Assessment1: Case Studies
Pleaseread "Case Study 4: Military Misunderstanding" in youre-textbook (chapter 4).
Answerthe below questions:
1.How might social role stereotypes explain the interaction? Is thereany evidence of descriptive or prescriptive prejudices? (3 points)
Theinteraction was brief and tense. Each party was apprehensive of theother to the extent that communication was limited to a fewpleasantries. There was evidence of prescriptive prejudices since theparties made judgments concerning one another before the interaction.
2.Discuss Lt. Meyers, Suzanne, and SSGT Lakey in terms of emotionalintelligence. How do they fare on each of the four branches? (3points)
Thenamed persons all have a high level of emotional intelligence. On thefour branches, Suzanne fairs best followed by SSST while Lt. Meyerstrails last.
3.What message design logic does Lt. Meyers appear to rely on? Whatabout Suzanne? How about MSGT Robinson? Using table 4.2 identifyingforms of miscommunication due to MDL, analyze what might havehappened. (4 points)
Lt.Meyers appears to rely on the instant message design logic. Hisresponses are fast and adapted to the matter at hand. Suzanne relieson medium-paced design logic while MSGT Robinson appears to rely onslow message design logic. According to table 4.2, miscommunicationoccurred due to a language barrier.
ReadCase Study 5: "With a Friend Like This" and answer all 5questions listed on page 93 in your e-textbook (Chapter 5).
Question1. Explain Lily’s face needs and how they have shifted throughoutthe case. Did she follow TT’s predictions when initially confrontedby Mia? Use PT to explain Lily’s interaction with Ben.
Lily’sface needs have shifted from oblivious to anxious throughout thecase. She failed to follow TT’s predictions when initiallyconfronted with Mia due to her apprehension. Lily’s interactionwith Ben was cold and antagonistic.
Question2. Use SET to assess the rewards and costs associated with thefriendship. Then predict whether or not Mia and Lily will remain goodfriends if Mia is terminated. What conditions, if any, would changeyour prediction?
Thefriendship between Mia and Lily is blossoming into one built on trustand loyalty. Therefore, it is quite safe to assume that they willremain good friends if Mia is terminated for whatever reason.Conditions of distrust would change my prediction.
Question3. Identify the internal and external dialectics that appear in thestory. What strategies were used to manage these tensions? Whatstrategies might have been better?
Internaldialectics include the barriers that hampered communication betweenthe characters in the story. External dialectics concern thedifficulties in language from outsiders. The adoption of a commonlanguage helped to diffuse the tensions. Utilizing nonverbal cues ofcommunication might have been a better strategy.
Question4. What private information and privacy rules exist in this story?How did Lily and Mia develop boundary coordination to separate theirwork and personal lives? What boundary turbulence does Lilyexperience?
Lilyand Mia resolved not to have any professional discussions apart fromwork. In this manner, they maintained their personal relationshipdespite the pressures they faced at work. Consequently, Lilyexperiences a resolved boundary turbulence.
Question5. Which theory alone seems to provide the “best” explanation forthe situation? Why do you believe this to be the case? Whatsituations might surface that would make a different theory ortheories better at explaining the situation? How could you combineseveral theories to make for an event “better” explanation of theencounter?
Thecognitive theory provides the best explanation for the situation thatarose. This is due to the misunderstandings that arose among thepersons involved in the conversation. A situation withmisunderstandings due to the language constraints would make adifferent theory more suitable. Combining different theories wouldsuffice for a multifaceted situation.
Readcase study 5: The Trouble with Tourists. Answer all 5 questions onpage 116 in your e-textbook.
Question1. How might the troubles with the tourism company be explained byHofstede’s dimensions of culture? Make sure to look at bothJapanese and American cultures.
Hisdimensions of culture have altered his view of practicality. Japaneseand American cultures value different aspects. Therefore, he ought tofocus on each culture separately to know what is most appealing.
Question2. Did either Yushiko or Mark ever accommodate? How? With whateffect?
BothYushiko and Mark accommodated by making allowance for the weaknessesportrayed by others. This made them friendlier and liked by themajority of the people.
Question3. Relate AUM’s seven predictors of anxiety and uncertainty to thecase. Which predictors seem to be the greatest contributors to theproblem at Granovetter Church? How might Gudykunst advise both Markand Yushiko so they can engage in more mindful communication?
Anxietyand uncertainty pose the greatest problem at the church. In order toengage in more mindful communication, they should accept each other’slimitations.
Question4. To what extent did Mark and Yushiko recognize the other’s faceneeds during the conflict? What conflict strategies did they use?Were the strategies consistent with the predictions of facenegotiation theory?
Thestrategies employed by Mark and Yushiko reflected a deepunderstanding of human culture and behavior. They were willing togrant one another the benefit of the doubt so as to mend the conflictthat has threatened their friendship. The strategies wereinconsistent with the predictions of face negotiation theory.
Dainton,M., & Zelley, E. D. (2010). ApplyingCommunication Theory for Professional Life: A Practical Introduction.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE Publications.