Weeks 3-5: Integrative Study/Subject Analysis

The following is Standalone material, and is based off of the subjects

discussed in the Subject Analysis Audio Files. Each audio file has a corresponding overview

and integrative analysis that combines the findings of the respective material.

Subject Analysis 1:

CSC --27--

Sex --M--

Audio Overview:

“Observer” - Me

“Subject” - Subject 1

“CSC” - Collective Subject Conversation Score

• Subject 1
  • Highest CSC score - 27%
  • Previous relationship with subject prior to experiment implies that this change in social activity between subject and observer is significant. Free will was involved – the subject was not coerced in any way to converse with observer..
  • Presuming that all aforementioned factors are correct: Writing is of probable fault
    • Since the observer had only one method of communication at this time, which was included into the week of the study where the significant change of behavior was noted, it is likely that the singular method of communication itself that proved itself so popular to the subject was indeed the factor that influenced the change in behavior.

• Writing
  • To speak verbally is to speak with the advantages of both versatility and convenience. However, what one speaks is available to all who are around to hear. Such 'exposure' requires the individual to apply a constant censorship of sorts to conversation. Alternately, public disclosure of private information is looked down upon – you could say that it is a “
    “norm” of society that everyone is expected to adhere. In a public area, we are expected to assume the “role” of nondisclosure and save our personal information in more secluded locations. (Myers, 2011)
  • Writing, however, seems to create a 'private' environment for the recipient and communicator, which, as is the case with verbal conversation, relaxes the societal pressures that dictate our public behavior and allow us more freedom to self disclose.
    • Self disclosure, on an important note, is, according to a independently verifiable study by Collins and Miller, the method by which we most typically form close relationships. (1994) By revealing our own personal information, we expose ourselves to the individual and ask the same of another, just as any other relationship strengthening exercise.
    • One potential flaw of written conversation is the lack of physical engagement. Though the exact impact of emotion on communication has not yet been quantified, multiple observations suggest that its absence was indeed noted by the subjects. Subject 1, most notably, always looked toward my face for emotional cues (perhaps to discern the nature of a sarcastic remark), and finding none would ask me to elucidate my true intentions. This was observed repeatedly amongst several subjects, especially with regards to ambiguous communications. This suggests that emotion, as an accentuation device for communication, lies somewhere in the realm of influence far beneath that of Mehrabian's 55, 38, 7% Rule (1981), but nonetheless an influential factor in communication.
  • The most startling observation of all, of course, is the subject's dogged perseverance in non-verbal communication with the observer – even though verbal communication is far easier. This type of behavior is suggestive that writing offers some benefit over verbal communication. Perhaps a desire for self-disclose, the expected gesture of reciprocation, or the mere novelty of a private zone of communication in a public area were the domineering factors – such things cannot be concluded by observation alone.

Integration:

Emotion is a universal facet of human communication – in presence as in execution. Though its nuances can vary from culture to culture, our basic expression, such as anger or happiness, are perceived similarly (Elfenbein & Ambady, 1999). Verbal language shares this peculiar uniformity – the languages of the world all share a 'universal grammar' that utilizes the same basic grammatical structures such as nouns and verbs (Hausen, 2006; Mikhail, 2007). The similarities and universality of both of these communicative methods suggest that an innate biological predisposition exists that causes us to strive to acquire them.

Biology is definitive in its tendency for organizing faculties in complimentary and cohesive ways. Language and emotion are similar – to that there is no doubt. The divination of their exact relationship, however, has proven to be a daunting task. Given the observational data provided by subject 1, such enigma begin to dissipate in the face of promising suggestion. As suggested in the analysis of subject 1, the situation in which a conversation transpires can change a publicly-censored discourse into a more intimate exchange of self disclosure. In such intimate exchanges, emotion seems to come into greater preponderance. Emotion, as such seems to serve as a manifest for this evolved relationship as the exchange of self disclosure creates less explicable bonds of affectation.

This assertion, if correction, would establish emotion as a compliment to language, morphing and changing in relative significance to the strength and situation of a given relationship.

