only group relations, and not on the basis of his objective place in this system, but on the basis of individual psychological characteristics of the individual. Examples of such interpersonal roles are well known from everyday life: individual people in a group are said to be a "shirt-guy", "one on the board", "scapegoat", etc. The discovery of personality traits in the style of performing a social role causes responses in other members of the group, and, thus, a whole system of interpersonal relations arises in the group.
The nature of interpersonal relations differs significantly from the nature of social relations: their most important specific feature is the emotional basis. Therefore, interpersonal relationships can be considered as a factor in the psychological "climate" of the group. The emotional basis of interpersonal relationships means that they arise and develop on the basis of certain feelings that people have in relation to each other. In the domestic school of psychology, there are three types, or levels of emotional manifestations of the personality: affects, emotions and feelings. The emotional basis of interpersonal relationships includes all kinds of these emotional manifestations.
However, in social psychology, it is the third component of this scheme that is usually characterized - feelings, and the term is not used in the strictest sense. Naturally, the "set" of these feelings is unlimited. However, all of them can be reduced to two large groups:
Conjunctive - this includes all sorts of people that bring people together, uniting their feelings. In each case of such an attitude, the other side acts as a desired object, in relation to which a readiness for cooperation, joint actions, etc. is demonstrated;
Disjunctive feelings - this includes feelings that separate people, when the other side appears as unacceptable, maybe even as a frustrating object, in relation to which there is no desire for cooperation, etc. The intensity of both kinds of feelings can be very different. The specific level of their development, of course, cannot be indifferent to the activities of the groups.
At the same time, the analysis of these interpersonal relations alone cannot be considered sufficient to characterize the group: in practice, relations between people do not develop only on the basis of direct emotional contacts. The activity itself defines another series of relations mediated by it. That is why it is an extremely important and difficult task of social psychology to simultaneously analyze two series of relations in a group: both interpersonal and those mediated by joint activity, i.e., ultimately, the social relations behind them.
3. Communication in the system of interpersonal and public relations
An analysis of the connection between social and interpersonal relations makes it possible to place the right emphasis on the question of the place of communication in the entire complex system of human relations with the outside world. However, first it is necessary to say a few words about the problem of communication in general. The solution to this problem is very specific within the framework of domestic social psychology. The term "communication" itself has no exact analogue in traditional social psychology, not only because it is not quite equivalent to the commonly used English term "communication", but also because its content can be considered only in the conceptual dictionary of a special psychological theory, namely the theory of activities.
Both series of human relations - both public and interpersonal - are revealed, realized precisely in communication. Thus, the roots of communication are in the very material life of individuals. Communication is the realization of the whole system of human relations. “Under normal circumstances, a person’s relationship to the objective world around him is always mediated by his relationship to people, to society, i.e. included in communication. Here it is especially important to emphasize the idea that in real communication not only interpersonal relations of people are given, i.e. not only their emotional attachments, hostility, etc. are revealed, but social ones are also embodied in the fabric of communication, i.e. relationships are inherently impersonal. Diverse relationships of a person are not covered only by interpersonal contact: the position of a person outside the narrow framework of interpersonal ties, in a broader social system, where his place is not determined by the expectations of individuals interacting with him, also requires a certain construction of a system of his connections, and this process can also be implemented only in communication. Without communication, human society is simply unthinkable. Communication acts in it as a way of cementing individuals and, at the same time, as a way of developing these individuals themselves. It is from here that the existence of communication follows at the same time both as a reality of social relations and as a reality of interpersonal relations. Apparently, this made it possible for Saint-Exupery to draw a poetic image of communication as "the only luxury that a person has."
Naturally, each series of relations is realized in specific forms of communication. Communication as the realization of interpersonal relationships is a process more studied in social psychology, while communication between groups is more studied in sociology. Communication, including in the system of interpersonal relations, is forced by the joint life of people, therefore it must be carried out in a wide variety of interpersonal relationships, i.e. given both in the case of a positive and in the case of a negative attitude of one person to another. The type of interpersonal relationship is not indifferent to how communication will be built, but it exists in specific forms, even when the relationship is extremely aggravated. The same applies to the characterization of communication at the macro level as the realization of social relations. And in this case, whether groups or individuals communicate with each other as representatives of social groups, the act of communication must inevitably take place, is forced to take place, even if the groups are antagonistic. Such a dual understanding of communication - in the broad and narrow sense of the word - follows from the very logic of understanding the connection between interpersonal and social relations. In this case, it is appropriate to appeal to Marx's idea that communication is an unconditional companion of human history (in this sense, we can talk about the importance of communication in the "phylogenesis" of society) and at the same time an unconditional companion in everyday activities, in everyday contacts with people. In the first plan, one can trace the historical change in the forms of communication, i.e. changing them as society develops along with the development of economic, social and other social relations. Here the most difficult methodological question is solved: how does a process appear in the system of impersonal relations, which by its nature requires the participation of individuals? Speaking as a representative of a certain social group, a person communicates with another representative of another social group and simultaneously realizes two types of relations: both impersonal and personal. A peasant, selling a product on the market, receives a certain amount of money for it, and here money is the most important means of communication in the system of social relations. At the same time, this same peasant bargains with the buyer and thus "personally" communicates with him, and the means of this communication is human speech. On the surface of phenomena, a form of direct communication is given - communication, but behind it is communication, forced by the very system of social relations, in this case, the relations of commodity production. In socio-psychological analysis, one can abstract from the "second plan", but in real life this "second plan" of communication is always present.
