Week 15, Question 1

1). Have you made friendships that exist exclusively in cyberspace? If so, how are they different from f2f relationships? If you have not formed cyber relationships, why not?

I have never made a friendship that was exclusively in cyberspace. I remember the first time I started using instant messaging was in seventh grade and I only used it to talk to friends I made to school. For me, I always initiate a friendship first through face to face encounters. From that point, I maintain that friendship through cyberspace.

I think that relationships that are initiated through cyberspace differ to those that develop face to face in several ways. People who communicate through computer mediated technology are able to potray themselves in different ways. One who is shy in person can be very outgoing on the internet. Some may see this as decieving, but I personally feel that are connecting with someone in a different way.

I actually did a paper once on the effects of technology on romantic relationships. I found a lot of articles on self-disclosure and intimacy. A study showed that relationships developed online included people more willing to share intimate disclosure on a quicker basis that face to face communication.

I can see this happening. For me, I can articulate better when I write and if you think about it, when you send someone a message through email, you don't get their feedback right away. You can think about a very good response if you are fighting for example. I think this is the say for text messaging as well.

Other than that, face to face communication is different from cyberspace communication because nonverbal cues are not present. Sarcasm and other types of humor are almost undetectable.

1). How are organizations tied to the environment? What is the relationship between the school you attend and the city or town in which it is situated? What, if any, ethical obligations does an organization like a college or university have to the local community?

Organizations are tied to the environment in many ways. Our text states that organizations depend on the environment for resources and energy. For example, SJSU depends on San Jose's community. It creates pressures, as the text says and opportunities. An example of a pressure is transportation and housing needs. San Jose has to have places for SJSU students to live and there are many apartments around the school available. Opportunites available from SJSU are jobs on campus as well as maintaining the upkeep of all the buildings.

A college has ethical obligations to the local community because when a college is placed and expands, so does it's student body. The number of college students that make up the community is larger and people who don't attend the university has to live among college students.

Week 14, Question 2

2). Review the etiquette rules suggested in the text. Respond to each one. Have you ever been bothered by cell phone, answering machines, or beepers? What do you feel about call waiting? Is it rude to put people on hold to take another call?



First off, I like this set of etiquette rules and I think that it should be available or engrained into everyones mind. Some people don't know what is appropriate. For cell phones, I agree with the text. I think that carrying a conversation loudly in the mentioned places, restaurants, movie theatres, and church is rude. I hate when people are on their phones during a transaction when shoppin because it really slows down the service. Also, when your with a friend and he/she answer his/her phone and is on the phone for a long time its rude.

For answering machines, I think it's irritating when people have short answering machines. I work at a doctors office so I constantly have to leave messages regarding appointments. I have to talk super fast and if I get cut off I have to call back. It takes too much work and I always feel like I'm bothering the person.

Call waiting isn't rude to me but it depends how long I've been put on hold and who I am talking to. Usually if it's a long time I'll just hang up and wait for them to call me back because they probably got an important call and I accept it with no hard feelings.

Conference calls I make are only with my siblings. I agree with the rules and I'll make sure that if I'm in a conference call, I do state my name.

The etiquette for ringtones are understandable but I don't really find myself in situations where I can have a funny ringtone. You always have the option of putting your phone on vibrate.

The important etiquette is the time in communication. You have to make sure that you are reaching the other person at an appropriate time. For example, we make sure to call people after 6pm because that's when people are most likely home. Otherwise, we would have to keep leaving messages when actually reaching the person is better.

Week 14 Question 1

The part of Chapter 8 that I found interesting was the way information can flow in an organization. For instance, information can flow in a downward flow where someone near the top of the organization sends a message to someone near the bottom. There are also upward flows and horizontal flows. I think that defining these types of information flows as upward/downward and horizontal is interesting because there are many situations in an organization that occurs in these different flows. I think sometimes when something that needs to a downward flow, doesn’t always end up that way and vice versa. A subordinate who needs to send a message upward needs to go through a hierarchal system and if it is not met, sometimes the middle person may be upset.
For example, I work at a doctor office and he has a manager that supervises his staff. If we have a problem we should go to our manager and not directly to the doctor. Otherwise, he takes offense to how our manager supervises.

Week 13, Question 3

3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading, that we have no already discussed, that you found useful or interesting, and discuss it.

In communication studies, I love topics on self-disclosure. For me, sharing things about yourself is an essential part to a good relationship. With self disclosure, we are able to gain insight into what a person may be thinking that we cannot gather by just looking at them.

In the text, Trenholm describes there are actually rules to disclosure and I thoroughly enjoy them. The first states that self-disclosure is not appropriate in all situations. This is true because sharing personal feelings is not something that can be discussed in perhaps a work environment.