Subject Analysis 2

CSC --18--

Sex --F--

Audio Overview:

“Observer” - Me

“Subject” - Subject 2

“CSC” - Collective Subject Conversation Score

• Subject 2
  • Next-highest CSC score – 18%
  • Emphasis should be placed on the fact that the subject of mention is female, which, as both experimental study and cultural role has established, seems to be the superior race for empathy. (Hall, 1984-7)
  • As noted with subject 1, subject 2's reactions to the abrupt change in communicative faculty of the observer was to reciprocate in a manner suggestive of a much more friendly relationship. It is notable to state that many of the subjects with the highest CSC's (subjects 1-4) sat close to or was otherwise in constant physical contact with me. This trend of beings in close proximity forming relationships is constant with the similar trend found in conventional communicative methods (Myers, 2011), though no doubt amplified by the intrinsic limitations presented by non-verbal linguistics.
  • Also as noted with subject 1, subject 2 was in no way, shape, or form coerced to converse with the observer. All social interactions were of the subject's own free will.
  • The subject displayed behavior consistent with the findings of subject 1, reinforcing its validity.
    • A few additional behaviors reinforcing previous observations were observed.
      • The subject was unwilling to disclose material discussed in our observation log
      • As the data for study termination grew near, the subject grew increasingly anxious in our discourses, asking if the observer could still converse with them with this method after termination. When asked for an explanation for such an odd request, no consistent answer was given. When the observer was unwilling to comply to this request, the subject became aloof and refused to converse with the observer for a period of time.

• Of particular interest, however, was the subject's amplified reactions to emotion in our non-verbal discourse, often becoming irritated when the observer provided an entry without reflecting an appropriate emotional form. Though the subject was not a novel executor of these reactions, she was the most perceptive of their absence, and frequently saw to it that emotion was inserted as regularly as possible.
  • Common methods employed to promote emotion were:
    • Inclusion of emoticons in sentences
    • Refusal to read sentences that lacked an emoticon
    • Withholding a response until a facial motion was displayed
• Though personal and gender factors likely played a role in the subject's curious attention to emotion, this inferred ' fixation' with emotion is not exclusive to the subject. Many individuals expressed concerns of emotion in varying magnitudes during our discourse, especially when conversing in ambiguous situations.

Integration:

Emotion is a powerful faculty in the human mind. As concluded in the Gelman study, the lack of accurate emotive perception carries the danger of potential misunderstandings in ambiguous situations (1989). A person who matches the emotions of someone with whom they are conversing (demonstrating more empathy) often show greater success in their ability to “listen more accurately to the flow of inner experiences.” (Rogers, 1980, p. 116) Even the simple act of forming an expression can modify one's feelings. (Strack et al., 1988) The observational data given from subject 2 shows a more intense but nonetheless commonly prevalent trait in human nature - a tendency to look for emotion to help define and elucidate conversational information, and a tendency to be confused when they are lacking. Situation, again, stands out as a predominant factor in determining the applicability of emotion and language as influential factors in interpersonal communication. Though it is difficult to analyze the specific influential factors of language and emotion due to their fluctuating preponderances, the situations that modify one's communicative abilities prove the most definitive in their ability to infer communicative relationship.

Week 2: Linguistic Phase

Language, it is said, is “the jewel in the crown of cognition.” (Pinker, 1990) With it's assistance, we have reasoned and innovated. More importantly, we found a way to inscribe and immortalize our inventions - passing them on to generations in the future. It is this linguistic faculty that is of focus in this week of observation – our ability to read and write language.

This week was going to be better , I told myself. Coming into the second week of observation, I found myself in anticipation of the increased freedom that written linguistic communication would afford me in effective social interaction, and to an extent this was true – with my notebook in hand, conversation came with much more ease than during the first week (if even that could be called 'conversation'). But the improvement was only marginal – more so than before, I found myself wanting to communicate but unable to do so with sufficient speed – to exchange at the speed of a vocal communicator was to condemn my writing to a sloppy and infuriatingly truncated mess. In truth, nothing could have prepared my mind, or my hand, for such an assailing feeling of communicative inadequacy.

In my ways, however, such feelings helped to better illuminate the advantages of verbally articulated linguistics. Just as written linguistics dominates emotion in its communicative accuracy, so does articulation rule over written language in its speed, ease of use, and versatility. Spoken language has many advantageous characteristics, and in a true naturally selective style, has thus taken its preponderant position in our history and development. Through verbal language, we compare all other forms of linguistic communications, and in this way has colored our perceptions.