4. Factors Determining Interpersonal Communication
In the vast majority of cases, interpersonal interaction of people, referred to as communication, almost always turns out to be woven into the activity and acts as a condition for its implementation. So, without people communicating with each other, there can be no collective work, teaching, art, games, and the functioning of the media. At the same time, the type of activity that communication serves invariably leaves its mark on the content, form, and course of the entire process of communication between the performers of this activity.
Interpersonal communication is not only a necessary component of activity, the implementation of which involves the interaction of people, but at the same time an indispensable condition for the normal functioning of a community of people.
When comparing the nature of interpersonal communication in different associations of people, the presence of similarities and differences is striking. The similarity appears in the fact that communication turns out to be a necessary condition for their existence, a factor on which the successful solution of the tasks facing it, their movement forward depends. At the same time, each community is characterized by the type of activity that prevails in it. So, for a study group, this activity will be the acquisition of knowledge, skills and abilities, for a sports team - a performance designed to achieve the planned result in competitions, for a family - raising children, providing living conditions, organizing leisure, etc. Therefore, in each type of community, there is a clear the predominant type of interpersonal communication is visible, providing the main activity for this community.
At the same time, it is clear that the way people communicate in a community is influenced not only by the main activity for this community, but also by what this community itself is.
If we take a family, then its daily goals - raising children, doing household chores, organizing leisure activities, etc. - directionally program the interpersonal communication of family members with each other. However, how it turns out in reality depends on the composition of the family, whether it is a complete or incomplete family, “three or two” or “one-generation”. Specific characteristics of intra-family interpersonal communication are also associated with the moral and general cultural image of the spouses, with their understanding of their parental responsibilities, the age and health of children and other family members. As in any other community, the features of interaction in the form of interpersonal communication and in the family are also largely determined by how family members perceive and understand each other, what emotional response they mainly evoke in each other, and what style of behavior they have towards each other. allow to a friend.
The communities to which a person belongs form the standards of communication that a person gets used to following. Bearing in mind the persistent influence of the type of activity and the characteristics of the community of people in which interpersonal communication unfolds, it is necessary in the analysis to make allowances for the constant variability of the process of activity and the community of people. All these changes, taken together, necessarily affect the interpersonal communication of the performers of this activity.
In the interaction of people, each person constantly finds himself in the role of an object and a subject of communication. As a subject, he gets to know other participants in communication, shows interest in them, and maybe indifference or hostility. As a subject solving a certain problem in relation to them, he influences them. At the same time, he turns out to be an object of knowledge for everyone with whom he communicates. It turns out to be an object to which they address their feelings, which they try to influence, to influence more or less strongly. At the same time, it should be specially emphasized that this stay of each participant in communication simultaneously in the role of an object and a subject is characteristic of any type of direct communication between people.
Being in the position of the object (subject) of communication, people differ greatly from each other in the nature of their role. First, "doing" can be more or less conscious. As an object, a person can show other people his physical appearance, expressive behavior, appearance design, his actions, naturally without thinking at all about what kind of response they evoke in those with whom he communicates. But he can try to determine what impression he makes in others throughout his communication with them or at some particular moment, purposefully do everything in his power to form in others exactly the impression of himself that he would like them to have. It was. Secondly, differing in the degree of complexity of their personal structure, which characterizes their individual identity, people present different opportunities for successful interaction with them.
At the same time, being the subjects of communication, people differ from each other in the ability inherent in each of them to penetrate into the mentioned originality of another person, to determine their attitude towards it, to choose the most appropriate, in their opinion, for the goals of their communication, ways of influencing this person.
At present, the phenomenon of the so-called compatibility or incompatibility of people is being widely studied in psychology. The facts collected at the same time show that the named greater or lesser compatibility makes itself felt most strongly in the communication of people, directly determining how they manifest themselves as objects and subjects of communication.
Now it is very important for psychological science, using comparison, to develop a typology of communication of individuals who are similar to each other in certain parameters or differ from each other also in certain parameters.
5. Communication and personality formation
Recently, scientists representing various fields of psychological science have shown an increased interest in a range of problems that, after being solved all together, will make it possible to fairly comprehensively cover the laws of the mechanism of communication.
Their efforts have enriched psychology with a number of general and more particular facts, which, being considered from the standpoint of a holistic theory of human development as an individual and as a person, convincingly show the extremely necessary role of communication in the formation of many important characteristics of mental processes, states and properties throughout a person's life.
We must consistently consider all these facts and try to trace how and why communication, along with labor, is an obligatory personality-forming factor and how to strengthen its significance in education.
If by activity we understand the activity of a person aimed at achieving certain goals that he realizes with the help of methods learned by him in society and stimulated by equally specific motives, then activity will be not only the work of a surgeon, a painter, but also the interaction of people with each other in the form of communication.
After all, it is clear that, entering into communication with each other, people also, as a rule, pursue some goal: to make the other person like-minded, to achieve recognition from him, to keep him from doing the wrong thing, to please, etc. In order to carry it out, they more or less consciously use their speech, all their expression, and encourage them to act in such cases in exactly this way, and not otherwise, their needs, interests, beliefs, value orientations.
At the same time, characterizing communication as a special type of activity, it is necessary to see that without it, the full development of a person as a person and a subject of activity, as an individuality, cannot take place.
If the process of this development is not considered one-sidedly and is realistically assessed, then it turns out that the objective activity of a person in all its modifications and his communication with other people are intertwined in life in the most intimate way.
While playing, the child communicates. Long-term learning necessarily involves fellowship. Work, as you know, in the vast majority of cases requires constant interaction of people in the form of communication. And the results of substantive practical activity of the people involved in it depend on how communication proceeds, how communication is organized. In turn, the course and results of this activity constantly and inevitably affect many characteristics of the communicative activity of people involved in the objective activity.
