As Our Textbook Posits, People Determine Meaning And Word
As Our Textbook Positspeople Determine Meaning And Thus Words Can B
As our textbook posits, people determine meaning and thus, words can be decoded differently by people. This is one of the central issues a public speaker must face to prevent miscommunication: "As speakers, we must do our best to craft messages that take our audience into account and use audience feedback to determine whether the meaning we intend is the one that is received" (Stand Up, 2011, p. 12). Our main strategy as speakers, then, is to identify our audience feedback. There are three types of feedback, according to Schramm: direct, moderately direct, and indirect (Stand Up, 2011, p. 9). Please provide examples of each type of feedback. Don't use examples written in the textbook!
Paper For Above instruction
Effective communication, especially in public speaking, relies heavily on audience feedback to ensure the message is correctly understood. Audience feedback serves as a vital indicator for speakers to gauge whether their message resonates, clarifies, or requires adjustment. According to Schramm (1960), feedback in communication can be categorized into three types: direct, moderately direct, and indirect. Each type presents unique ways for the audience to signal their reception and understanding of the message. As a speaker, recognizing these cues allows for real-time adjustments that enhance mutual understanding and reduce miscommunication.
Direct feedback occurs when the audience explicitly communicates their reactions or understanding to the speaker. This type of feedback is unmistakable and immediate. For example, during a presentation, an audience member might raise their hand to ask a clarifying question or express agreement verbally. An example would be, "Could you elaborate on that point?" or saying, "That makes sense," which directly indicates comprehension. Similarly, a listener might nod vigorously or respond with verbal affirmations like "Yes" or "Exactly," signaling their engagement and understanding. Such explicit responses confirm that the message is understood and appreciated.
Moderately direct feedback involves subtle cues and behaviors that suggest an audience’s response without explicit communication. These cues often require the speaker to interpret non-verbal signals. For instance, if during a speech, audience members begin to fidget or check their watches, it may suggest boredom or confusion. Conversely, leaning forward, maintaining eye contact, or nodding can indicate attentiveness and understanding, although these signs are less explicit than verbal responses. An example is when an audience smiles or laughs at a humorous remark, indicating positive reception, but not necessarily confirming detailed understanding of the content.
Indirect feedback refers to cues that are less immediate or deliberate and often require interpretation over time. This type of feedback includes behaviors such as decreased audience participation, lack of questions after the presentation, or leaving early. For example, if audience members remain silent throughout the presentation and do not ask questions afterward, the speaker might interpret this as a sign that the message was ineffective or unclear. Additionally, if an audience disperses quickly after the speech without engaging further, it may indicate a disconnect or lack of engagement. Indirect feedback is crucial because it can reveal underlying attitudes or feelings that are not overtly expressed but nonetheless impact overall communication effectiveness.
In conclusion, understanding the nuances of audience feedback – whether direct, moderately direct, or indirect – is essential for effective public speaking. Each type provides critical clues that help speakers adjust their messages in real-time, fostering clearer understanding and minimizing miscommunication. Mastery of interpreting these cues enhances a speaker's ability to connect meaningfully with their audience and ensures that the intended message is successfully conveyed and received.
References
Schramm, W. (1960). The process and effects of mass communication. University of Illinois Press.
Stand Up. (2011). Fundamentals of Public Speaking. Pearson Education.
Burke, K. (1969). A Rhetoric of Motives. University of California Press.
Gordon, M. E. (2014). Audience analysis and adaptation in persuasive communication. Journal of Public Relations Education, 8(2), 45-59.
McCroskey, J. C., & McCroskey, L. L. (1988). An introduction to communication in the classroom. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Richmond, V. P., McCroskey, J. C., & Payne, S. K. (2019). Fundamentals of Human Communication. Pearson.
Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapist's view of psychotherapy. Houghton Mifflin.
Seiler, W. J. (2012). Public speaking: Finding your voice. Pearson Higher Ed.
Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. Ballantine Books.
Wagner, E. J. (2009). Audience as a critical concept in communication studies. Communication Theory, 19(4), 371-393.