Summary - Psychology of
Business Communication
The influence of biases on communication
Pronin, E., Puccio, C., & Ross, L. (2002). Understanding Misunderstanding: Social
Psychological Perspectives. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and
biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. (pp. 636 - 665): Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808098.038 (30 pages)
Sender: egocentrism
- Knowledge, expectations, and one’s own perspective influence the way we perceive
and interpret information.
Failures: Creates “Naïve Realism” You will see the world as I see it.
Sender: subtle biases
- People adapt how they convey messages based on many (often unconscious) factors
- People perceive messages differently based on many (often unconscious) factor
- E.g. Kingsbury (1968): giving directions
o "Can you tell me how to get to Jordan-Marsh?“ local dialect.
o "Can you tell me how to get to Jordan-Marsh?“ local dialect + "I'm from out of
town,“
o "Can you tell me how to get to Jordan-Marsh?“exotic dialect.
Receiver: construal
Snyder et al, 1977; telephone experiment:
- 51 males and 51 females participated in a ‘getting-acquainted study’
- Half of the males received a picture of an attractive woman and the other half a
picture of a rather unattractive women
- Do men endorse a beauty stereotype?
- How do the women rate the conversation
- How do external judges rate the conversation?
Results
- Men thought the more attractive woman would be more sociable, poised, and
humorous
- Objective judges rated the ‘attractive’ women as more sociable, poised, and
humorous
- According to the judges women acted warmer, nicer and with more self-confidence if
the man thought they were attractive.
- Men who talked to ‘attractive’ women were rated to be more sociable, outgoing, and
humorous and more confident and animated in the conversation
Perceptions can even be re-construed afterwards
Loftus & Palmer, 1974
- Eye-witness reports of car-crash video
- Questions were manipulated
o About how fast were the cars going when they smashed each other?
, o About how fast were the cars going when they collided each other?
o About how fast were the cars going when they bumped each other?
o About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?
o About how fast were the cars going when they contacted each other?
Miscommunication
Often due to egocentrism and a bias blindspot.
When is it more likely that it occurs?
- Social distance
- CMC
Consequences
- Negotiation
- Health communication
- Leadership
The consequences
On feeling understood and feeling well (Lun et al. 2008)
- Two-week daily diary study on the relationship between feeling understood and life
satisfaction and physical symptoms
- On days where people feel more understood, they report more life satisfaction and
fewer physical symptoms
- Feeling more understood on a given day is related to fewer physical symptoms the
next day.
The Impact of Misunderstanding on Psychological and Physiological Health (Crockett &
Pollmann, 2022)
- People who had a “misunderstanding” interaction reported lower interaction
satisfaction, motivation, and poorer performance
- Feeling misunderstood predicted higher perceived stress, lower life satisfaction and
motivation as well as less healthy cortisol slopes.
Solutions?
- Perspective taking
o That’s Not What I Meant (Edwards et al. 2017)
o experiences with misunderstanding in cmc and ftf and its relationship with
perspective-taking
o 98 students reported on a recent misunderstanding (either via CMC or FtF)
o 69% about misinterpretation of tone, 23% about humor
o FtF misunderstandings are more serious than CMC misunderstandings
o Perspective-taking is negatively correlated with the frequency of
misunderstandings (self-report)
o CMC misunderstandings that need to be resolved are mostly resolved FtF or
with a phone call
- Empathy
- Perspective getting
o Perspective taking condition. Participants read, “We would like for you to take
the perspective of your partner. Please imagine a typical day in the life of your
partner as if you were him/her, looking at the world through his/her eyes and
, walking through the world in his/her shoes. You should start from the
beginning of your partner’s day to the end, focusing on his/her thoughts and
feelings. Please take approximately five minutes to write about a day in the
life of your partner. Once you have done that, we would like for you to use this
information to rate the extent to which your partner would agree or disagree
with the following statements.
o Perspective getting the condition. Participants read, “Before you rate the
extent to which your partner would agree or disagree with the following
statements, we would like for you to ask your partner to tell you about their
opinions. We will give you a list of statements. Please take approximately five
minutes to ask your partner about the extent to which they agree or disagree
with each of the statements on the list, trying to get a sense of the range of
your partner’s opinions. ...
o
Psychological biases
- Confirmation bias: E.g. Looking up information with a certain idea in mind
- Dissonance reduction: I got a 6 on a test → “But it was a really hard test”
- Fundamental attribution error: I got a 6 on a test → “But it was a really hard test” //
Someone else got a 6 on a test → “They probably didn’t study hard enough” //
External versus internal attribution or situational versus dispositional
- Reactance: What do you think about the proposal to offer more vegetarian options in
the Mensa and fewer meat options?
- Prospect theory: Losses loom larger than gains → People do not like to deviate from
the status quo or the default. People do not like risking to lose a small gain for a
chance to win a large gain. “One bird in the hand is worth two in the bush”
- Better-than-average effect: Please rate yourself in comparison to the average
member of the community on each of the following characteristics (strong effect
criminals)
- False consensus effect: Others are like me
The effects of miscommunication
Who of you ever thought things like:
- If you are depressed, just go out and do something
- If you are overweight, just eat less
- If you are in a bad relationship, just break up
Or observe fans from two soccer teams watch a game together
The same situation can look very different from two different viewpoints
Business Communication
The influence of biases on communication
Pronin, E., Puccio, C., & Ross, L. (2002). Understanding Misunderstanding: Social
Psychological Perspectives. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and
biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. (pp. 636 - 665): Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808098.038 (30 pages)
Sender: egocentrism
- Knowledge, expectations, and one’s own perspective influence the way we perceive
and interpret information.