Both the formation of a number of stable characteristics of mental processes, states and properties of a person's personality, and the formation of the structure of these properties, are influenced by objective activity and communication activity in combination, with different effects depending on their ratio.
If the moral norms according to which people communicate in their main work activity do not coincide with the norms underlying their communication in other types of activity, then the development of their personality will be more or less contradictory, the formation of a whole personality for everyone will be difficult .
Trying to find out the reasons that make communication one of the strongest factors involved in the formation of personality, it would be simplistic to see its educational value only in the fact that in this way people get the opportunity to transfer to each other the knowledge they possess about the reality around them, as well as skills and abilities. skills required by a person for the successful performance of subject activities.
The educational value of communication lies not only in the fact that it expands the general outlook of a person and contributes to the development of mental formations that are necessary for him to successfully perform activities of an objective nature. The educational value of communication also lies in the fact that it is a prerequisite for the formation of a person’s general intellect, and above all, many of his mental and mnemonic characteristics.
What requirements do the people around a person make to his attention, perception, memory, imagination, thinking, when they communicate with him on a daily basis, what kind of “food” is given to him, what tasks are set for him and what level of his activity they cause - from this in to a greater extent depends on the specific combination of different characteristics that the human intellect carries.
Communication as an activity is of no less importance for the development of the emotional sphere of a person, the formation of his feelings. What experiences are predominantly provoked by people communicating with a person, evaluating his deeds and appearance, responding in one way or another to his appeal to them, what feelings he has when he sees their deeds and actions - all this has a strong influence on the development in his personalities of stable emotional responses to the impact of certain aspects of reality - natural phenomena, social events, groups of people, etc.
Communication has an equally significant impact on the volitional development of a person. Whether he gets used to being collected, persistent, resolute, courageous, purposeful, or the opposite qualities will prevail in him - all this is largely determined by how favorable the development of these qualities are those specific situations of communication in which a person finds himself every day.
Serving objective activity and contributing to the formation of the general characteristics of a person’s outlook, the ability to handle objects, as well as his intellect and emotional-volitional sphere, which are typical for a person, communication to an even greater extent turns out to be an indispensable condition and a necessary prerequisite for the development of a complex of both simpler and more complex qualities that make him able to live among people, coexist with them and even rise to the realization of high moral principles in his behavior.
The completeness and correctness of a person's assessment of other people, the psychological attitudes that manifest themselves in the perception of others and the manner of responding to their behavior bear the stamp of a specific communication experience. If on his life path he met people similar in virtues and shortcomings to each other, and he had to communicate day by day with a small number of people who did not represent different age, gender, professional and national-class groups of people, then this limited personal impressions from meetings with people cannot but have a negative impact on the formation of evaluative standards in a person, which he begins to apply to other people, and on the result of his emotional reactions to their behavior, on the nature of the ways of responding to the actions of people with whom he, for one reason or another communicates now.
Own experience is only one of the ways in which a person develops the qualities he needs for successful communication with other people. Another way that complements the first one is the constant enrichment of it with theoretical information related to various areas of human knowledge, penetration into new layers of the human psyche, comprehension of the laws governing his behavior through reading scientific and genuine fiction, watching realistic films and performances that help penetration into the inner world of man, understanding the mechanisms that ensure his existence. The enrichment of people coming from different sources with generalized knowledge about the main manifestations of a person as a person, stable dependencies that connect its internal characteristics with his actions, as well as with the surrounding reality, makes these people more sighted in relation to the personal essence and, so to speak, the momentary state of each of those specific individuals with whom these people have to interact.
It is necessary to raise another issue that is directly related to educating a person's ability to interact with other people at a psychologically competent level - this is the formation of a setting for creativity in communication. A person, especially if he is an educator, manager, doctor, must be able to carry out an individual approach to each of those with whom he has to work, overcome formalism in communication and, moving away from evaluative stereotypes, identify, stepping over old behavioral patterns, seek and try the most educational methods of treatment suitable for this case.
To achieve tangible results in covering all areas of the process of personality formation in communication, it is necessary to raise new questions and look for scientifically convincing answers to them. These include the development of ways to manage communication in order to increase its educational impact on the individual and, in this regard, the definition of a directed correction of communication of a person with these specific properties; clarification of the characteristics of communication most favorable to the comprehensive development of the personality, its goals, means, actualization of motives, taking into account the age, gender and profession of those communicating; search for an educationally optimal organization of communication when people perform various types of activities; creation of reliable diagnostic tools to establish the degree of formation in the personality structure of the traits that form the "communicative block".
communication interpersonal personality educational
Conclusion
All of the above illuminates one idea: since communication is one of the main activities of people, it not only reveals the most significant characteristics of them as objects and subjects of communication, but depending on how it proceeds, what requirements it imposes on their cognitive processes, emotionally - the volitional sphere and how much it generally corresponds to the ideal of communication that each of them has, in different directions affects the further formation of their personality and most clearly on such blocks of properties in it, in which its attitude to other people and to itself is expressed. And the changes that take place in them under the influence of one way or another (with a positive or negative result for the goals of each participant) of unfolding communication, in turn, more or less strongly affect such basic personality properties, which express its attitude to various social institutions and communities of people, to nature, to work.
It is necessary to correctly evaluate the role of communication in a timely manner in order to stimulate the optimal emotional mood of the individual, to maximize the manifestation of his socially approved inclinations and abilities, and, finally, to form it as a whole in the direction necessary for society, it is necessary because communication as a value in the system of values that most people have very high place.
