By: Julia Effle –
The reality of text miscommunication in the social world, how it happens and what we can to fix it.
Text messaging – according to a Gallup poll – is the largest form of communication. But in our generation, it seems to be the biggest form of miscommunication, as well. Every day, 22 billion texts are sent worldwide – a staggering 15 million every minute. Almost everyone at Southeast is a part of that statistic.
Have you ever received text message and felt an instant heat wave of anger? Or irritation? Offense? Or disparaged? These are familiar emotions we may all experience when we open a text message.
With a lot, a little, or no words at all, we find ourselves reacting to text without context. Context of a message is important because it provides necessary background information on the emotional and mental status of the sender. Consequently, we often get ourselves into a mess of miscommunication due to our use of words and false assumptions based of off little to no context.
How the miscommunication happens
We then lead ourselves to a series of questions we ask ourselves: “How could they say that?” “What is going on?” “I knew they didn’t like me!” “I am not going to deal with this!”. We’re all guilty of it – sending and receiving such messages. It’s crazy how easy it is for us to confuse certain phrases and even things as simple as letters. ‘K’ for example, a popular one among teenagers, is interpreted as short and rude, when in reality, it normally means the sender didn’t have time for a longer reply. Buzzfeed even wrote a whole article dedicated to the ‘perfect responses for when someone ‘k’s’ you. But that’s just one example. A lot of times I find myself guilty of sending messages with underlying messages, also known as subtexts – on twitter this is known as subtweeting. If I were to text my friend and say, “are you actually wearing that?” when I really mean, “don’t wear that, it’s ugly”. The underlying message can also cause some conflict and miscommunication.
Quickly though, without much thought, we respond (or not) in one of three ways. We type back an irrational response, send it off to a friend for confirmation of its distastefulness or we take the non-response, silent way out.
I believe this miscommunication is due to the absence of facial expression, tone of voice, and gesture, leaving very little to aid us in the presence of a miscommunicated message. Eventually, without these essential cues, we do what’s called “filling in the blanks” otherwise known as the assumptions we make upon receiving the text. If you’re one who’s normal tendency is to feel criticized, you will read criticism into the message being displayed. If you are more anxious about demands being made to you, many messages will read as imperatives, or an authoritative command.
Inner emotions aren’t the only contributor to the misinterpretation. Another thing that complicates the situation even further is a previously established relationship held between the sender and receiver, where we then form our own preconceived opinions of the person who sent the text message.These distorted ideas determine the way we ‘fill in the blank’ of assumptions as well.
What we can do to stop the miscommunication
So instead of quickly ‘filling in the blank’, we should first stop and ask ourselves, “Can there be another, rational, meaning behind this?” One that would be less upsetting.
It’s tough, nonetheless. I’m guilty of jumping in and tapping out my own angry reply, and some of you can probably say the same. But to avoid the miscommunication, stopping and thinking can really clear the air.
Another way I try to handle false assumption is talking to the sender later. Previously, I said that some of us may take the non-response way out. But this isn’t so bad after all. Instead of starting an unwanted argument, just wait it out, and let it resolve itself. Waiting until tone and body language is present is sometimes the safest call.
Several times I’ve found myself in the position of the sender, the one who is misunderstood. And countless times I’ve received the rapidly typed out, irrational response, all because the receiver misunderstood my message. As the senders of the texting word, this is where it becomes our responsibility to ask ourselves, “How can I make this more clear to them?” We also have to consider how we would have reacted if we received and confused a message with a preconceived notion, or assumption based off of personal feeling. And then lastly, ask ourselves, “Is it worth continuing the argument?”
In conclusion.
As the world of technology advances, the world of interactive communication declines. We see this clearly in the result of misinterpreted messages and text. For some, it doesn’t bother us at all and for others, it happens everyday. But we can fix it. Be rational. Not everything is worth the fight, but even I’m guilty.