At the time that I had started writing this post*, I had been contemplating factors that impact the communication between two people.  Our therapist oft asks about the our communication. I’m going to go out on a thick, sturdy branch here and postulate that examining the quality of a couples’ communication may be to a couple’s therapist what Béchamel sauce is to a chef.  New and old couples alike fail to understand what the other is saying; well at least for those in couple’s therapy.

I suspect that partners attempt to predict each other’s reactions and responses and customize or edit their messages based upon those expectations. Couples with a long history may excel at this. A pair may glance at each other and stifle a chortle because of some shared meaning.  A dedicated duo can have an entire conversation in a breath salted with a few facial tics.  Naturally, there are counter examples.  One person may unfairly anticipate a response or infer an inappropriate meaning.  The other person may make an unfortunate decision because a brow moved or tone deepened.  Both have projected for their partner without actually confirming the truth of it.

What I wonder is is there an ideal time in a relationship for communicating?  Is there some formula that I could re-create that would help us get back to a more healthy state of communication?

When thinking about the current as well as past states of Sandy and my communication, I realized that I cannot recall what it looked like half a relationship ago, let alone during our initial dating period.  So, I decided to compare three current relationships of mine with individuals in different stages of intimacy and what the communication appears like.  Sandy’s relationship serves as the long-standing romantic relationship.  The mid-point, non-romantic, but deep relationship is with my friend, Lee.  The newest relationship is with Robert, an acquaintance with whom I’ve delighted in several conversations.  All three are males with some generational differences: Lee a decade younger than me, Sandy my age, and Robert a couple of decades older.  All are charming and attractive.  With all three, there is comfort in one-on-one communication.  And, if I’m honest with myself, in all three cases I have or at the initial stage of the relationship at least had a desire to be seen as an interesting and attractive woman.   [At this time, the relationship with Robert, albeit completely innocent (and fully clarified that I am committed), is the only one that contains any traces of that initial excitement].  My topics of discussion with each vary, as well as their communication styles.

Sandy, as I have mentioned before, may not be the best person with whom to discuss depression or emotions, but he’s easy to spend time with.  He has interesting things to say, he analyzes topics with depth as well as humor. He can just as readily joke about Star Wars as he can discuss the intricacies of the political and economic climate of the Baltic nations.  He tends to talk more about things outside of his personal beliefs and experiences, though he may share a funny story from his past occasionally, but he does not hesitate to share opinions (as opposed to beliefs).  Although an introvert in many ways, Sandy does well at dinner parties and mid-size gatherings.  He knows how to dance the small-talk dance.  My assessment is that he speaks easier with men than women.

Lee, on the other hand, may manage a dinner party, but prefers one on one communication. He has little tolerance for shallow discussion.  He’s easy to speak with about emotions, relationships, quandaries of the soul and other meaningful topics.  His conversation is more contemplative.  This is not to say that he doesn’t joke or comment on the happenings of the day, but if you were to share a political opinion or stance, my guess is he’d be less interested in the impact of that stance on the future (which would be Sandy’s approach) and more interested in how you came to hold that opinion in the first place.  I know that he prefers communication with women to men.

With Robert I have far fewer observations with which to work, so I can only speculate about how he communicates in a social situation.  Based upon the anecdotes he has shared, I suspect he is comfortable in a crowd, a party, as well as an intimate situation.  The nature of his work (managing a construction business) means that he works well with both men  and women in different states of authority.  He both defers to clients, and directs his team.  In the interactions that I have observed with his employees and renters, he has listened attentively and shown respect, while radiating warmth.  Unquestionably, he is charming and flirtatious.  I sense no hesitation to communicate with males or females, but I suspect his preference is for females given his romantic nature.