Another thing is to consider the effect of your disclosure on others. In this case, views on certain things can be detrimental to a relationship. For instance, views on gay marriage are two-sider. Save yourself the fight when talking to someone who is gay or for it. If you don't agree with it, it's better to just keep quiet especially if you don't care too much about the topic or you dont have a dog in the fight.

Week 13, Question 2

1). Which pattern (rigid complementarity, competitive symmetry, or submissive symmetry) do you think would be the most difficult to change? Why? Which would be the most damaging to a relationship? Which would be the most potentially damaging to the self-esteem of the individuals involved?

Among the given patterns, the one I find most difficult to change is the rigid complemtarity. I believe that partners in this pattern fall into submissive/superior roles. If they begin this way, it's harder for them to break out of this. One partner will always feel dominated over the other and sometimes, they may even be oblivious to it. I think that when one is oblivious, perhaps he/she doesn't feel that there is anything wrong to begin with so this pattern might not be the most damaging. I also feel that relationships vary and maybe having a "rigid" pattern is what is viewed by our society but not others.

The patter that I feel is most damaging to the self esteem of individuals involed is the submissive semmetry. I think that when partners lose desire to make decisions, he or she has reached a stage where they have given up their self worth. Allowing the other individual to take control and being apathetic about it very damaging.

Competitive symmetry is damaging to the relationship because it causes individuals to compete. I personally feel that this is damaging because if one partner always wins, the other one almost feels as though they are less than the other. The one who wins all the time may also develop some kind of ego that causes him/her to think that they are better than their partner.

Week 13, Question 1

2). Think about the filters you use to eliminate people from consideration as potential romantic partners. What characteristics or behaviors lead you to judge others as unattractive? Does Duck's theory make sense to you? Have you ever eliminated someone by using a sociological or pre-interaction cue only to reconsider them based on interaction and cognitive cues?

There are many filters that I use to eliminate people from consideration as a potential partner. The major characteristic that my romantic partner has to possess is confidence. Confidence affects everything in a person including physical attractiveness because it affects their behaviors as well. For example, a person who is too clingy and seems too sensitive at early stages of a relationship is very unattractive.
Duck’s theory makes sense to me. The part of the theory I liked the most was the final stage, grave-dressing phase. It states that each party determines the meaning of their time together. They decide what to take away from their relationship. This is the phase that takes the longest to me. Relational dissolution or break-ups are messy and sometimes the lesson you get is blurred. Like the text states, its an important phase because it helps you in your next relationship.
I have definitely eliminated someone through preinteraction cues which include nonverbal impressions. We have learned that nonverbal cues include physical beauty or dress. I need to be attracted to someone to consider them as a potential romantic partner. I do think that attraction can grow through a relationship.

Week 11, Question 3

The concept in this chapter that I found most interesting was the portion in text that Trenholm discusses language style. I completely love this topic because I am minoring in speech pathology and the particular part of the text that I enjoyed is that many people believe that when you translate a phrase in English to a different language, it means the same thing. However, given the cultural background, direct translation of the terms doesn’t mean the same thing. Language is more than just a string of words, but culture adds to the language in every culture. This is why barriers in language are more complex and difficult than a person thinks.

Week 11, Question 2

Among the three premises provided by Trenholm, rationality, perfectibility, and mutability, I agree with the first and last. I feel that rationality seems very understandable because it states that people are capable of discovering truth through logical analysis. The average person has the tools to make the right decisions and there are several institutions in tact that allow for this view such as jurys and enterprise.

The second premise, perfectibility is a bit hard for me to grasp because I feel that it should be the other way around. We are born innocent rather than sinned.

The last one, is one that I feel like i can relate to the most. I believe that people are shaped by enviornmental factors and in order to better themsleves, they need to look within their psychological and physical self.

Week 11, Question 1

According to anthropologist Ruth Benedict, we are “creatures of our culture” and I cannot agree more. Culture is more than the color of our skin, race, and our ethnic back ground; it is a part of our identity. Our cultural identity deals with our gender, sexual orientation, age, etc. When we add all these things together, we get one whole person that is able to take characteristics, beliefs, and traits from each aspect we identify with.

For example, I am a woman so the cultural identity I identify with is from what society feels is expected from a woman. They are to be care takers, bear children and etc. For a woman, obtaining a high position is more difficult than a man and when and if she is able to reach this level of success, there is a negative attachment that comes along with it. This is an example of an impossibility that comes from gender identity.

Also, women have habits that identify only with their group. Women talk, act, dress as society sees fit. This may change over time, but we are creatures of our culture.

The only way I see that we could breakthrough from limitations from our culture is by creating equality. Perhaps this is easier said than done however, if there was no defining characteristic that made an individual superior or inferior over the other, then limitations may not be such a big problem.