Summary
Samenvatting Psychological Processes in Business Communication
- Course
- Institution
summary of all lectures and articles for PPiBC
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
ylsebatenburg
Reviews received
Content preview
Summary Psychological Processes in Business CommunicationSession 1 Introduction: The influence of psychological processes on communication .............................. 3
Notes from lecture 1 __________________________________________________________________ 3
Session 2 The influence of biases on communication................................................................................... 6
Understanding Misunderstanding: Social Psychology Perspectives (Pronin, Puccio & Ross, 2002) ____ 6
Notes from lecture 2 _________________________________________________________________ 12
Session 3 The influence of emotion on communication ............................................................................. 14
How mood turns on language (Beukeboom & Semin, 2005) _________________________________ 16
Too much experience: a desensitization bias in emotional perspective taking (Campell et al., 2014) __ 23
Notes from lecture 3 _________________________________________________________________ 30
Session 4 Stereotypes .................................................................................................................................... 33
How language contributes to stereotype formation: combined effects of label types and negation use in
behavior descriptions (Burgers & Beukeboom, 2020) _______________________________________ 33
Why don’t we believe non-native speakers? The influence of accent on credibility? (Lev-Ari & Keysar,
2010) ____________________________________________________________________________ 38
Expert article: The effect of Hispanic accents on employment decisions (Hosoda, Nguyen, & Stone-
Romero, 2012) _____________________________________________________________________ 41
Notes from lecture 4 _________________________________________________________________ 41
Session 5 Emotion in professional settings .................................................................................................. 45
Affective influencers on judgments and behavior in organizations: an information processing perspective
(Forgas & George, 2001) _____________________________________________________________ 45
Can emotion regulation change political attitudes in intractable conflicts? From the laboratory to the
field (Halperin et al., 2013) ___________________________________________________________ 53
Expert article: The social costs of emotional suppression: a prospective study of the transition to college
(Srivastava et al., 2009) ______________________________________________________________ 56
Notes from lecture 5 _________________________________________________________________ 57
Session 6 Persuasion .................................................................................................................................... 59
Happy believers and sad skeptics? Affective influences on gullibility (Forgas, 2019) ______________ 59
Should I ask over Zoom, phone, email, or in-person? Communication channel and predicted versus
actual compliance (Roghanizad & Bohns, 2021) ___________________________________________ 62
Expert article: How emotional expressions shape prosocial behavior: interpersonal effects of anger and
disappointment on compliance with requests (Van Doorn, van Kleef & van der Pligt, 2015) ________ 66
Notes from lecture 6 _________________________________________________________________ 66
Session 7 Emotion and bias in leadership ................................................................................................... 68
Emotionality and leadership: taking stock of the past decade of research (Rajah, Song & Arvey, 2011) 68
The relationship of leaders’ humor and employees’ work engagement mediated by positive emotions:
moderating effect of leaders’ transformational leadership style (Goswami et al., 2016) ____________ 74
Expert article: The detrimental effects of power on confidence, advice taking, and accuracy (See et al.,
2011) ____________________________________________________________________________ 78
Notes from lecture 7 _________________________________________________________________ 79
Session 9 Negotiation.................................................................................................................................... 81
, Egocentrism drives misunderstanding in conflict and negotiation (Chamber & de Dreu, 2014) ______ 81
Why it pays to get inside the head of your opponent: the differential effects of perspective taking and
empathy in negotiations (Galinsky et al., 2008) ___________________________________________ 88
Expert article: Emotions as strategic information: effects of other’s emotional expressions on fixed-pie
perception, demands, and integrative behavior in negotiation (Pietroni et al., 2008) _______________ 92
Notes from lecture 9 _________________________________________________________________ 92
Session 10 Emotions in CMC ....................................................................................................................... 94
Carrying too heavy a load? The communication and miscommunication of emotion by email (Byron,
2008) ____________________________________________________________________________ 94
RU mad@ me? Social anxiety and interpretation of ambiguous text messages (Kingsbury & Coplan,
2016) ___________________________________________________________________________ 100
Expert article: Hypernegative interpretation of negatively perceived email at work (Sillars & Zorn,
2020) ___________________________________________________________________________ 105
Notes from lecture 10 _______________________________________________________________ 105
Session 11 Miscommunication in CMC ..................................................................................................... 108
Egocentrism over email: can we communicate as well as we think? (Kruger et al., 2005) __________ 108
Online social regulation: when everyday diplomatic skills for harmonious disagreement break down
(Roos, Koudenurg & Postmes, 2020) __________________________________________________ 114
Expert article: When wat you type isn’t what they read: the perseverance of stereotypes and expectancies
over email (Epley & Kruger, 2005) ____________________________________________________ 119
Notes from lecture 11 _______________________________________________________________ 119
Session 12 Communicating bad news ........................................................................................................ 122
Breaking bad news – what patients want and what they get: evaluating the SPIKES protocol in Germany
(Seifart et al., 2014) ________________________________________________________________ 122
Straight talk: delivering bad news through electronic communication (Sussman & Sproull, 1999) ___ 125
Expert article: You can handle the truth: mispredicting the consequences of honest communication
(Levine & Cohen, 2018) ____________________________________________________________ 130
Figures ........................................................................................................................................................ 132
Figure A: Affect Infusion Model ______________________________________________________ 132
Figure B: Model of Sender, Receiver, Social Content, and Message factor effects on receiver’s emotion
misperception in emails _____________________________________________________________ 132
Figure C: Proposed Relational and Informational Effects of the Neutrality and Negativity Effects in
Emails in Organizations _____________________________________________________________ 133
Figure D: Consequences of the breakdown of everyday diplomatic skills in text-based online discussions
________________________________________________________________________________ 133
, Session 1 Introduction: The influence of psychological processes on communication
Notes from lecture 1
Miscommunication
• How well do we know each other?
