Co-Presence and Communication, Term Paper Example

Communication is the most important aspect of human co-existence in the world. There is a need for effective communication using various languages and mediums of communication for any development, conflict resolution, meeting personal demands, and transferring cultural and religious beliefs from one generation to another.  Technological development has led to a redefinition of communication since several online platforms that individuals, governments, and institutions can use to pass information and receive feedback from the audience. The introduction of social media has eliminated the distance communication barrier since the users can send messages and receive feedback in real-time, even with those whom they do not know or have never met. Technology has also led to cultural influence in communication where people can learn new languages and mix existing languages to form a new language. People of the same interest to form a virtual group and communicate their ideas, learn and get feedback is an indicator of how technology has developed communication. Despite the evolution of communication, there is a need for co-presence among the actors for communication to be effective. Co-presence provides feedback, clarifications and ensures that the communication proceeds to the desired state. Therefore, communicators must ensure that they are active in conversation and use simple language to make the recipient understand the intended message.

According to Samad (2005), Yahoo chat was among the early messaging apps that people used to exchange information over the internet. The users could send texts and files through the app before the company eliminated it in 2012. The Yahoo messaging app has been evolving when the company introduced Yahoo messenger and Yahoo to replace the traditional app. Still, both application s have been eliminated by the company in just a few years of their existence. The chat for this analysis is an excerpt gotten from a conversation that occurred on March 25^th, 2008, between 9:01 AM and 9:10 AM. The conversation primarily uses text in the English language as the basis of communication between the actors. Even though there is a grammatical error that may change the meaning of the intended message, the actors tend to understand each other. A conclusion of the conversation with both parties seemed satisfied with the conclusion, especially when Patron 14 commends the job done by the library. The library responds by saying, “thank you!” Additionally, the platform gives the users the timings of their postings for reference, enhancing understanding of the messages and providing feedback among the actors.

The above chart is from asynchronous computer-mediated communication, where users can have real-time communication through text with the aid of the internet connection by all actors. According to Tudini et al. (2017), the Conversation Analysis methodology is appropriate in the modern day when analyzing computer-mediated communication since several computers are mediated. These internet-based communication platforms influence human communication interactions. In this context, I will use the CA methodology, primarily for analyzing human social communication, to analyze the chat except presented. The primary focus will be on the communication and the channel used, the timeliness of feedback, the relevance, the language, co-presence, understanding, and effects of the exchange, among other essential factors of the chat.

Question 1 (a)

In my opinion, co-presence is when two or more communicating individuals interpersonally communicate physically or virtually, and each person provides feedback and adds relevant information that indicates they are emotionally and mentally present in the communication taking place at the moment. Also, the liner sequence presentation of chats indicates that the actors are both active in the conversation. In my opinion, any communication that has no clear sequential flow of chats would be assumed to lack co-presence among the actors. In this context, the actors provided relevant questions and feedback. The duration between the information between each party indicates that each individual is attentive to the information coming from the other party; therefore, there is co-presence. Additionally, according to Sillars et al. (2018), communication is the exchange of meaning between two or more parties, and there is an understanding by both parties of the information re-laid. In the chart above, the individuals understand each other and provide relevant feedback, emphasizing their co-presence.

Question 1(b)

The system provides the time at which the information from either side was sent, enabling the people conversing to know the activeness of each person. Additionally, the conversations are numbered such that each person can refer to the previous information in case they are interrupted, and the flow has been stopped; this help to ensure that each party provides relevant information and gives the recipient the required feedback that would keep the conversation going or would help in concluding. Additionally, the system allows each user to use all the punctuation and numbers, which aids the clarity of information provided by each party in the conversation. Sillars et al. (2018) state that communication effectiveness depends on the clarity and understanding of the topic at discussion by the sender and the receiver. Understanding is an essential part of maintaining co-presence in any conversation, and the system has made it possible by allowing the use of all letters and marks. Also, the texts from each person are arranged horizontally, making them easy to read and understand, especially when either Patron 14 or Hagerty Library Reference account operators are in a hurry or engaged in other activities during the conversation time. Finally, the system allows the parties to communicate remotely and promptly. Timely feedback is an essential aspect of communication that ensures that communication is done. The conclusion is reached when each party is still active and focused on the topic of communication. The ability to get almost immediate feedback aided by the system makes co-presence effective.

