![]() ![]() Consequences for eavesdropping may include an angry reaction if caught, damage to interpersonal relationships, or being perceived as dishonest and sneaky. 1 In any case, this type of listening is considered bad because it is a violation of people’s privacy. Sometimes people eavesdrop to feed the gossip mill or out of curiosity. People might think another person is talking about them behind their back or that someone is engaged in illegal or unethical behavior. People eavesdrop for a variety of reasons. ![]() We usually only become aware of the fact that other people could be listening in when we’re discussing something private. However, given that our perceptual fields are usually focused on the interaction, we are often unaware of the other people around us or don’t think about the fact that they could be listening in on our conversation. Many if not most of the interactions we have throughout the day occur in the presence of other people. There is a difference between eavesdropping on and overhearing a conversation. More than likely, though, the speaker will form a negative impression of the interrupter and may withdraw from the conversation.Įavesdropping is a bad listening practice that involves a calculated and planned attempt to secretly listen to a conversation. A person engaging in this type of interruption may lead the other communicator to try to assert dominance, too, resulting in a competition to see who can hold the floor the longest or the most often. The speaker may form a negative impression of you that can’t just be erased by you noting that you didn’t “mean to interrupt.” Interruptions can also be used as an attempt to dominate a conversation. So if you interrupt unintentionally, but because you were only half-listening, then the interruption is still evidence of bad listening. ![]() As we’ve already learned, intended meaning is not as important as the meaning that is generated in the interaction itself. Unintentional interruptions can still be considered bad listening if they result from mindless communication. All these interruptions are not typically thought of as evidence of bad listening unless they become distracting for the speaker or are unnecessary. We may also interrupt out of necessity if we’re engaged in a task with the other person and need to offer directions (e.g., “Turn left here.”), instructions (e.g., “Will you whisk the eggs?”), or warnings (e.g., “Look out behind you!”). Back-channel cues like “uh-huh,” as we learned earlier, also overlap with a speaker’s message. Sometimes interruptions are more like overlapping statements that show support (e.g., “I think so too.”) or excitement about the conversation (e.g., “That’s so cool!”). One of the most frequent glitches in the turn-taking process is interruption, but not all interruptions are considered “bad listening.” An interruption could be unintentional if we misread cues and think a person is done speaking only to have him or her start up again at the same time we do. In this sense, conversational turn taking has been likened to a dance where communicators try to avoid stepping on each other’s toes. \)Ĭonversations unfold as a series of turns, and turn taking is negotiated through a complex set of verbal and nonverbal signals that are consciously and subconsciously received.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |