Experimental Report
Experimental Report
ABSTRACT
The main aim of this research is to determine the influence that visibility of communicators have in communication context. The research is exploring whether the presence of visible communicators can make a difference in communication, for instance, communication being more effective. The study focuses on verbal communication and non-verbal communication such as gestures facial expressions and the rest. There is consideration of the relationship between speed and accuracy and how they affect communication. The findings of this research also contributes greatly to the general familiarity of language use as well as give an overview of communicator visibility as an influential tool in communication. The study utilizes ANOVA in the model of data presentation selected and uses SPSS for data analysis. The study covers both the descriptive and inferential statistics in reporting the results. The interpretation of data covers use of tables and considering aspects such as significant levels and degrees of freedom. Correlation of the variables is also well thought-out. The research’s methodology includes experimental designs that are applicable depending on the variables. The presence of both dependent and independent variables are put into consideration. The findings of the study strongly reveals that visibility of communicators in a communication have a greater impact.
INTRODUCTION
The verbal communication usually incorporates usage of the auditory linguistic in order to enable people to interchange the information with the other people whom they interact with. It may include the use of words, sounds or even face to face talks. Verbal communication is always accompanied with non-verbal communication hence it’s rendered less explicit without non-verbal communication. The non-verbal communication on the other hand is a negative description which is associated with physical sources of information. It includes the use of visual signals for effective communication. These includes facial expression, gestures, and movements of body parts, timing and touch. The visibility of communicators usually use both verbal and non-verbal communication. The visible behaviours usually goes hand in hand with words in order to convey the exact and intended meaning.
The language use is structured in different patterns, for instance, formal ways of communication is used when addressing an important person, while when communicating to friends or family members, casual forms of language are employed. The language use normally strengthens the human understanding of communication as well as its primary function. This enables research work in identification of superiority of interpersonal and intergroup affiliation that individual have with one another in the communication context. Communication incorporates both listeners and addressers in which each plays a major role in conveying message. The major role of the speaker is to package the message intended for the audience in accordance to the communication agenda. The language use in this context will highly depend on the type of audience being addressed. The speaker have a task of particularizing and putting emphasis and even replace some words with gestures in a visible communicator context, to ensure the information is driven home. The voice intonation usually tells much of the scenario being addressed and facial expressions verifies the listeners’ understanding. The intonation is one of the verbal cues that usually explains the tone of the scenario. Mimics, hand gestures and facial expressions also represents non-verbal cues that are used in communication by communicators and listeners. The listeners concurrently, provides an audience to the speaker and also helps in applause, mirroring the speaker’s dramatic gestures, facial actions to mimic the event of the scenario that is being explained, for example, satisfaction by nodding, raising eyebrows to show fright or surprise and many others. The speakers and the listeners therefore have the same role in communication since it is a mutual and dependent interaction. They have to co-exist for the information to be conveyed, which in turn gives a communication. This is because communication is a two way traffic.
Visibility of the communicator plays a major role in communication. If the visibility is limited, then the message that was to be given may not be received as intended. For example, the role that visibility plays in giving direction is more convenient in face-face- interaction as compared to the intercom. This because non-verbal communication is highly needed for directing, which is impossible if the visibility is limited. The hand gestures, body motions and even smiles may help in revealing the acceptability or rather the excitement of the communicator and the addressee, which may make a different perception of the information. Giving direction by intercom may require extra words that may limit understanding and exactness of the place. This may create communication barrier, since people have varied perspectives and explanations to different issues. Using a map in giving directions via the phone may be more preferable as compared to speech. Some non-verbal expressions usually lack verbal explanation for the limited visibility communicators hence, it’s problematic to translate them into words for the understanding of people via the phone, for instance, McNeill (1985,1992), stated that ‘’Gestures are not just movements and can never be fully explained in purely kinesis term…They are symbols that exhibit meaning in their own right.’’
Several strategies are employed when giving directions depending on the addressee. For example, when addressing children, needs modulation of emotions as well as very short lectures which are easy to memorize. Others include using locator remarks such as, you have to walk 10 metres from the shady grove. Use of imperatives and directives. The use of directives locator remarks and imperatives in giving directions just depend on personal preference and they are all effective.
The speed is also a major factor that influence communication. The speed of communication can actually determine whether the audience will listen to the addresser or they will just hear. A certain pace of speaking can captivate the audience emotionally. The speed in communication depends with the audience’s culture, age, level of education, political persuasion and many others. The speed in communication sometimes depends largely on where someone grew, the family background, the company of that particular person and even the culture of one’s first language. The visible communicators usually spend much time due to low pace as time is spent on both verbal and gestures, which is opposed to the limited communication. All these dictates the credibility of communication to listeners, however, when the communicator is visible, the content of information conveyed to the audience is clearer and transparent than in the case of invisible communicator.
HYPOTHESES
Speed of Completion
H0;
The speed of map task completion solely depends on the visibility of the communicator. In the limited communication, filling the map task will be faster as compared to when the communicator is visible. This is due to full interaction of the communicator and the addressee, since questions may arise concerning map plotting, and finer details may also be given. The group that focus on accuracy may also go slower as compared to the one that focus on speed.