Bibliography
1. Stolyarenko L.D. Fundamentals of psychology. Tutorial. - Rostov n / a: Phoenix, 2006, 672.
2. Ilyin E. Psychology of communication and interpersonal relations. - St. Petersburg: Piter, 2011, 573 p.
3. Nemov R.S. "General Foundations of Psychology". Moscow, 1994
4. Andreeva G.M. Social Psychology. M: 1998.
Hosted on Allbest.ru
Similar Documents
Factors that determine communication. Comparison of the nature of interpersonal communication in different associations of people. The connection between the circle of communication of the individual and its properties. Communication and personality formation. Conditions for psychologically comfortable and personally developing communication.
abstract, added 02/05/2011
Place and nature of interpersonal relations, their essence. Theoretical approaches to the study of communication, structure, types, forms, levels, functions and means of communication. Study of the role of communication training in raising the level of social status of high school students.
term paper, added 03/17/2010
abstract, added 05/17/2010
The system of a person's relationship to other people and its implementation in the form of communication. Stages of development of the child's need for communication. Relationship between communication and activity. Basic functions of communication. The formation of interpersonal relationships as one of the features of communication.
abstract, added 10/10/2010
The concept of communication and interpersonal relationships. Communication. Perception. Reflection. Personal qualities that affect the processes of communication. Factors determining the form and content of communication. The psychological make-up of a person. Features of personality types, temperament.
abstract, added 11/21/2008
Basic principles of building effective communication. Socio-psychological characteristics of personality. The mechanism of building interpersonal relationships. The concept of human values. The nature of conflicts and ways to overcome them. Psychological barriers to communication.
presentation, added 12/02/2015
Public and interpersonal relations. Manifestation of social and psychological qualities of a person in interpersonal relationships. Content and effects of interpersonal perception. Analysis of the process of cognition by people of each other. Verbal means of communication.
test, added 11/01/2011
Conceptual basis for the development of the problem of communication. The essence of non-verbal communication as a means of communication between people and interpersonal relationships. Interaction theory, its characteristics and content of norms. Communication as an opportunity for joint activities.
test, added 12/17/2009
Analysis of the essence of the concept of "communication" and its influence on the formation of a person's personality. Study of the functions and socio-psychological foundations of communication. The study of the place of interpersonal perception in the system of perceptual processes and the features of its content.
term paper, added 01/22/2015
C. Darwin "On the Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals". Unity of communication and activity. Communication as an exchange of information, interpersonal interaction. Emotions and feelings. Functions and types of speech. Factors of pedagogical communication. Temperament, abilities, character.
Read - 13189 times
Location and
the nature of interpersonal relationships
Now it is important to understand
place these interpersonal relationships in the real system of life
of people.
In socio-psychological
In the literature, there are different points of view on the question of where
interpersonal relations are “located”, primarily relative to the system
public relations. Sometimes they are considered on a par with public
relations, at their base, or, on the contrary, at the highest level (Kuzmin E.
C. Fundamentals of social psychology. L., Leningrad State University, 1967. S. 146), in other cases -
as a reflection in the consciousness of social relations (Platonov K, K. About the system
psychology. M., 1974. S. 30), etc. It seems to us (and this is confirmed
numerous studies) that the nature of interpersonal relationships can
be correctly understood if they are not put on a par with social
relations, but to see in them a special series of relations that arise within each
type of social relations, not outside them (be it “below”, “above”, “sideways” or
somehow else). Schematically, this can be represented as a section by a special plane
systems of social relations: what is found in this “section”
economic, social, political and other types of public
relationships, and there are interpersonal relationships (Fig. 1.1).
Rice. 1.1.
Interpersonal relationships and social relations
With such
understanding, it becomes clear why interpersonal relationships, as it were,
"mediate" the impact on the personality of a broader social whole. AT
Ultimately, interpersonal relationships are conditioned by objective social
relationships, but in ultimately. Almost both series of relations
are given together, and the underestimation of the second series prevents a truly in-depth analysis
relations and the first row.
The existence of interpersonal
relations within various forms of social relations is, as it were, the realization
non-personal relations in the activities of specific individuals, in the acts of their communication and
interactions.
However, during this
implementation of relations between people (including public ones) again
are reproduced. In other words, this means that in the objective tissue
social relations there are moments emanating from the conscious will and
specific goals of individuals. It is here that the social
and psychological. Therefore, for social psychology, the formulation of this problem
is of paramount importance.
Proposed relationship structure
gives rise to the most important consequence. For each participant in interpersonal relationships
these relations may appear to be the only reality of any
there was no relationship. Although in reality the content of interpersonal relationships
in the final analysis, this or that type of social relations is, i.e.
certain social activity, but the content and, moreover, their essence
remain largely hidden. Despite the fact that in the process of interpersonal,
and hence, social relations, people exchange thoughts, are aware of their relations,
this awareness often goes no further than knowing that people have entered into interpersonal
relations.
Separate moments of public
relations are presented to their participants only as their interpersonal relationships:
someone is perceived as an “evil teacher”, as a “cunning merchant”, etc.
At the level of everyday consciousness, without a special theoretical analysis, the matter
it goes exactly like this. Therefore, the motives of behavior are often explained
this, given on the surface, picture of relations, and not at all real
objective relationships behind this picture. Everything is further complicated by the fact that
that interpersonal relations are the actual reality of social
relations: outside of them there are no “pure” social relations somewhere. That's why
in almost all group actions, their participants act as if in two
qualities: as performers of an impersonal social role and as unique
human personalities. This gives grounds to introduce the concept of “interpersonal role”
as fixing the position of a person not in the system of social relations, but in
system of only group ties, and not on the basis of its objective place in
this system, but on the basis of individual psychological characteristics of the personality.