Failures: Creates “Naïve Realism” You will see the world as I see it.
Sender: subtle biases
- People adapt how they convey messages based on many (often unconscious) factors
- People perceive messages differently based on many (often unconscious) factor
- E.g. Kingsbury (1968): giving directions
o "Can you tell me how to get to Jordan-Marsh?“ local dialect.
o "Can you tell me how to get to Jordan-Marsh?“ local dialect + "I'm from out of
town,“
o "Can you tell me how to get to Jordan-Marsh?“exotic dialect.
Receiver: construal
Snyder et al, 1977; telephone experiment:
- 51 males and 51 females participated in a ‘getting-acquainted study’
- Half of the males received a picture of an attractive woman and the other half a
picture of a rather unattractive women
- Do men endorse a beauty stereotype?
- How do the women rate the conversation
- How do external judges rate the conversation?
Results
- Men thought the more attractive woman would be more sociable, poised, and
humorous
- Objective judges rated the ‘attractive’ women as more sociable, poised, and
humorous
- According to the judges women acted warmer, nicer and with more self-confidence if
the man thought they were attractive.
- Men who talked to ‘attractive’ women were rated to be more sociable, outgoing, and
humorous and more confident and animated in the conversation
Perceptions can even be re-construed afterwards
Loftus & Palmer, 1974
- Eye-witness reports of car-crash video
- Questions were manipulated
o About how fast were the cars going when they smashed each other?
, o About how fast were the cars going when they collided each other?
o About how fast were the cars going when they bumped each other?
o About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?
o About how fast were the cars going when they contacted each other?
Miscommunication
Often due to egocentrism and a bias blindspot.
When is it more likely that it occurs?
- Social distance
- CMC
Consequences
- Negotiation
- Health communication
- Leadership
The consequences
On feeling understood and feeling well (Lun et al. 2008)
- Two-week daily diary study on the relationship between feeling understood and life
satisfaction and physical symptoms
- On days where people feel more understood, they report more life satisfaction and
fewer physical symptoms
- Feeling more understood on a given day is related to fewer physical symptoms the
next day.
The Impact of Misunderstanding on Psychological and Physiological Health (Crockett &
Pollmann, 2022)
- People who had a “misunderstanding” interaction reported lower interaction
satisfaction, motivation, and poorer performance
- Feeling misunderstood predicted higher perceived stress, lower life satisfaction and
motivation as well as less healthy cortisol slopes.
Solutions?
- Perspective taking
o That’s Not What I Meant (Edwards et al. 2017)
o experiences with misunderstanding in cmc and ftf and its relationship with
perspective-taking
o 98 students reported on a recent misunderstanding (either via CMC or FtF)
o 69% about misinterpretation of tone, 23% about humor
o FtF misunderstandings are more serious than CMC misunderstandings
o Perspective-taking is negatively correlated with the frequency of
misunderstandings (self-report)
o CMC misunderstandings that need to be resolved are mostly resolved FtF or
with a phone call
- Empathy
- Perspective getting
o Perspective taking condition. Participants read, “We would like for you to take
the perspective of your partner. Please imagine a typical day in the life of your
partner as if you were him/her, looking at the world through his/her eyes and
, walking through the world in his/her shoes. You should start from the
beginning of your partner’s day to the end, focusing on his/her thoughts and
feelings. Please take approximately five minutes to write about a day in the
life of your partner. Once you have done that, we would like for you to use this
information to rate the extent to which your partner would agree or disagree
with the following statements.
o Perspective getting the condition. Participants read, “Before you rate the
extent to which your partner would agree or disagree with the following
statements, we would like for you to ask your partner to tell you about their
opinions. We will give you a list of statements. Please take approximately five
minutes to ask your partner about the extent to which they agree or disagree
with each of the statements on the list, trying to get a sense of the range of
your partner’s opinions. ...
o
Psychological biases
- Confirmation bias: E.g. Looking up information with a certain idea in mind
- Dissonance reduction: I got a 6 on a test → “But it was a really hard test”
- Fundamental attribution error: I got a 6 on a test → “But it was a really hard test” //
Someone else got a 6 on a test → “They probably didn’t study hard enough” //
External versus internal attribution or situational versus dispositional
- Reactance: What do you think about the proposal to offer more vegetarian options in
the Mensa and fewer meat options?
- Prospect theory: Losses loom larger than gains → People do not like to deviate from
the status quo or the default. People do not like risking to lose a small gain for a
chance to win a large gain. “One bird in the hand is worth two in the bush”
- Better-than-average effect: Please rate yourself in comparison to the average
member of the community on each of the following characteristics (strong effect
criminals)
- False consensus effect: Others are like me
The effects of miscommunication
Who of you ever thought things like:
- If you are depressed, just go out and do something
- If you are overweight, just eat less
- If you are in a bad relationship, just break up
Or observe fans from two soccer teams watch a game together
The same situation can look very different from two different viewpoints