• How well do we think we understand each other?
• Pollmann & Finkenauer (2009)
○ Married partners know each other fairly well
○ How well they know each other is unrelated to their perceived understanding
○ Those who perceive a lot of understanding are more satisfied with their marriage
• Communication versus miscommunication
• More successful communication – less successful communication
• There is always some miscommunication, perfect understanding is impossible
• Communication can be distorted by many different things
○ Confusion of meaning
○ Biases
○ Situational circumstances
○ Deception
○ Missing common ground
• It is a common misperception that language use has primarily to do with words and what they
mean. It does not. It has primarily to do with people and what they mean. It is essentially
about speakers’ intentions (Clark & Schober, 1982)
• Words make no sense, conversation does: ‘Have you seen Peter?’, ‘There is a railway problem
between Utrecht and Den Bosch’
Sender: egocentrism
• Knowledge, expectations, and one’s own perspective influence the way we perceive and
interpret information
• Failures: creates “Naïve Realism” → you will see the world as I see it
Sender: subtle biases
• People adapt how they convey messages based on many (often unconscious) factors
• People perceive messages differently based on many (often unconscious) factors
• E.g., Kingsbury (1968): giving directions
○ Can you tell me how to get to Jordan-Marsh? → local dialect
○ Can you tell me how to get to Jordan-Marsh? → out-of-town dialect
○ Can you tell me how to get to Jordan-Marsh? → exotic accent
Receiver: construal
• Snyder et al. (1977): telephone experiment
○ 51 men and 51 women participated in a getting-acquainted study
○ Half of the men received a picture of an attractive women and the other half a picture
of a rather unattractive women
○ Do men endorse beauty stereotypes?
○ How do women rate attractiveness?
○ How do external judges rate the conversation?
○ Results: Men though the more attractive women would be more sociable, poised, and
humorous à Objective judges rated the ‘attractive’ women as more sociable, posed,
and humorous à According to the judges women acted warmer, nicer, and with more
self-confidence if the man thought they were attractive à Men who talked to
attractive women were rated to be more sociable, outgoing, and humorous and more
confident and animated in the conversation
, • Loftus & Palmer (1974): perceptions can even be re-construed afterwards
○ Eye-witness reports of car-crash video
○ Questions were manipulated
§ About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?
§ About how fast were the cars going when they collided each other?
§ About how fast were the cars going when they bumped each other?
§ About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?
§ About how fast were the cars going when they contacted each other?
Miscommunication
• Often due to egocentrism and a bias blind-spot
• When is it more likely that it occurs?
○ Social distance?
○ CMC
• Consequences
○ Negotiation
○ Health Communication
○ Leadership
The consequences
• On feeling understood and feeling well (Lun et al., 2008)
○ Two-week daily diary study on the relationship between feeling understood and life
satisfaction and physical symptoms
○ On days where people feel more understood, they report more life satisfaction and
fewer physical symptoms
○ Feeling more understood on a given day is related to fewer physical symptoms the
next day
Solutions?
• Perspective taking? → assumption about the person
o That’s not what I meant (Edwards et al., 2017)
§ Experiences with misunderstanding in CMC and FtF and its relationships with
perspective taking
§ 98 students reported on a recent misunderstanding (either via CMC or FtF)
§ 69% about misinterpretation of tone, 23% about humor
§ FtF misunderstanding are more serious than CMC misunderstanding
§ Perspective taking is negatively correlated with the frequency of
misunderstanding (self-report)
§ CMC misunderstanding that needs to be resolved are mostly resolved FtF or
with a phone call
o Self-test perspective taking
§ I sometimes find it difficult to see things from the ‘other guy’s’ point of view
(PT) (-)
§ I try to look at everybody’s side of a disagreement before I decide (PT)
§ I sometimes try to understand my friends better by imagining how things look
from their perspective (PT)
§ If I’m not sure I’m right about something, I don’t waste much time listening
to other people’s arguments (PT) (-)
§ I believe that there are two sides to every question and try to look at them
both (PT)
§ When I’m upset at someone, I usually try to ‘put myself in his shoes’ for a
while (PT)
§ Before criticizing somebody, I try to imagine how I would feel if I were in
their place (PT)
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller ylsebatenburg. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $7.73. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
82871 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now