Examples of such interpersonal roles are well known from everyday life:
individual people in the group say that he is a “shirt-guy”, “one on the board”,
scapegoat, etc. Finding personality traits in performance style
social role causes responses in other members of the group, and, thus,
Thus, a whole system of interpersonal relations arises in the group (Shibutani,
1968).
The nature of interpersonal relationships
differs significantly from the nature of social relations: their most important specific
the trait is the emotional basis. Therefore, interpersonal relationships can
be considered as a factor in the psychological “climate” of the group. emotional
the basis of interpersonal relationships means that they arise and develop on
the basis of certain feelings that are born in people in relation to each other. AT
In the domestic school of psychology, there are three types, or levels of emotional
manifestations of personality: affects, emotions and feelings. Emotional basis
interpersonal relationships includes all kinds of these emotional manifestations.
However, in social psychology
usually it is the third component of this scheme that is characterized - feelings, and the term
not used in the strictest sense. Naturally, the “set” of these feelings
unlimited. However, all of them can be reduced to two large groups:
1) conjunctival - here
include various kinds of bringing people together, uniting their feelings. In every
In the case of such a relationship, the other side appears as the desired object, according to
attitude towards which demonstrates readiness for cooperation, for joint
actions, etc.;
2) disjunctive feelings -
this includes feelings that divide people when the other side acts as
unacceptable, maybe even as a frustrating object, in relation to
to which there is no desire to cooperate, etc. The intensity of that and
other kind of feelings can be quite different. Their specific level
development, of course, cannot be indifferent to the activities of groups.
However, the analysis of these
interpersonal relationships cannot be considered sufficient to characterize
groups: in practice, relations between people do not develop only on the basis of direct
emotional contacts. The activity itself defines another series of relations,
mediated by her. That is why it is an extremely important and difficult task.
social psychology simultaneous analysis of two series of relationships in a group: how
interpersonal, and mediated by joint activities, i.e., in the final
account of the social relations behind them.
Communication in the system of interpersonal and public relations
Analysis of the connection between public and
interpersonal relationships allows you to place the right emphasis on the issue of
place of communication in the entire complex system of human relations with the outside world. However
First, it is necessary to say a few words about the problem of communication in general. Solution
this problem is very specific within the framework of domestic social psychology.
The term “communication” itself does not have an exact analogue in the traditional social
psychology, not only because it is not quite equivalent to the commonly used
English term “communication”, but also because its content can be
considered only in the conceptual dictionary of a special psychological theory, namely
activity theory. Of course, in the structure of communication that will be considered
below, such aspects of it can be distinguished, which are described or studied in
other systems of socio-psychological knowledge. However, the core of the problem is
it is put in the domestic social psychology, it is fundamentally different.
Both series of human relations - and
public, and interpersonal, are revealed, realized precisely in communication.
Thus, the roots of communication are in the most material life activity.
individuals. Communication is the realization of the entire system of human relations. "AT
normal circumstances of a person's relationship to the surrounding object
the world is always mediated by its attitude towards people, towards society” (Leontiev A.A.
Communication as an object of psychological research // Methodological problems
social psychology, 1975. S. 289), i.e. included in communication. Here especially
It is important to emphasize the idea that in real communication not only interpersonal
relations of people, that is, not only their emotional attachments are revealed,
hostility and so on, but public ones are also embodied in the fabric of communication, i.e.
relationships are inherently impersonal. The manifold relationships of man are not
covered only by interpersonal contact: the position of a person behind narrow
within the framework of interpersonal relationships, in a wider social system, where his place
determined not by the expectations of the individuals interacting with it, also requires
a certain construction of a system of its connections, and this process can be
implemented only in communication. Outside of communication, the human is simply unthinkable.
society. Communication acts in it as a way of cementing individuals and together
with that as a way of development of these individuals themselves. This is where existence comes from.
communication both as a reality of social relations and as a reality
interpersonal relations. Apparently, this made it possible for Saint-Exupery
draw a poetic image of communication as “the only luxury that
person."
Naturally, each row
relations is realized in specific forms of communication. Communication as implementation
interpersonal relationships - a process more studied in social psychology, in
while communication between groups rather studied in sociology. Communication,
including in the system of interpersonal relations, forced by joint life activity
people, so it must be carried out under a wide variety of
interpersonal relationships, i.e. given both in the case of positive and in the case of
negative relationship of one person to another. Type of interpersonal relationship
is not indifferent to how communication will be built, but it exists in
specific forms, even when relations are extremely aggravated. The same applies to
to the characterization of communication at the macro level as the realization of social relations.
And in this case, do groups or individuals communicate with each other as representatives
social groups, the act of communication must inevitably take place, is forced to take place,
even if the groups are antagonistic. This dual understanding of communication
in the broad and narrow sense of the word - follows from the very logic of understanding the connection
interpersonal and social relations. In this case, it is appropriate to appeal to
Marx's idea that communication is an unconditional companion of human history (in
In this sense, we can talk about the significance of communication in the “phylogenesis” of society) and together
with that, an unconditional companion in everyday activities, in everyday contacts
people (see A. A. Leontiev. Psychology of communication. Tartu, 1973). In the first plan
one can trace the historical change in the forms of communication, i.e., their change according to
as society develops along with the development of economic, social and other
public relations. Here the most difficult methodological question is solved:
how in the system of impersonal relations the process appears, in its own way
nature requiring the participation of individuals? As a representative of some
social group, a person communicates with another representative of another social
groups and at the same time realizes two kinds of relations: both impersonal and personal.
