I always found it very interesting to hear from or about someone who stepped up in a crisis or high stress scenario. Especially if that person is not regularly in a leadership role. In a high-pressure group setting finding the nerve to not only take initiative but also direct others is impressive to me. Its also interesting that the others who didn't step up are usually willing and receptive to the directions of someone else even if they are a stranger. It seems the higher the stakes the quicker everyone falls in line and moves once someone has stood up as a leader even if it's a self-appointed role.

Story telling is one of my favorite ways to bond with a new friend or coworker. I find it fun not just to share but also to listen. If I think the story is on topic or I think they would find interesting, I like to share. I find this helps build a sense of knowing each other deeper even if we don't get to spend that much time together. As a listener, I get a chance to see what they are like in different scenarios.

When it comes to interpersonal relationships, I have never considered the amount of strategy that goes into a conversation. The most strategy I have purposely used is at work where I am in a team setting. However, when it comes to friends and family, I only tend to think more about my delivery if there is a 'big' or sensitive topic to address. Using strategy in these situations would definitely be helpful since it will have an immediate and long-lasting effect on my personal life.

I'm much better at receiving than I am at giving feedback. Especially when I am asked without expecting to share an observation or opinion on someone. It helps a lot to have a list of goals or expectations to score someone else against. When delivering my feedback, I tend to try and make it seem as least judgmental as possible. I always prefer feedback to be a conversation than written for both giving and receiving.

This reminded me of the nail video from class and also reminds me of a phrase I saw online. "Do you want solutions right now or do you just want me to listen?" It was from someone making a joke/complaint about how aren't able to use context clues and emotions to draw accurate conclusions about their partner's needs. This was the solution given by the creater of the video. While the phrase itself is an attempt at trying to understand a situation better. I can’t help but image hearing this in the middle of an emotional moment would make me feel a bit disconnected from my partner. In my mind it implies that they don't have good listening skills or the ability to read any context clues.

Having worked a job in sales and managing others that sell products, this reminded me of a lot of conversations I would have with my team. Those who had higher sales were in general better communicators than the others. It was always my best listeners who asked the most questions and had the most patience who sold more. Being a better listener gave two advantages. One being able to connect to customers on a personal level, and two actually get to the core of what they need. Which made them customer favorites, boosting their repeat sales.

I have noticed recently that I give a lot of back-channel cues, especially when talking to someone new. It's almost like anticipatory feedback. If I feel I understand or can identify what they are feeling, I will comment on it during breaks in their story. I'm not sure where I picked it up from, but I am trying to keep it from becoming interruptive or rushing. Instead, I have tried to switch the comments to questions. Even if it's something simple to show, I am engaged rather than interrupting

Most of the misunderstandings I have in conversations happen when either I or the other person is interpreting wrong. Especially if the tone and volume don't match what is being said to me. Which makes sense as people rely a lot on nonverbal cues. I find myself asking for clarification or a longer explanation. I also have to remind myself to correct my tone, especially if I'm not in a good mood. I do this in hopes to not make the other person feel like my attitude is with them, or to help show that I am being genuine.

I have noticed the amount of resistance that someone puts in depends on how attached they are to the idea being challenged. The deeper it is as a part of their core beliefs or personality, the more they are willing to do logical acrobatics. The reaction to dissonance can almost be impressive. On the flip side, some people just need time. So, dissonance is not as startling or threatening. After mauling it over for some time, I have also seen people work through the dissonance to a new point of understanding. Which is inspiring to see someone change behavior no matter how uncomfortable it is.

This is an appeal I see a lot specifically from charismatic speakers. They are already appealing speakers who naturally draw people in. I suspect it makes transitioning to an emotional appeal easier. It's one of my least favorite persuasive methods when done poorly and often feels manipulative from the listeners end.

The switch from debate to lecture style teaching is very interesting to think about. I could imagine trying to debate a professor in a class setting especially if it was considered fundamental ideas. I have been in classes with students that will take a question and make a debate out of it. The atmosphere was always weird and tense during lectures. It's fascinating to think at some point this was the social norm when it came to education.

Whenever I listen to a persuasive speech, or an informative speech and catch a fallacy, I always feel a little duped by the speaker. It immediately makes me question the validity of the information and the ethics of the speaker. As this chapter has highlighted, ethics in speaking are extremely important. There for knowing these fallacies and being able to spot them in others and especially in yourself would be a very helpful skill.

