The Influence of Culture on Listening

One of the things I found interesting in this week’s reading was the influence of culture on listening. In this part of the chapter Harris and Sherblom spoke about studies comparing German and American participants listening behaviors. As a result, the studies showed German participants “conceptualized listening as interactive and focused on the person in a way that supports monitoring and conversation”. While on the other hand Americans saw “listening as a sustaining activity that affects the listener’s knowledge structure and set of attitudes”. It was inciting to see how different cultures form different types of listeners and how dependent the society or culture we live in is on our listening skills/styles. I never looked at listening as something that can be affected by the culture you’re influenced by. I know for me the way I listen to others was mostly influenced by my family and childhood social groups. I grew up in a family where both my parents were people who were always came to fro advice or to be talked to. So for me, sometimes, I feel when it comes to listening to others they are the ones who helped me form some of my listening styles. 

Selective Attention

A perfect example of where I've had selective attention is during my eighth grade basketball tournament. The reason I can remember this so vividly is because it almost cost us the game. During a time out my coach designed a play that was supposed to end up with me scoring.  You see it sounds simple but during this play I was suppose to set a screen for another player that would make it so the defense thought he was the one getting the ball. I forgot to do so, and I was double teamed but ended up being fouled so I was still able to get to the free throw line. Everyone always teases me about this play, and calls me Kobe because I didn't do anything the coach said I just wanted to score. The reason I think this happened is because I heard my name, so I wanted to be the "hero". Sometimes I feel I have selective attention when I hear something that benefits me, which kind of showed during that game.  I really feel one of the ways I can overcome doing this is from basically just learning from the mistakes I make because of my selective attention. I feel the more I realize how it could be detrimental to what ever message I’m trying to hear, the more I can try to fix the way I attend to messages. 

Interpreting the Message

When I look back on recent situations where listening was difficult to me I feel the phase I looked over or found most difficult was interpreting the message.  In this phase you are to assigning meaning to the message you are receiving, and I feel this was hard for me because it's difficult for me to understand someone's message if it doesn't pertain to me or interest me. The book says that in this phase as you listen to someone else, you filter your own interpretation of their message through your own attitudes, assumptions, needs, and emotional involvement. So I feel sometimes when others speak to me, if I have no type of connection with what there saying sometimes things go "in one ear, and out the other".  I feel a way can overcome doing this sometimes is by probably just asking myself how I would feel if people don't really listen to things I tell them. Hopefully not only is this something I can overcome, but also I hope it's not noticeable when I do commit this mistake. 

Humor

The one concept I found interesting in this week’s discussion was the concept of humor in a small group process. The book states that humor is based on our ability to take advantage of inconsistent and incongruence’s. It uses the power of verbal communication to share messages, relieve stress, support group fantasies, integrate ideas, support common values, and help listener acceptance. I think this is a very important aspect to highlight to me because I feel this is something that is overlooked. To me it’s always good to have one person in a group to make light of situations that really aren’t. Not take the role of a “class clown” but more of a stress reliever. I think it always important to take away some of the tension that may be built in the group because of the tasks’ at hand. Those who do bring humor to the group are often overlooked, but many should realize the affect they have in the group. 

Proxemics & Chronemics

Nonverbal communication is a very important factor in the small group process. Now when looking at nonverbal communication in a small group the book states that there are five aspects that we focus on. Out of those five aspects, proxemics and chronemics is what I want to highlight at this moment.           

            Proxemics is the study of how we use space to communicate. This can easily be seen taking place during a group meeting. During seating arrangements, the book states how you can see certain members are trying to communicate. For example, if two people are seating across from each other it can give off a somewhat competitive vibe between the two. Also when you are seating next to another person, this can communicate that you are trying to be cooperative. Sitting next or standing close to someone can also be a sign of similarity.

            Now chronemics is the study of the use of time in a small group. The way we use time is a very important aspect in interacting in small groups. An individual who takes too much of a groups time can be looked down upon in the group and may have their contributions discounted. While someone who is in an influential position in the group may get freedom in expectations for the use of time. (Harris & Sherblom)

            An example of proxemics being used in another culture is in India. Traditionally in India, public displays of affection are not proper and also generally they space between them and others are very valued. Chronemics can be seen in Japanese societies and also in the military. 

Nonverbal Communication Principles

Out of the eight principles of nonverbal communication, the first and the second principles are the ones that I will highlight today. The first principle states that through nonverbal communication the quality of the relationships is made and perpetuated amongst group members. That to me means that our nonverbal communication can tell someone in the group how we are feeling about them. For example if someone was to always look away when a group member is speaking. That would make the group member speaking feel like the other one doesn’t like them, thus causing friction in the relationship from then on.

The second principle says that since what we say and do is inconsistent, nonverbal communication is what is more likely to be believed. I believe this is true in many cases especially in small groups. I think I have seen this happen most in group projects involving reading a book. When the group gets together on a designated day, they usually are all supposed to be up to pace, so when the group gets together they all claim they are up to speed. But when you see the way some members look down in order to avoid inputs, or seem a little designated, you can usually tell they didn’t read even if they say they did.