H1;
The speed of map task completion does not depend on the visibility of the communicator. In the limited communication, filling the map task will not be faster as compared to when the communicator is visible. The group that focus on accuracy will not be slower as compared to the one that focus on speed.
Amount of Communication Problems
H0;
The group that had visible communicators are likely to incur less problems due to vivid explanations given on plotting the map as compared to limited communications. Those who focus on accuracy will also have less problem in map task.
H1;
The group that had visible communicators will not incur less problems. Those who focus on accuracy will not have less problem in map task.
H0;
The group that put more emphasis on accuracy while plotting the map are likely to have less problem however they will need more time in completing the task, due to the vivid elaboration and much information to be translated into map plotting.
H1;
The group that put more emphasis on accuracy while plotting the map will not have less problem and they will not need more time in completing the task.
A Speed -accuracy Trade-off
H0;
There is a significant correlation between speed of plotting and accuracy levels in the map task. The pair that will hit high accuracy level will have a lower speed and vice-versa.
H1;
There is no significant correlation between speed of plotting and accuracy levels in the map task. The pair that will hit high accuracy level will not have a lower speed and vice-versa
METHODOLOGY
The between Design will be used as experimental design and the ANOVA in data analysis.
Between Design
Between-subject factors
| Value label | N | |
| Condition(Full or limited communication) 1
2
Good Accuracy(deviation<50) vs poor 0
communication(deviation >50) 1 |
Full Communication
Limited Communication
Poor Accuracy
Good Accuracy |
23
22
23
22 |
Descriptive Statistics
Dependent variable Time to complete in seconds
| Condition (Full or limited)
Good Accuracy (deviation< 50) vs poor accuracy (deviation>50) |
Mean | Std. Deviation | N |
| Full communication Poor Accuracy
Good Accuracy
Total |
198.44
223.57
213.74 |
47.117
64.393
58.435 |
9
14
23 |
| Limited communication Poor accuracy
Good accuracy
Total |
186.86
251.50
210.36 |
68.817
80.037
77.975 |
14
8
22 |
| Total Poor accuracy
Good accuracy
Total |
191.39
233.73
212.09 |
60.325
69.938
67.912 |
23
22
45 |
RESULTS
In the descriptive table above, the full communication condition of poor accuracy has a mean of 198.44 and standard deviation of 47.117 with sample size being 9. On the same state poor accuracy has a mean of 223.57 and a standard deviation of 64.393 with a sample size of 14. The other condition which is limited communication, poor accuracy has a mean of 186.86 and a standard deviation of 68.817 with a sample size of 14 while good accuracy has a mean of 251.50 and a standard deviation of 80.037 with a sample size of 8.
In general, the full communication condition which is mostly faced to face is better than the limited communication condition since the total mean of the entire communication which I 213.74 is higher than the overall mean of the limited communication which is 210.36.
| Source | Type 3 sum of squares | Df | Mean Square | F | Sig |
| Corrected model
Group (Communication) Accuracy group Group* Accuracy group Error Total Correlated Total |
24860.28
1953308.01 704.64 21264.64 4120.41 178071.37 2227108.02 202931.64 |
3
1 1 1 1 41 45 44 |
8286.76
19533308.01 704.64 21264.64 4120.41 4343.20 |
1.908
449.74 0.162 4.896 0.949 |
0.143
0.000 0.689 0.033 0.336 |
AR squared=123 (adjusted R squared .058)
In the above ANOVA table, our rows of interest are the “group (communication),” “accuracy group” and “group*accuracy.” These rows inform us whether our independent variables (“group (communication)” and “accuracy”) have a statistically significant effect on the dependent variable “speed.”
Using the “group*accuracy,” we get that there is no statistical significance interaction between group and accuracy since (F (1, 45) =0.949, p=0.336). Also results based on “communication” and “accuracy” we find that there is no statistically significant difference in mean interest in communication since from the ANOVA table (F (1,45)=0.162, p=0.68) but there is a statistically significant difference between the accuracy group since (F(1,44)=4.89),p=0.033)
Estimated Marginal Mean
|
Condition(full/limited) accuracy(deviation<50) vs poor accuracy(deviation>50) |
mean |
Std error
|
95% confidence interval |
|
| Lower bound | Upper bound | |||
| Full communication good accuracy
– Poor accuracy |
4.00
2.09 |
0.43
0.32
|
3.13
2.27
|
4.87
3.59 |
| Limited communication good accuracy
– Poor accuracy |
4.43
3.88 |
0.33
0.43 |
3.77
3.00 |
5.09
4.75 |
Using Estimated Marginal Mean, the 95% confidence interval for the full communication, good accuracy is (3.13, 4.87) while for poor accuracy is (2.27, 3.59). In the limited contact, the 95% confidence interval for good accuracy is (3.77, 5.09) while for poor accuracy is (3, 4.75)
Between Design
Between-subject factors
| Value label | N | |
| Condition(Full or limited communication) 1
2
Good Accuracy(deviation<50) vs poor 0
communication(deviation >50) 1 |
Full Communication
Limited Communication
Poor Accuracy
Good Accuracy |
22
22
22
22 |
The dependent variable of problem or confusion
| Condition (Full or limited)
Good Accuracy (deviation< 50) vs poor accuracy (deviation>50) |
Mean | Std. Deviation | N |
| Full communication Poor Accuracy
Good Accuracy
Total |
4.00
2.93
3.32 |
1.512
1.207
1.393 |
8
14
22 |
| Limited communication Poor accuracy
Good accuracy
Total |
4.43
3.88
4.23 |
1.158
0.991
1.110 |
14
8
22 |
| Total Poor accuracy
Good accuracy
Total |
4.27
3.27
3.77 |
1.279
1.202
1.327 |
22
22
44 |
RESULTS
There was the same number of people who took part in full communication and limited communication. Among the poor accuracy people, there were more people in the limited communication group more than the entire communication.
