How is it possible that someone can respond harshly or aggressively to a simple question or comment? Apparently a nerve has been touched unnoticed and unintentionally. Is it possible that such painful misunderstandings can be prevented or at least reduced? It helps if you realize that communication addresses different levels. And that what is going on inside someone can just come out in this way.
An existential question
A concept does not refer so much to objective characteristics as to ideas and these can be quite different for different people: sociable, authority, nice, freedom, sweet, tired, helpful, tasty, etc.
Communication not only conveys information (content). , but also imposes a behavior (relationship). For example, you may agree with each other about the content, but not about the way in which communication takes place, for example: You invite a mutual friend to dinner without first consulting your partner.
Interpersonal perspectives/viewpoints
Communication is a never-ending stream of views:
- a) this is how I think about myself
- b) that’s how I think about you
- c) that’s how I think you think about me
- d) this is how I think you think I think about myself
- e) this is how I think you think I think about you.
Only perspectives a) and b) are directly my own, all others are impressions about other people’s impressions. To know whether those impressions are correct, we have to ask the other person.
If my sister thinks that my friends value my friendship so much, is it my sister who thinks that my friends think that way about me, or is it also what my friends think about me?
These views are not only exchanged with words (content), but also through the way (behavior) they are expressed.
Difference in response
Mother (interested): ,How was school today?,
- Child A: ,Great, we have…,
- Child B: ,Why do you want to know that?,
The other person’s reaction tells you how he/she interpreted your communication; as interested or as interfering.
Three ways to deal with these views
- Noticing and responding OO
- Noticing and opposing OT
- ‘Not’ noticing NO; eg play back: ,You know that yourself!, Or: Start talking about something else. Or: Go do something (watch TV, iron, etc.) Or: run away.
Els returns from a sick friend. She tells Eric how she would like to help her.
- Els considers herself altruistic.
- Els knows that Eric likes to be informed about what she is doing.
Eric: ,You are quite concerned about the fate of others, I think you are exaggerating.,
Els can respond to this in three different ways . Eric can also respond to each of these three ways in three different ways. And Els can respond in three ways to each of those three ways, etc., etc. This is about the effect of the message, the meaning given to the views, not about the intention, the intentions: Jo comes
home and collapses, sighing. in a chair. Hanna brings him a beer. Jo can think:
- She notices that I’m tired and could use a pick-me-up!
- Can’t she see that I’m still too tired for a beer?
- Can’t she see that I’m tired, why won’t she leave me alone?
Suppose next time Hanna doesn’t bring Jo a beer and when he falls asleep she doesn’t wake him up for dinner. When Jo wakes up, he is disappointed that he overslept last night and angry with Hanna that she didn’t wake him up. Hanna is angry because he doesn’t know what he wants and she can never get it right. He then accuses her of not knowing the difference between resting and sleeping deeply. And Hanna says he only thinks about himself. Etc.
OO: if there is noticing and responding, those involved experience this as recognition; they feel understood. OT: if there is mainly noticing and going against it, we speak of escalations (argument follows argument).
NO: if there is regular and repeated failure to notice, those involved experience this as alienation.
Usefulness of such a complicated theory
The vision/viewpoint that one continually expresses may coincide with one’s inner self, but that is not always the case.
Johan compliments Hannes on the thorough project he submitted to the management. Hannes says: ,Just mock it., Apparently it does not match what He thinks of himself (his project), so the compliment is not received and is misunderstood. Johan learns from this that he cannot simply express his appreciation for Hannes, but may have to do so in doses.
In addition, he may also have to take timing into account. For example, it is better to discuss your problems when the other person is not busy or is struggling with problems themselves. So you don’t have to change your view, but you do have to dose and/or time it better.
It is not about being right or getting your way, but about noticing what is on the other person’s mind so that their vision has the right to exist. This means you don’t have to share each other’s vision!
- Hannes may understand how positive Johan is about his project. The misunderstanding is then resolved, while Hannes remains dissatisfied with his project.
- If mother notices that daughter B has a different view instead of concluding that her daughter is difficult and unruly, she can ask herself: how can I show her that I am really interested?
‘I’ is not always ‘I’
‘I’ can be: what I think of myself and what I repeatedly notice that others think the same, or: what I perceive what others think of me. This does not necessarily have to be true, but the ‘I’ does not investigate further whether this is the case and whether people still think this way under changed circumstances:
- Jef: ,Don’t sit next to me, I’m an annoying type.,
- Rik: ,I’m a genius, let me wash that pig.,
- The neighbor complains that she is so nervous. Petra advises her to relax more, to which the neighbor tells her: ,Don’t think that I have time for that.,
Petra took her neighbor literally. Later it turns out that her neighbor keeps being told by her family that she should not be so nervous. She therefore sought support from Petra, who also wanted to give her that, but that turned into a misunderstanding. After a second conversation, the neighbor investigates and discovers that she is not nervous, but sometimes becomes nervous when her family members do not notice that she is busy.
An ‘I’ message can relate to the other person
- ‘I like this’ actually means: you cooked well.
- ‘I have a headache’ = you are busy.
- ‘I’m having a great time’ = you’re good company.
Interpersonal perspectives are not isolated phenomena
- I will discuss this with him in private, not during the meeting.
- You can tell me that you think I’m sloppy, but not in front of my parents.
When more than two people are present, more interpersonal perspectives are exchanged than one realizes
- Parents reward one of their children in front of the others. The others may interpret this as: ,we have not done well enough,, while this is not the intention.
- An employee indicates how hard he has worked. The team leader notices this and agrees. The colleagues might think: ,as if everything comes naturally to us and we don’t work hard.,
The chance of such side effects is greater when people are going through a difficult period.
|
When |
She is not available in the morning. She doesn’t say anything, doesn’t answer, but in the evening she is unstoppable. |
|
Where |
I often get out of control at home, but I shouldn’t try that at work. |
|
Circumstances |
When my daughter was sick, strangely enough, we got along very well; she was grateful for my care and affection. Now that she’s better, she’s back to being the sulking troublemaker. |
This makes it understandable how someone can react harshly or aggressively to a simple question/comment. This is a consequence of dealing with subtle messages that touch personal chords. There is no recipe to reduce misunderstandings. It does help if you realize that there is always a layered level of communication and that what is going on inside someone comes out in this way.