A peasant who sells a product in the market receives a certain amount of money for it.
and money here is the most important means of communication in the system of social
relations. At the same time, this same peasant is bargaining with the buyer and
most “personally” communicates with him, and the means of this communication is
human speech. On the surface of phenomena, a form of direct communication is given
- communication, but behind it is communication, forced by the system itself
social relations, in this case, the relations of commodity production.
In socio-psychological analysis, one can abstract from the “second
plan”, but in real life this “second plan” of communication is always present.
Although in itself it is the subject of research mainly
sociology, and in the socio-psychological approach it must also be accepted in
consideration.
Unity
communication and activities
However, with any approach
the question of the connection between communication and activity is fundamental. In a number
psychological concepts, there is a tendency to oppose communication and
activities. So, for example, to such a formulation of the problem in the final account
E. Durkheim came when, arguing with G. Tarde, he paid special attention
not on the dynamics of social phenomena, but on their statics. Society looked like
not as a dynamic system of active groups and individuals, but as a totality
static forms of communication. The communication factor in the determination of behavior
was emphasized, but at the same time the role of the transformative
activities: the social process itself was reduced to the process of spiritual speech
communication. This gave grounds for A. N. Leontiev to notice that with such an approach
the individual appears more as “as a communicator than as a practically acting
social being ”(Leontiev A.N. Problems of the development of the psyche. M., 1972. P.
271).
In contrast to this, in the domestic
psychology accepted the idea unity of communication and activity. Such a conclusion
logically follows from the understanding of communication as a reality of human
relations, assuming that any forms of communication are included in specific
forms of joint activity: people do not just communicate in the process of doing
their various functions, but they always communicate in some activity, “according to
about" her. Thus, an active person always communicates: his activity
inevitably intersects with the activities of other people. But it is this intersection
activities and creates certain relations of an active person not only to
the subject of his activity, but also to other people. It is communication that creates
community of individuals performing joint activities. So the fact
connection of communication with activity is stated one way or another by all
researchers.
However, the nature of this connection
is understood differently. Sometimes activity and communication are not seen as parallel
existing interrelated processes, and how two sides social
human being, his way of life (Lomov B. f. Communication and social regulation
behavior of the individual //Psychological problems of social regulation of behavior.
M., 1976. S. 130). In other cases, communication is understood as a certain side
activities: it is included in any activity, is its element, while
how the activity itself can be seen as condition communication (A.N.
Leontiev. Activity. Consciousness. Personality. M., 1975. S. 289). Finally, communication
can be interpreted as a special kind of activity. Inside this point of view
two of its varieties are distinguished: in one of them, communication is understood as
communicative activity, or communication activity, acting independently
at a certain stage of ontogenesis, for example, in preschoolers and especially in
adolescence (Elkonin, 1991). In the other - communication in general terms
is understood as one of the types of activity (meaning primarily speech
activity), and with respect to it all the elements characteristic of
activities in general: actions, operations, motives, etc. (A. A. Leontiev. Communication
as an object of psychological research // Methodological problems of social
psychology. M., 1975. S. 122).
It is unlikely that it is very important to find out
advantages and disadvantages of each of these points of view: none of the
does not deny them the most important thing - the undoubted connection between activity and
communication, everyone recognizes the inadmissibility of their separation from each other during analysis. Tem
moreover, the divergence of positions is much more obvious at the level of theoretical and
general methodological analysis. As for experimental practice, in
all researchers have much more in common than different. This common and
are the recognition of the fact of the unity of communication and activity and attempts to fix
it is unity.
The selection of the subject of communication is not
should be understood vulgarly: people communicate not only about that
activities with which they are associated. To highlight two possible reasons
communication in the literature, the concepts of “role” and “personal” communication are divorced.
Under some circumstances, this personal communication in form may look like
as a role-playing, business, “subject-problem” (Kharash A. U. To the definition of tasks
and methods of social psychology in the light of the principle of activity // Theoretical and
methodological problems of social psychology. M., 1977. S. 30). Thereby
breeding role-left and personal communication is not absolute. In certain
relationships and situations, both are associated with activity.
The idea of "interlacing" of communication in
activity also allows you to consider in detail the question of what exactly in
activity can constitute communication. In the most general form, the answer is
be formulated in such a way that through communication, activity organized
and enriched. Building a plan for joint activities requires
each of its participants an optimal understanding of its goals, objectives, understanding of the specifics
its object and even the capabilities of each of the participants. Including communication in this
the process allows for “matching” or “mismatching”
activities of individual participants (A. A. Leontiev. Communication as an object
psychological research // Methodological problems of social
psychology. M., 1975. S. 116).
This coordination of activities
individual participants can be realized thanks to this characteristic
communication as its inherent function impact, in which it manifests itself
“reverse influence of communication on activity” (Andreeva G. M., Yanoushek Ya.
The relationship of communication and activities //Communication and optimization of joint
activities. M., 1987). We will find out the specifics of this function together with
consideration of various aspects of communication. Now it is important to emphasize that
activity through communication is not just organized, but it is enriched,
it creates new connections and relationships between people.
Structure
communication
Considering the complexity of communication,
it is necessary to somehow designate its structure, so that later it is possible
analysis of each element. The structure of communication can be approached in different ways, as well as
definition of its functions. We propose to characterize the structure of communication by
highlighting three interrelated aspects in it: communicative, interactive and
perceptual. The structure of communication can be schematically depicted as follows
(Fig. 1.2).