While being provocative could capture audience attention, it's also just baiting people into engaging. Usually, baited attention is not genuine interest, its often people waiting to argue back. Also, once credibility is damaged, the speech is no longer informative or fact based on the minds of an audience. As mentioned in the first section of the chapter, an informative speech without any credibility or respect for the speaker is often treated as opinion.

I find it fascinating how a person's mind will seek out any sort of confirmation even if it comes from ones self. This reminds me of a self-fulfilling prophecy from an earlier chapter. How our behavior and actions will feed into a what we believe. Even to the point of causing a self-destructive cycle if gone unchecked. It also reminds me another chapter where coping mechanisms for stress before giving a speech was covered. I'm sure the breathing exercise for anxiety or stress could also help lessen irritation and there for help get rid of negative nonverbal actions/cluster.

This reminds me a lot of a concept I heard, I believe from a video, a long time ago. It was about grooming habits between people and how it can be a reflection of comfort with physical intimacy. The video talked about the moment in a friendship or relationship when we feel comfortable enough to reach out and 'groom' the other person. That the closer a connection the more comfortable and willing we are to 'groom' the other. Someone in a newer relationship might point out something like a messy hair, lint, or a tag sticking out. As you move up levels of intimacy that moves onto just letting them know you're reaching to fix it. Finally reaching out and fixing the problem you noticed without having to say anything to them. It was supposed to be a sign to see how physically close two people were. As the person being groomed had the chance to reject the help offered and set a boundary. The person asking had a chance to express care for others appearance and or comfort. I'm not sure entirely how true observation was but this section reminded me of the video as it discusses levels of physical contact in comparison to the depth of the relationship.

This reminds me of the previous sections where the text mentioned that some basic nonverbal communication systems are universal. Things like shaking your head no, nodding yes, hands pressed together in thanks, are generally universally known. Same as some of the emblems like a thumbs up, okay, or waving come/go away. It makes me wonder just how far a totally nonverbal interaction could go for people that don't speak the same language. From my experience helping customers that dent speak English at times it was easier to stop trying to translate. Instead focus on the context clues, nonverbal cues, and whatever small words I could recognize.

I am a huge artifact person. Everything from my bags to my car, my room, and especially my own body. I love to decorate with things that I consider a part of me. I never realized how important my own physical artifacts were to me until I had to hide them for work. I was disappointed when I discovered it was part of the dress code to not have any facial piercing. I went from irritated, to sad, and eventually accepting the new rule I would have to live by. For me my piercings passively convey things about myself to the outside world. I found myself wondering what others thought of me now that I only had my own voice and actions to show the kind of person I am. That's when I started to realize just how much I expected the artifacts in my life to communicate to others.

I know I definitely rely more on non-verbal cues specifically when it comes to any kind of new relationship. Until I feel like I know someone well enough I try not judge based off of any text conversations we have. I know there is always the possibility I could be adding emotion where there is none or assigning the wrong emotion to a text. So, I try to avoid that behavior and wait until I see someone in person. I also feel that some people hold much better conversations in person because a lot of their character and humor comes from things like expression, inflection and gestures.

Some of the best manuscript speeches I have seen were given without a teleprompter. Usually, the content of these speeches are important enough that I pay attention. However, it always helps when speakers take advantage of methods to add variety, like the ones discussed later in this chapter. Things like gestures, a well times paused, and tone/fluctuation in voice all help me stay engaged with the speaker. On the other hand, I can definitely see the advantage of using a teleprompter as it allows the speaker to make more consistent eye contact with the crowd.

It's kind of funny that one of the best ways to build public speaking skills is also the most anxiety inducing way. When I think about it in action it makes a lot of sense. Since impromptu speeches put a lot of pressure on just formulating and giving a good speech it forces the speaker to focus on things other than researching the material. A lot of impromptu speeches I see usually are about a topic someone is familiar with or is an informative speech with some sort of reference for them to use. So doing this spontaneously over and over can help build the skills that sometimes get skipped when preparing for a speech at home.

This reminds me of using emphasis or fluctuations in voice when speaking. Just like a well-placed change of tone gestures can help drive a point across or draw attention to the speaker. I would also assume using both of these together could be a really good way to reengage an audience, show enthusiasm, or make a statement/fact feel more impactful.

This is a very interesting point I haven't considered before. It reminds me of a previous chapter. Going over demographic, environment, and how important it is to consider the audience for a speech. Something like this could be researched before giving a speech abroad or to a foreign audience.