Question 2 (a)

The system provides for turn-taking communication, where one actor presents their point and allows the other actor to respond. The numbering of information in ascending order helps make either person in the conversation know when there is new information in the chat timeline. Additionally, the system indicates when each conversation was made, making the sender or receiver know the presence and the activeness of the other source of information. The actors can also know communication occurs when they receive information or feedback in a language they can understand and comprehend. There must be meaning, and any time the actors can read and understand information from each other, communication is happening. Sometimes, the technology gives the actors new message notification sounds that enable them to know that new information needs their attention. The actors also know that communication is happening when they can get timely information from each actor. For example, if Patron 14 were not getting feedback from the library, there would be no communication since the information would only be flowing from one side, the same could be reflected in the face to face communication where for the realization of communication, there must be information form two or more actors. Finally, the actors know communication is happening when they get relevant and desired feedback. The tone is friendly, and the feedback provided answers the questions or is in line with the information from the other actor.

Question 2 (b)

The actors use punctuation marks such as question marks, full stop, exclamation marks, among others. For example, when Patron 14 asks a question, Hagerty Library Reference responds by saying, “How can I help you?” indicating that Patron 14 is the recipient of the information and Hagerty Library Reference is the speaker. Also, Patron 14 initiates the conversation with a greeting before seeking information, explaining that Patron 14 is the source while the library account manager is the recipient. In every communication, the speaker usually expresses a thought, makes an inquiry, coveys an idea. At the same time, the recipient gets the presentation of the sender, interprets the information, and provides feedback based on their understanding or emotional status at the time of communication. In this context, the participants make known the sender and the recipient by providing relevant information to the subject matter. The library reference gives Patron 14 relevant feedback and sticking to the primary communication. At the same time, Patron 14 keeps the conversation only on library matters and no other national politics or sports issues.

Additionally, the participants make known the speaker and recipient by providing clear, detailed, and short questions and answers. The information provided by each participant gives the reader clear details on what is expected from the other party in the next information they are to provide. The questions or feedbacks provided guides the next conversation, which leaves either party in the conversation satisfied or encouraged to ask the next question or next feedback for the continuity and conclusion of the conversation. Finally, the encoding and decoding of information between the actors through this channel elaborates the sender and receiver, especially when the library congratulates Patron 14 for graduating.

Question 3(a)

An actor can keep the other from posting by failing to provide feedback. Any conversation requires feedback so that the sender can send another question or present another idea. If one actor fails to provide feedback, there will be no communication since the process requires two or more people to exchange meaning. Additionally, if one actor provides irrelevant feedback, the other actor may fail to post since there will be no value for the communication even though there is communication. Evans (2017) states that effective communication requires timely feedback; therefore, providing late feedback would prevent one party actor from posting. For continuity of any communication, each actor must use a language understood by all actors. For example, the chat between Patron 14 and the library uses the English language, which can be encoded, decoded, and responded to by all actors. Suppose Patron 14 was posting in abusive language or in Chinese, Spanish, or any other community language that the library account manager cannot decode; they would be stopped from posting. The tone of communication can also prevent one actor from posting, especially if one actor uses a rude or abusive tone.

In some communications, one actor may provide unreliable information, which would not keep the conversation going. For example, if the library gave Patron 14 short incomplete information about accessing the library remotely, Patron 14 would likely stop posting since there is no value for time. Finally, the timing of the communication would stop one actor from posting. For example, the librarian may be having a long queue of people that need to be attended to physically at the same time Patron 14 is making a conversation online, the library would stop posting, attend to the physical customers, then address the online conversation in later hours even if the information provided may not be effective at that time due to lack of timeliness.

Question 3(b)

There are several possibilities if the actor gets no response. The first occurrence will be a communication barrier where the conversation cannot continue; therefore, it has to stop. Feedback indicates co-presence. Its absence will tell the sender that the expected respondent is not active in the present communication channel or other unknown challenges or reasons for failing to provide feedback. The sender may also interpret no response that the recipient did not understand the information presented. Therefore, there may be a follow-up explanation of what was meant in the previous information. The actor may use a different communication channel to ensure they get feedback; for instance, if Patron 14 failed to get feedback via email, a phone call or using social media would be the best alternatives for reaching the library and ensuring that appropriate feedback is received.