Rice. 1.2. Structure of communication
Communicative
side of communication, or communication in the narrow sense of the word, consists in the exchange
information between communicating individuals. Interactive party is
in the organization of interaction between communicating individual species, i.e. in the exchange
only knowledge, ideas, but also actions. Perceptual communication side
means the process of perception and knowledge of each other by partners in communication and establishment
on this basis of mutual understanding. Naturally, all these terms are very
conditional. Others are sometimes used in a more or less analogous sense.
For example, in general, three functions are distinguished: information and communication,
regulatory-communicative, affective-communicative (Lomov B. F. Communication
and social regulation of individual behavior //Psychological problems of social
behavior regulation. M., 1976. S. 85). The task is to
carefully analyze, including at the experimental level,
the content of each of these parties, or functions. Of course, in real
in reality, each of these aspects does not exist in isolation from the two
others, and their selection is possible only for analysis, in particular, for constructing
experimental research systems. All sides of communication indicated here
are detected in small groups, i.e. in conditions of direct contact between
people. Separately, one should consider the issue of means and mechanisms of influence
people on each other and in the conditions of their joint mass actions that
should be the subject of a special analysis, in particular, when studying
psychology of large groups and mass movements.
interpersonal communication is the interaction of an individual with other individuals. Interpersonal communication is marked by the inevitability, as well as the pattern of occurrence in various real groups. Interpersonal subjective relations are a reflection of communication between members of the same group, which serve as the subject of study for social psychology.
The main purpose of the study of interpersonal interaction or interaction within a group is an in-depth study of various social factors, various interactions of individuals included in this group. If there is no contact between people, then the human community will not be able to carry out joint full-fledged activities, since proper mutual understanding will not be reached between them. For example, in order for a teacher to be able to teach students, he first needs to enter into communication.
Interpersonal relationships and communication
Communication is a multifaceted process of developing contacts between individuals, which are generated by the needs of joint activities. Consider communication in the system of interpersonal relations, as well as the interaction of individuals. Let us determine the place of communication in the structure of interpersonal interaction, as well as the interaction of individuals.
In interpersonal interaction, three main tasks are considered: first, interpersonal perception; second, the understanding of man; third, the formation of interpersonal relationships, as well as the provision of psychological impact. The concept of "perception of man by man" is insufficient for the final knowledge of people. In the future, the concept is added to it as “human understanding”, which includes connecting to the process of human perception and other cognitive processes. The effectiveness of perception is directly related to the property of the individual (socio-psychological observation), which will allow you to catch in the individual's behavior subtle, but very important features for understanding.
Features of interpersonal communication are noted in the perception of speech and depend on the state of health, age, gender, nationality, attitudes, communication experience, personal and professional characteristics. With age, a person differentiates emotional states, begins to perceive the world around him through the prism of a personal national way of life.
A variety of mental states, as well as interpersonal relationships, are more effectively and successfully determined by individuals with a high level of social, and the object of knowledge in this case is both the social and physical appearance of a person.
Initially, the perception of a person is fixed on the physical appearance, which includes functional, physiological, paralinguistic characteristics. Physiological characteristics include perspiration, respiration, blood circulation. Functional features include posture, posture, gait, non-verbal features of communication (facial expressions, body movements, gestures). Definitely emotions are easy to differentiate, and unexpressed and mixed mental states are much more difficult to recognize. Social appearance includes the social design of appearance (a person's clothing, shoes, accessories), paralinguistic, speech, proxemic and activity characteristics.
Proxemic features include the state between the communicants, as well as their relative position. The extralinguistic features of speech include the originality of the voice, pitch, timbre. In the perception of an individual, social features in comparison with the physical appearance are the most informative. The process of cognition of an individual consists of mechanisms that distort ideas about the perceived person. Mechanisms that distort the image of what is perceived limit the possibility for objective knowledge of people. Significant of them are the mechanisms of primacy or novelty, which boil down to the fact that the first impression of the perceived affects the next formation of the image of the object being known.
When perceiving an individual, as well as understanding him, the subject unconsciously chooses various mechanisms of interpersonal cognition. The main mechanism is the correlation (interpretation) of the personal experience of cognition of people with the perception of this individual.
Identification in interpersonal cognition appears as identification with another individual. The subject also uses the mechanism of causal attribution, when certain causes and motives are attributed to the perceived object, explaining its features and actions. The mechanism of reflection of another individual in interpersonal cognition is marked by the awareness of the subject as he is perceived by the object.
Interpersonal understanding and perception of an object is carried out with a fairly strict order of functioning of the mechanisms of interpersonal cognition, namely from simple to complex. In the process of interpersonal cognition, the subject takes into account all the information that comes to him, which indicates a change in the state of the partner during communication. The conditions of perception of an individual include time, situations, place of communication. Reducing the time at the moment of perception of an object reduces the ability of the perceiver to obtain sufficient information about it. With close and prolonged contact, evaluators show favoritism and condescension.
Interpersonal relationships are an integral part of the interaction, and are also considered in its context.
The psychology of interpersonal relationships is experienced, realized in varying degrees, the relationship between individuals. They are based on various emotional states of interacting individuals, as well as their psychological characteristics. Sometimes interpersonal relationships are called emotional, expressive. The development of interpersonal relationships is determined by age, gender, nationality and other factors. Women have a much smaller social circle than men. They need interpersonal communication for self-disclosure, for transferring personal information about themselves to others. Also, women complain more often about loneliness. For them, the most significant features that are noted in interpersonal relationships, and business qualities are important for men.