Such perceptions, as an unfortunate result, threaten to taint objective observational reasoning. The best data and observations would come from those with whom I conversed the most. With all of the data I received on a daily basis, how could I possibly weed out those who were the most talkative? The original frustration at the apparent lack of solutions was accentuated by its stark necessity. The wealth of conversational data I was collecting was of no use to me if I could not convert it into an analyzable and indiscreet format. Dilemmas, however, are seldom a match for a dedicated mind – a solution was quickly stamped out to assuage this problem with the assistance of my advisor. For one week, each of the individuals who wrote in my book were given a pen of a distinguished color clearly identifiable with its respective writer. (the pens were kept by me until they were used so as to prevent tampering or trading of pens.) Each of the “subjects' ” collective entries were subjected to a multitrial recording session that cataloged the average equivalent time it would take to verbally articulate. These average times were then added together, and the proportion of each relative to the total conversation time was calculated. These values, deemed the Collective Subject Conversation Score, were essentially statistical gradings by which the subjects were ordered. ^*

The highest value, belonging to Subject 1, exceeded 45 minutes of equivalent verbal linguistic conversation. Keep in mind that this was merely an observation of one week's time – 45 minutes of conversation is quite massive considering the tasking nature of our discourse. Such heavy concentrations of conversation suggest, at least amongst my more 'talkative' subjects, that writing offers some sort of intrinsic benefit over talking that so motivates these characters to continue to converse with me in such a seemingly inefficient manner^** One can only infer from such uncontrolled conditions – but strong inferences can nonetheless prove a valuable basis for further research.

*A Chi-Squared Test of Homogeneity affirmed the validity of the CSC scores of the observed subjects for Week 2 as an accurate representation of the averages overall CSC scores of the observed subjects of Week 2-Week 5.

** For a more comprehensive analysis on the subject of the intrinsic advantages of written over verbal language, see “Integrative Study – Subject Analysis 1”

Week 1: Emotive Phase

If any one reason could be found as to the reason communication exists today, it is that nature favors those who work as a team and as a community. A powerful suggestion indeed, as one can infer from the numerous communities that color the Earth's surface - perhaps the one constant among species is that each has invented its own method of special communication. Pheromones, for instance, are used quite effectively by insects to communicate and relay important messages - of impending danger, or a need of assistance - in order to better assume a cohesive unit that can collectively work towards mutual benefit. The necessity of exchange is apparent here - not merely in resource but in collaboration. Every community, it is revealed, is a complex network of which the cohesive is communication; without some language in some form, no creature would ever be able to form any sort of infrastructure of cohabitation beyond itself.

The first seven days of my month of silence was thus dedicated to our own kinesthetic faculty of communication - the contorting of faces to display emotion. I would refrain from all forms of linguistic communication whenever possible and attempt to communication using only this basic communication method. Initially, my predictions on my ability to remain an active partner were gloomy, and my resultant experiences during that fateful first week had all but confirmed my prediction, in what was to be perhaps the most socially devoid stretch of time. After the initial bemusement to my peculiar social plight, and a few awkward attempts at a modicum of a normal social exchange, I was left largely to my own devices, and was no longer bothered to provide any further exchanges. (My later inquiries as to the cause of this aversion were met with varied but depressingly similar responses. 'Talking' to me, if even it could be called that, was "too hard for what it was worth." I experienced this depressing trend even with my own family.) As a unfortunate result, my first week was largely disabused of any real social exposure.

My social shock from going to a lively and active social lifestyle to one of near nonexistence helped to put into perspective the importance of communicative systems, however. Emotive communication, in all its usefulness in its simplistic applications in (for a lack of a better word) simpler species, seemed so paltry when compared to the powerful and versatile linguistic system that was being used around me. Emotion, as a singular system of human communication, doesn't seem to work. Remember that without communication in some form, lasting communal structures cannot form; human language 'the qualities of mind that are, so far as we know, unique to humans," (Chomsky) takes the purpose of communication beyond mere cohabitation and forges for itself a society of sophistication and convenience, where, as Myers put it best, "thanks to language, we know much that we've never seen." (313)

Though my first week left me with a lack of concrete social data, it did help me to put into perspective the unique position that language has provided us in the world.