Interpersonal Communication Report

Name:

Tutor:

Course:

Date:

Interpersonal Communication Report

The communication competence simulation had the objective of assessing the participant’s capacity to communicate effectively in divergent scenarios. Despite the many divergences in stress and complexity in the inquisitions, common to all ten prompts was that interpersonal communication had to consider the second party as a unique human being prior to giving a response. This follows Woods’ conceptualization of interpersonal communication as a systemic and selective process that facilitates an individual to construct personal knowledge of associative parties in order to create meanings (19). None of the scenarios showed superior complexities that would negate the ability to communicate competently. This is mainly because, in all events, one could reflect easily on past interactions and employ the experiences to create meaning. All ten inquisitions in the exercise affirm the Interpersonal Needs Theory by Schurz in that all scenarios depicted the requirement to acquire affection, control, and social inclusion.

Several questions in the exercise gave a cognitive dilemma in interpersonal communication as one had to balance or choose between the need to satisfy emotional requirements or facilitate inclusion continuity. For instance, in question two, ten, and six, the participant has to communicate on his or her friend’s inadequate behaviors. The act may result in termination or loss of cohesion in the friendship. The dilemmas follow Woods’ argument that communication is a complex function as there are many dynamic variables involved for consideration (Woods 17). In all three inquisitions, the response on whether communication would be clear was not strong or affirmative. This was because emotional and inclusion needs had almost the same weight. In meaning, one perceived that through satisfying emotional requirements, one would acquire short-term peace but negate the long term.

Interpersonal communication cannot occur in isolation as it necessitates contextual analysis of the physical and conceptual environment surrounding an individual. The statement follows Woods’ fourth principle that individuals construct meaning through their interpretation of the world (30). In questions one, five, and seven, one had to integrate the cultural and situational contexts of the prompts to structure meaning for a good response. For example, in question five concerning the painting, one had to include all the rules taught in class in creative writing to assess the talent. In addition, one had to include the learned behaviors of the individual that influence his interactions. Through these contextual examinations, one could communicate rationally without using words that give negative perceptions that in turn result in hurt feelings.

The fourth exercise was the only one that depicted the need to ascertain control in the interaction in order to gain control of the heated debate. Despite Woods (29) arguing that interpersonal communication encompasses moral choices, strong emotions and perception have the capacity to negate the inclusion of ethics. Dependent on the emotional intensity involved in a debate, one may not employ moral principles arguing as to why the response given to the prompt was not completely satisfactory. Inquisitions three and nine were the simplest or straight forward in the exercise as they revolved around the satisfaction of emotional needs in interpersonal communication. In both events, one had to examine the relational contexts of the other party to get a basic understanding of their probable reactions. To ensure positive responses, the objective would be to interact briefly through messages that can only be understood in one way (Woods 36). In this, complexity is reduced, and there is least emotional harm and maximum understandability.