Ok.  So returning to the original question:  what affects the efficacy of communication with another person?  When I first asked myself this, I brainstormed like I was a freshman in Communications 101. Typing a few thoughts, glancing at the ceiling, typing another, chewing my fingernail, etc.  A head-desk moment later, I reminded myself, the subject of “interpersonal communication” constitutes a whole field of study, and Google holds vast more knowledge than my warped brain. So I searched, and here are some of the factors affecting communication I found:

  • status/role
  • cultural differences
  • communication channel
  • length of communication
  • use of language
  • disabilities
  • known or unknown receiver
  • individual perception
  • atmosphere/noise
  • clarity of message
  • lack of feedback
  • ability of individual to send and receive
  • perceptions of sender & receiver
  • personal space / proxemics
  • territoriality
  • roles and relationships
  • time environment
  • attitudes
  • emotions and self-esteem
  • congruence
  • developmental stage

[And like the shameful library school graduate that I am, I just jotted stuff down without specific attribution. Here’s what you can do to confirm my results: google: “factors affecting communication”. Use the general, image, and scholar results. You will find these and plenty more I was too lazy to copy. In five densely packed minutes of research, I probably I missed entire subfields on this topic, so my reflections in this post will likely bore the folks in the field.]

After jotting these down, I compared the list to my Communications 101 list. No question, I failed to capture a spectacular number of the items. I like to think that if I hadn’t resorted to Google I would have figured out a few of these. Still, comparing the lists I realized my list assessed subtler qualities.  I upgraded its sophistication to something that might have come out of Comm 201 or even 301 brainstorm.   Below is my original list.

  • motivation:  the desire to understand and be understood
  • practice:  the amount of experience you have communicating with the person
    (technically this could fall under known or unknown receiver, but to me it’s not a binary)
  • history: the commonality of references
  • experience (practice+history?):  one’s ability to project the receiver’s response or to infer additional meaning due to previous communication
  • simpatico: the similarity of thought processes
  • tone: the subtext we read into inflection or emoticons
  • timing: the meaning we attribute to the rhythm and gaps in communication

I composed this list considering my the three relationships, so there is no wonder that the first bullet point exists.  With all three men, I feel a strong motivation to understand and be understood.  There is a commitment to the communication that may not exist with a person you meet on the subway or a co-worker who rubs you the wrong way.   What I did not include in the list but has emerged as this post as evolved is not just a positive motivation, but a negative motivation – I guess by that I mean the threat of being misunderstood and how that will impact the relationship:  fear and anxiety that the relationship will falter.

Practice, history and experience emerged next because that is what differs the most between the three relationships.  With the newest relationship there exists little practice, little shared history and almost no ability to predict the others’ response.  Moreover, because of our generational differences, Robert and I have few references in common.  So what contributes to the strong motivation to overcome those gaps in communication?  The amusement we feel when chatting, the delight in discovering a common musical interest?  Perhaps our communication simpatico, as well as a genuine interest in finding out more about the other person.  Interestingly, the tone and timing items on the list, which can augment meaning and negatively impact the communication offer less threat in this newer, uncommitted relationship.  In other words, I don’t feel a great deal of concern if I am misunderstood.  I do not grow concerned if a response takes too long.  Our intimacy is too little for negative motivation to set in and become threatening.

When I consider my relationship with Lee, however, there absolutely exists more tension and anxiety.  No doubt, the topic of our conversations – relationships, depression, self-worth, the purpose of the world – affect the weight one gives a pause or a delayed response to a text message.  Still,I live under some fear that a miscommunication might ruin our friendship. Often, I feel the need to over clarify my meaning. Even at the risk of annoying him; I want him to accurately understand.  In spite of a decade long friendship and often weekly discussions, there is enough that I do not know about him to predict his response. (Notably, this is one of the things that has changed dramatically since I began this post.  My reliance upon his immediate support and feedback has waned. )

Sandy and I have also shared years of experiences, but even if we avoid emotional topics, the sheer depth of our shared lives makes it a very different relationship from that with Lee.  I suspect that our commitment to each other eliminates much of the threat that something I misstate will send him away permanently or that he will reject me if something previously unknown is unearthed in our communication.  My negative motivation is lessened.

Is it possible that the act of commitment itself poses a risk to communication?  Sandy and I both come from unbroken homes – our parents all still committed to each other.  Divorce is not a reality with which we grew up.  When we married, did we at that moment give up our negative motivation?  Our fear that something we might say to the other would tear us apart?

If so, at some point in the relationship did the positive motivation also dissipate? Perhaps over time we have grown so comfortable with our shared narratives and so readily predict each others’ responses that we stopped trying to listen and understand what the other is truly saying?

————————————————-

*I have struggled with this post for a few weeks.   Each time I sat down to write, I would eek out something and then I would abandon it.  The situations behind some of the testimony have already radically changed, and even now as I move things about and try to make sense of it, I have no hypothesis, only observations and thoughts.