This is one of the main reasons I like to practice any speeches around others and not alone. I struggle with gauging my own speaking rate. Having life external feedback while practicing can help me catch inconsistencies in my speed. Sometimes I will even pre plan spots to take a breath and regather to reset myself before continuing. All this helps me break any bad habits before I memorize them during practice.

I watched code-switching a lot growing up in a bilingual household. Specifically, from my mother who not only code-switched at home but also at work. It was always kind of impressive to me how seamless a conversation could be even with a mix of two different languages involved. It wasn't until I was older and we spoke less Spanish in the house that she shared it isn't always easy. She explained to me that there are many different dialects of Spanish, some similar and some very different. Even though speaking with family is easy at work, it can start to get more complicated. Often making conversations longer as more descriptors are needed to make sure everyone is on the same page.

I've never thought through the step-by-step process of a conversation with a stranger or new acquaintance. A lot of people joke that all people talk about the weather or the day of the week, but I find its often true. At least for the first moments of brief interactions. It's how I always start my conversations with customers. It helps having a neutral ground to then share some little details like how our day is going, what kind of weather we enjoy, or if we have plans. This usually creates a good segway to start a deeper conversation. Until reading this paragraph, I never realized how scripted and even ritualized the process was. Having a basic but successful conversation following these rules usually leads to a good first impression on the customers and a more comfortable checkout process.

I didn't realize how much jargon is used and how confusing it can be even within one specialized field. This was something I had to learn to work around when I took my first computer science class. One of our lectures was on controlling our use of jargon as much as possible and identifying when it was appropriate to use. We were encouraged to try and explain things in layman terms regularly to avoid isolating others during work conversations. We practiced for future clients, partners, bosses, or anyone else we might need to discuss our work with. Doing this not only made explaining computer science to others easier but also deepened my understanding of the material so I could create metaphors or examples.

In the workplace is where I see sarcasm used specifically as a form of passive-aggression or a way to express the desire to be left alone. When that cue is ignored or if the topic is pressed further, the atmosphere gets award. That's when I notice sarcasm strays farther from humor and closer to aggression. I also see them use it as a form of friendly teasing between each other. However, once someone they don't get along with is involved, the same sarcasm is then used as a way to deter conversation.

This portion of the chapter reminds me a lot of different ways I communicate with my friends over text. Especially when it comes to our use of images and emojis. It seems like a simple silly thing, but we use emojis and images to help express the tone or emotion behind a text. Adding some sort of visual media along with text is the easiest way for us to give more detail without having a verbal conversation. This can get even more complicated as some emojis we have assigned meaning that has more to do with our personal relationship and less the emoji itself.

I'm never sure how to close out a speech without it feeling natural and not a dead end. I'm guilty of using some of the more artificial sounding conclusions. As mentioned earlier in the chapter conclusions don't get as much attention or as much practice. Which I think is where part of my issue stems from. Starting to treat the conclusion more as a thoughtful statement will hopefully help me get rid of abrupt endings.

Because first impressions develop so quickly and can have a significant impact on the rest of an interaction with someone, I would think it's even more important to have a good first impression on an audience you plan to be speaking to. Especially if it's a persuasive speech. Even if it's not, I wonder if it's better to always appear strictly professional or if it could be better to tailor the way you present yourself depending on the speech and audience. I could image speaking to a younger audience especially if it's about a sensitive topic, would probably go over better to have a more relaxed and relatable approach to a speech. Since this is mentioning first impressions something simple yet immediate could be altering what you wear depending on situation.

I absolutely love it when a well-done interview is included in any kind of presentation especially in documentaries. It makes me feel extra interested and engaged in the topic even if I don't know anything about it. I've seen interviews used to add a human touch, help explain a specialized topic or just to offer a new perspective. In each situation I know as an audience member I have enjoyed it when done well. Unfortunately, I have seen some not-so-great interviews as well. Which are always a little uncomfortable to watch and make me weary that the interviewer could be pushing for a specific narrative.

In high school it was stressed a lot to spot and avoid biases when chosing sources. I use to have a list of sources I knew to avoid and ones I could trust. But it felt that over times a lot of those sources started to develop biases. I always assumed it was bought out, or someone else was put in charge though I could never truly tell. But I could definitely see biases and new narratives being pushed. Sometimes it feels like struggle to find a truly neutral or unbiased source, especially if I'm looking for it in any form of general media.

