Emotional Intelligence Language Social

Effective interpersonal communication: the conversational maxims.

comunicación efectiva

Communicate is the art to do partícipe to another person of what one same feels, needs or has, by what keep a good interpersonal communication effective supposes a big advantage in practically all the fields of the life. We happen us 70% of our lives communicating us of diverse forms already was receiving or issuing messages through diverse forms of communication.

These are some of the principles by which govern  the communicative processes.

Principle of rationality.

It treats  to interpret the reality that the another person wants to explain further of the literal sense of his words. For example, if your read a ‘tuit’ of a person that says “The Barça has won the league”,at first can not know if the another person is happy or cheerful with the message that has written. To know it need to analyse the context. If the profile of the that has put it is of a culé of pure strain have clear that it is a cheerful message. However, if it writes it a madridista perhaps was being sarcástico and critic with his team.

Therefore, the principle of rationality does reference to the impossibility to interpret a behaviour without splitting of some general idea of as it works the mind of the another person that has made this behaviour. Be rational involves to arrive to a solution in base to our analysis of the context and the data that have to give an explanation the most logical possible. Our brain executes  of simple way and tries to make the calculations with the less possible cost to give a fast and advantageous solution.

If you see to a person bent in a park surely are thinking that it has fallen him  something and is looking for it, but…And if it is hiding  of somebody? It could be, but searches be rational.

Principle of cooperation.

When we issue any type of communicative signal, generally do it of voluntary and instrumental form, directed to an end. The emisor of the message wants that the another person understand him and the one who receives it wants to understand what says him  by what has to exist some degree of coordination and precision. Like example a group of music, each instrument is communicating a message but all does it of form coordinated so that it sound well. As the same.

Maximum conversational or basic rules to interpret a communication.

Basically, of what treats  is to express what wants to say  of clear form, without mentir, respect the topic of conversation without changing it sharply and formulate simple expressions. That is to say, fulfil with the principle of cooperation so that we understand us of form coordinated, precise and without ambiguities.

It thinks that when issuing the information of clear form the receptor will understand it better by what this feedback positive and proactivo goes to be beneficial afterwards for when you go back to restart your turn of word.

We go to base us to explain this in the 4 basic rules of Paul Grice formulated in 1975:

Maximum of quality or veracity.

You do not say what think that it is false or is missing you suitable evidence that contrast it. It treats  to be honest without giving detours.

Example:

✔ “You seem me a very good-looking girl”.  In this case it is very used because really you think that it is good-looking and have the empirical evidence that it is it.

“You are a girl that could work in Victoria Secret of the good-looking that you are”. Seriously? Have proofs? We could think that it could be true but think that the conversation would begin to have some uncertainty.

✘ Another example would be when they spread  the messages of hoaxes

Maximum of quantity.

Limit you to transmit the necessary information without doing a wider contribution of what requires you. For what go to speak of more?

Example:

✔ To. “Of what goes the series of Netflix 13 Reasons Why?” ; B. “It is a drama on the reasons by which finishes suicidándose a teenage youngster”. It is very used because it explains  of concise form the subject without going in in details of the series that can carry to spoilers unnecessary

✘ When we explain more details of the unnecessary series is when we incur in a rape of the maximum of quantity.

 

Maximum of importance. 

The information that share has to have relation with the subject and context of the conversation. Like this they can  go linking subjects of one to another, but whenever the end of one have coherence with the start of the following. The conversation will be more fluent. Usually this goes out of natural form, because an idea carries us to another alike. It remembers, our brain is an artist to save resources.

✔ To. “Where it is the station of train?” ; B. “I do not know it, but you can ask in the that gasolinera and will say you better”. Really you do not know where is the station of train, but contribute notable information for the question formulated.

✘ To. “Where it is the station of train?” B. I do not know, but the airport is going up that street. Anybody has asked after you the airport.

Maximum of way or way. 

It avoids the ambiguity, know brief and clear. Said like this seems easy, but of what treats  is to be concise without giving him turns to the subject or put elements that do not form part of the current conversation.

Example:

How it remained the party?

✔ “It won the Barcelona 2-0, with goals of Messi and Luis Suárez”. It describes the question of orderly and concise form.

“The party was very balanced in a principle but with some superiority of the Barcelona that finally was the one who resolved in the final minutes the party with which always mark.”  Really or it has said how it has remained the party, seems that it won the Barcelona but has not given notable data to the result.

It is necessary to take into account that the maximum conversational of Grice no always fulfils  since they depend of the context and can violate  as long as have ironic sense or a concrete purpose. Besides, they exist some cultural differences. It is of all known that the Argentinians speak a lot 😉 (this would be a rape of the maximum of quality since we do not have the certainty that all the Argentinians speak a lot, or yes?).

 

Sobre el autor

Iván Pico

Graduado en Psicología (UNED). Nº Colegiado G-5480. Diplomado en Ciencias Empresariales (USC). Máster en Psicología del Trabajo y las Organizaciones. (INESEM). Máster Universitario Oficial en Orientación Profesional (UNED). Posgrado en Neuromarketing (Universidad Camilo José Cela). Técnico Deportivo Nivel II, fútbol sala (RFEF). Especialista en Psicología Aplicada al Deporte. Etc, etc...
Ver Página personal de Linkedin para información adicional o en la sección ¿Quién soy de la web? :)

Comentar

Click aquí para dejar un comentario

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.