Interpersonal relations in dynamics develop according to the following scheme: they are born, consolidated, and also reach a certain maturity, then they are able to gradually weaken. The dynamics of the development of interpersonal relations consists of the following stages: acquaintance, friendly, friendly and friendly relations. The mechanism of development in interpersonal relations is, which is the response of one person to the experiences of another. Compared to rural areas, in urban areas, interpersonal contacts are the most numerous, quickly start up and are quickly interrupted.
Psychology of interpersonal communication
Communication is one of the central ones in psychological science and stands along with such categories as “thinking”, “behavior”, “personality”, “relationships”.
Interpersonal communication in psychology is a process of interaction aimed at mutual establishment, cognition, development of relationships, and also involving mutual influence on the states, behavior, attitudes, and regulation of the joint activities of all participants in the process. In social psychology, over the past 25 years, the study of the problem of communication has received one of the central directions of study in psychological science.
Communication in psychology is understood as the reality of human relations, which implies various forms of joint activity of individuals. Communication is not only the subject of psychological research, and one of the methodological principles for revealing this relationship is the idea of the unity of activity and communication. But the nature of this connection is understood differently. Sometimes communication and activity are considered as two sides of a person's social being; in other cases, communication is perceived as an element of various activities, and activity is considered as a condition for communication. Also, communication is interpreted as a special kind of activity. In the process of communication, there is a mutual exchange of activities, ideas, feelings, ideas, the system of relations “subject-subject(s)” develops and manifests itself.
Interpersonal communication problems are often noted in motivational as well as operational difficulties, which correlate with two aspects of communication - interactive and communicative. Problems manifest themselves in affective, cognitive and behavioral areas. They are characterized by a lack of desire to understand the interlocutor, the characteristics of his personality, internal state, interests. Interpersonal communication problems can be noted in the following: taking advantage of the interlocutor using flattery, intimidation, deceit, splurge, show of care and kindness.
Interpersonal communication in the youth environment
Adolescence and adolescence is a critical period in the process of interpersonal evolution. From the age of 14, interpersonal relationships are being formed, in which attitudes towards the subjects of reality play a different role: to the elderly, to parents, to classmates, to teachers, to friends, to oneself, to representatives of another religion and nationality, to patients and drug addicts.
The psychological world of a teenager is often turned to inner life, a young man is often thoughtful, fantasizes. The same period is marked by intolerance, irritability, a tendency to. By the age of 16, the stage of self-knowledge and self-affirmation begins, which is noted in increased observation. Gradually, in young people, the degree of unacceptable, as well as unacceptable, tends to increase. This comes from the fact that young people become very critical of reality.
The problems of interpersonal communication in the youth environment are manifested in the form of conflicts among students, which destabilize the emotional background in the team, in the group. Often conflicts, quarrels among young people occur due to inability or lack of compassion and unwillingness to respect others. Often, protests occur due to a lack of good manners, as well as a violation of the culture of behavior. Often the protest is targeted, i. directed against the originator of the conflict situation. As soon as the conflict is resolved, the young man calms down.
In order to avoid such situations, adults are advised to maintain a calm, polite tone in communication. It is necessary to abandon categorical judgments about a teenager, especially when it comes to fashion and music issues.
Adults need to try to compromise, to yield in an argument, avoiding the red rag syndrome. It is especially painful if the scandal is observed by friends or peers of a young man, so adults should give in and not be sarcastic, because only good relations contribute to building relationships.
Culture of interpersonal communication
The development of a culture of communication includes the development of skills and abilities to correctly perceive others, in general terms, to be able to determine the character of a person, his internal state and mood in a particular situation during interaction. And already from this to choose an adequate style, as well as the tone of communication. Since the same words, gestures, may be appropriate in a conversation with a calm and friendly person and can provoke an undesirable reaction from an excited interlocutor.
The culture of interpersonal communication involves the development of a culture of communication, which is based on the development of speech, mental properties, specific social attitudes, and especially thinking. There is a high need for deep emotional as well as meaningful communication. This need is satisfied when a person has empathy, which is understood as the ability to respond emotionally to the experiences of other people, as well as to understand their experiences, feelings, thoughts, penetrate into their inner world, empathize, and sympathize with them.
The culture of interpersonal communication is based on openness, non-standard action plan, flexibility. It is very important to have a large vocabulary, figurativeness and correctness of speech, to accurately perceive spoken words, as well as to accurately convey the ideas of partners, to be able to correctly pose questions; accurately formulate answers to questions.
- Burns, Robert - short biography
- The concept of common vocabulary and vocabulary of limited use
- Nancy Drew: The Captive Curse Walkthrough Nancy Drew Curse of Blackmoore Manor Walkthrough
- Deadpool - Troubleshooting
- Won't start How to Survive?
- What to do if bioshock infinite won't start
- Walkthrough Nancy Drew: Alibi in Ashes
- Spec Ops: The Line - game review, review Spec ops the line crashes on missions
- Room escape level 1 walkthrough
- Processing tomatoes with boric acid How much will 2 grams of boric acid
- Cucumber Grass (Borago)
- Bioinsecticide Lepidocid: purpose, properties and application procedure Lepidocide waiting period
- How to change the language to Russian in steam
- Dendrobium noble: room care
- Morphology of plants general concepts - document
- Planting, propagation and care of bamboo at home, photo Growing bamboo from seeds
- How to strengthen the cellular signal for the Internet in the country
- Sanskrit reveals the forgotten meaning of Russian words (2 photos)
- The oldest language Sanskrit programming language of the future Dead language Sanskrit
- Who has dominion over all the earth?