I wasn't aware of refence librarians, but it sounds like a very insightful resource to have. Collecting information for any kind of research is often the most overwhelming part of the process for me. Knowing what and where to look is very helpful and I would probably save a lot of time and energy that I usually spend sifting through material. I'm a bit excited for the opportunity to work with a reference librarian and see what the process is like firsthand.

This section reminds me a lot of what I have seen some people do in arguments. They will acknowledge that the other person reality is different but then insist that it also means its incorrect. I feel like a large part of disagreements are spent on the back and forth of trying to get someone to not just understand but ultimately subscribe one sides version of reality.

I see this every time I get on any social media platform. Sometimes its subtle and sometimes advertisers are very upfront about who they are targeting and why. It seems pretty successful both ways. Though recently I have seen a lot more adds undisclosed and slipped into partner content. Content I know people are fallowing to either compare themselves or to keep up with their favorite online personality. These adds seem to be more effective. I can only assume it's because a lot of people don't even register them as adds since its presented more like a friend is sharing a link to something good, they just happened to find.

As someone who is biracial, I got to a point where I had to make a conscious decision to invest time and energy into learning both racial parts of my identity. In doing that I found a lot of similarities and a lot of differences. It's a rewarding process but also very confusing. Especially when communicating that to others rather visually or in conversation. There can be a lot of pressure to "chose", and not a whole lot of encouragement to create a new middle ground of both.

When it comes to praise and motivation, I believe that it's a touchy dynamic that can slide either way. I've seen it done where praise is only given when someone shows intrinsic motivation unprovoked. Or where intrinsic motivation is learned through watching and example rather than being coaxed into that behavior.

Knowing the difference between these different kinds of discrepancies could be useful not just for self-evaluation but for interacting with others as well. Especially when our idea of what someone ought to do isn't met or doesn't match with what they believe they ought to do. I could image this would create a lot of space for conflict and misunderstanding. Since one person could feel unfairly judged and the other could feel disappointed.

I wonder how quickly into a first impression someone assigns a stereotype onto another person. It also makes me wonder if people less exposed to a variety of cultures rely on stereotypes more heavily. I could definitely see someone stereotyping another person based off a first impression just because they only things about that stranger are features or traits that belong to a stereotype. Which reminds me a lot of the pattern searching and connections that was mentioned earlier in the chapter.

I first came across this topic when talking to a friend visiting from another country. She wanted to know why in America we say hello to everyone and make small talk. My first impulse was to tell her it's just what you're supposed to do, and not to be rude. While the concept of different countries having different norms seems obvious in the moment, I was a little surprised she didn't do the same at home. Phatic communion was something so simple yet such a regular practice for me it feels like second nature. So, I find it very interesting to learn about what is considered phatic communion in other countries.

Growing up with a culturally diverse group of friends and diverse home was a gift. It allowed me to learn how to speak to those that weren't the same as me. It also taught me that there is usually some way to relate or connect to someone despite differences. I believe it's an exposure that has made it easier for me to build connections when I am in a new place. However, I have also seen firsthand how it's not always easy. Hiccups always happen but can be sorted if one person is willing to listen and the other is willing to explain. Unfortunately, I have even been around people where it seems impossible for them to even be interested in communicating with someone that doesn't familiar or comfortable to them.

This year for the first time ever I started working with a larger team of people where we all must have a good line of communication to get our job done well. This was my first time in a job seeing how the lack of interpersonal skills could have a huge impact, not just on the two people taking but the entire team. It quickly became clear that whenever there was friction some part of communication wasn't being fulfilled. Rather differing opinions, negative talk around the work, or poor conflict resolution. In one way or another failing to meet eye to eye or failing to treat everyone with equal respect can quickly become a team rather than a two-person problem.

I never thought of self reflection or "talking to myself" as being a kind of communication that has anything to do with others. But as the text mentions in the paragraph above the way others communicate with us can then shape how we move on to the interact with the next person, It makes me wonder how many social behaviors people participate in that are an echo of a past experience they had with someone else. It makes the act of deliberate self-reflection just that much more important.

I never stopped to think what the first words might have actually been or sounded like. It reminds me a lot of talking with babies or toddlers. How sometimes they assign sounds or gestures to the things they ask for the most. I have even seen kids use a word that sound similar then pair it with hand gestures until someone understands. While it may be confusing to a stranger being around a baby or kid long enough you can start to see the connections and communicate with them easier.