Additionally, the actor would leave information requesting the recipient to respond when they get the message. There may be an assumption that the intended recipient has not received the information. Some people insist on getting feedback due to pressure, poor communication skills, or a state of emergency for need for feedback. Therefore, they would send several copies of the same message until they get feedback or get tired of sending additional messages.

Question 4 (a)

No. some postings do not make sense to the actors. For example, chat 6 is incomplete and gives a sign to Patron 14 that more information is coming, and therefore Patron 14 should hold on before giving feedback.  In conversation 14, Patron 14 expresses doubt whether the alumni library will offer the same resources as the present library. Still, the feedback given by the library does not give Patron 14 assurance, and neither does it confirm his fears. In this context, Patron 14 is likely to assume his fears are true even if that may not be the case when the library is established, mostly because of the gap in communication or inadequate feedback. In chat eight, Patron 14 has made a grammatical error that could change the meaning of the conversation, especially on paying for remote access again, which one could interpret that he had previously paid for the remote service. However, the librarian has shown trouble-talk skills by understanding the message and responding appropriately.

Question 4 (b)

Unproblematic exchanges occur when both actors understand each other and provide relevant feedback promptly. For example, Patron 14 informs the library of the intention to get information concerning the library services. The library responds by showing the willingness to help by asking Patron 14 how he would want to be helped. This exchange is unproblematic because it leads to the next conversation, and the feedback provided elaborates that the recipient of the message understood the message and interpreted it correctly. The message and the response are in a language that can be understood by both actors, leading to relevance and appropriate feedback, and therefore there is unproblematic exchange.

There is an unproblematic exchange in the posting 4 and 5 since Patron 14 asks if he can access the library as a regular student. The library respondent tells him that the terms and policies of the library do not allow alumni to access the library remotely. There is evidence of understanding between the actors from this exchange, and feedback is provided on time. Additionally, the respondent, which is the Hagerty Library Reference, uses polite language in response to Patron 14, which would encourage him to continue with the conversation and make more inquiries which may be useful in answering his questions.

Question 4 (c)

Problematic exchange is witnessed in posting number 6, where the library writes “and” with no further information that can be used by Patron 14 to answer his questions. The duration between the 6^th and the 7^th posting is long to make the recipient form assumptions about what the library intended to communicate, making the exchange problematic to Patron 14. Also, in post 8, Patron14 makes grammatical errors challenging to correct, especially if the recipient is not proficient in the English language. The typing of there is not instead of “there is no,” The statement of “remote access again” may confuse the recipient to understand that Patron 14 had previously paid for the remote library access. Now the service is unavailable, which is not what is meant in the posting, making it a problematic exchange.

Question 4 (d)

Understanding problems are noted when the recipient fails to provide feedback, as seen when Patron 14 failed to respond to posting 6, meaning that he did not understand what the library posting meant; the challenge can also be noted when the respondent take too long to respond to questions, feedback or ideas. For example, postings 6 and 7 have a duration of more than 30 seconds, leading to misinterpretation by some people in an online conversation. When the recipient asks for further clarification and when the feedback provided is incomplete or irrelevant, there is a problem of understanding. Posting six represents incomplete information while posting 16 represents selective feedback since there is no response to Patron’s concerns about the new library having inadequate resources than the present library.

In conclusion, communication effectiveness depends on the actors’ understanding and provision of feedback. The timeliness of feedback may be a form of communication itself since the actors can understand whether they have co-presence or they are alone in the conversation. One of the actors needs to have skills in trouble-talking to handle typing or language errors that may change the meaning of the intended message. Generally, technology has enhanced communication by enabling real-time remote communication and providing a turn-taking system where the actors can understand who is expected to talk or respond next in a conversation, leading to effective communication and improved understanding of the primary messages actors involved.

References

Evans, C. M. (2017). Interpersonal communication application to leadership. In Encyclopedia of strategic leadership and management (pp. 296-316). IGI Global.

SAMAD, F. (2005). Semantics Study On Terms And Symbols Used On The Internet Yahoo Chat (Doctoral dissertation, University of Muhammadiyah Malang).

Sillars, A. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2018). Communication: Basic properties and their relevance to relationship research.

Tudini, V., & Liddicoat, A. J. (2017). Computer-Mediated Communication and Conversation Analysis. Language, education, and technology. Encyclopedia of language and education, 415-426.