Among the limited communication people, the average difference between the poor and the excellent accuracy is only 0.55 number of problems while in full communication the average difference between the poor and good accuracy is more than one number of questions.
Within the full communication and limited communication group, the difference in standard deviation is higher in full disclosure as compared to the limited discussion.
| Source | Type 3 sum of squares | Df | Mean Square | F | Sig |
| Corrected model
Group (Communication) Accuracy group Group* Accuracy group Error Total Correlated Total |
16.495
590.592 4.813 6.722 0.683 59.232 702.000 75.727 |
3
1 1 1 1 40 44 43 |
5.498
590.592 4.813 6.722 0.683 1.481 |
3.713
398.832 3.250 4.539 0.461 |
0.019
0.000 0.079 0.039 0.501 |
AR squared= .218 (adjusted R squared .259)
In the above ANOVA table, our rows of interest are the “group (communication),” “accuracy group” and “group*accuracy.” These rows inform us whether our independent variables (“group (communication)” and “accuracy”) have a statistically significant effect on the dependent variable “number of problems.”
Using the “group*accuracy,” we get that there is no statistical significance interaction between group and accuracy since (F (1, 43) =0.461, p=0.501). Also results based on “communication” and “accuracy” we find that there is a statistically significant difference in mean interest in “communication” since from the ANOVA table (F(1,40)=3.250, p=0.079) and also there is a statistically significant difference between the accuracy group since (F(1,44)=4.539),p=0.039)
Speed Accuracy Trade-Off
Correlation
Descriptive statistics
| Mean | Std. deviation | N | |
| Time to complete in seconds
Deviation score from the route |
212.91
49.71 |
70.35
18.34 |
47
47 |
Correlation
| Time to complete in seconds | Deviation score from the route | |
| Time to finish in seconds Pearson’s correlation
Sig(1- tailed) N
|
1
47 |
-.248
.046 47 |
| The deviation score from route Pearson’s correlation
Sig(1- tailed) N
|
-.248
.046 47 |
1
47 |
Using correlation coefficient, since the Pearson’s correlation value is R(47)=-0.248, p=0.046 which is a negative correlation thus we can conclude that when time to complete in seconds increases the deviation score from the route decreases. Since our sig (1-tailed) is 0.046, we can conclude that there is a statistically significant correlation between time to complete in seconds and deviation score from the route.
DISCUSSION
In the ANOVA table, interest focus on communication and accuracy variables whereby it was tested whether the independent variables; communication and accuracy had an influence the speed, which is a dependent variable. The results show that there is no statistically significant interaction between the group and skill. The results, however, showed that there is a substantial difference in accuracy. A persons’ speed, therefore, influences accuracy in plotting the maps yet in real communication it does not play any role in verbal or non-verbal communication.
The results above have supported the hypothesis in that the full communication which is the visible communicator form of communication is more beneficial to the listeners as compared to the limited interaction. In the time speed tradeoff correlation, the perfect negative correlation is experienced which shows that when speed increases, the accuracy deviates and when skill increases the rate slows down. A significant relationship is also established amongst the independent variables; speed and accuracy. Some of the variables in the experiment could also influence the speed of communication, for instance, the pair that have interacted before are usually well acquainted with each other hence inaccuracy in the map task. Some factors are insignificant to the map task, yet they also affect the results obtained. These factors include; gender of the map plotters and age. This is because communication is highly influenced by age, since the speed may vary when conveying a message to different age groups. Although the focus of the study was not directed towards age and gender, the results of the experiment may have been influenced by these variables hence biasness. These are uncontrolled variables accordingly could not be detected and eliminated in the analysis.
Even though the visible communicator context has been demonstrated to be of advantage over the limited communication, the use of map task in the experiment could not accurately show the significant power since the map task is not so precise in testing the limits of the communication context.
REFERENCES
http://moodle1819.uws.ac.uk/pluginfile.php/445937/mod_resource/content/2/1218communicate_.pdf
http://web.uvi.ca/psyc/bavelas/2000visibR.pdf
http://web.uvic.ca/psyc/bavelas/2008Gesture_phone.pdf
Do you need high quality Custom Essay Writing Services?
