On the Road of Understanding Others: Message Design Logic Theory
September 24, 2017
Reading
Add Comment
Updated September 24, 2017.
Hey, we’re back! Balancing studies with our blog has been a constant challenge. But fear not, we are doing our best to share these communication theories that will be able to help you maneuver your interactions with other people to achieve an effective conversation. We can still push for our advocacy. We also hope that you are still hanging on despite your struggles.
Hey, we’re back! Balancing studies with our blog has been a constant challenge. But fear not, we are doing our best to share these communication theories that will be able to help you maneuver your interactions with other people to achieve an effective conversation. We can still push for our advocacy. We also hope that you are still hanging on despite your struggles.
 |
| Translation: Bro, I can still do it. |
Speaking of communication where we learn from each
other, recently, it has been difficult for us to share our views because we
sometimes receive uninformed responses. These responses do not necessarily
determine the complexity of their thinking processes. They are “uninformed”
because others may not have fully understood
or misunderstood what was said.
Their interpretation of the message could have been affected by their personal
views of what communication is for. We sometimes forget to clarify the
intended meaning of the sender and we assume that what we understood is what
the speaker meant to say. And honestly, this is normal because we are all
different from each other. But this does not mean that we should not strive
for clarification of meanings.
Communication is not a competition, it is all about engaging an
interaction with each other. In the comics above, the little boy insists that
communication revolves around winning against the tiger, but the tiger thought
otherwise. Effective communication, hence, involves tailor fitting a message
and empathizing others for fruitful interaction to occur.
To explain the differences in understanding messages, we are going
to dig deeper with Message Design Logic (MDL) Theory.
According to O’Keefe, MDL holds that people have
different views about what are the goals for communicating. What a person
believes to be the aim of communication shapes how he/she interacts with others
and how he/she interprets other messages. This theory divides people into three
categorizations: Expressive MDL, Conventional MDL, and Rhetorical MDL.
3 TYPES OF MESSAGE DESIGN LOGIC
Expressive Message Design Logic: “I don’t want you to break up with me.” “It’s not fair,” “What would I do without you?” Expressive messages usually are based on actual thoughts and emotions, so there is no really filter. Basically, they are whatever thought that come to people’s mind immediately in a certain situation. People with this type of message design logic don’t care what other people would think of their messages. Below is an example of an expressive MDL.
Conventional Message Design Logic:
By abiding social rules, one gains social approval. An example of this MDL in
the daily life is when you are walking down the hall and bump in to someone and
you both say sorry. People with conventional design logic consider both their
knowledge and emotion when they give messages. They do not let their emotions
overpower them when giving messages but the messages they give do not necessarily
mean that it creates a new reality. Below is an example of a conventional MDL.
Rhetorical
(Strategic/Person-Centered) Message Design Logic: This MDL structures reality with others and meet multiple
goals. It’s thought out, logical, and tailored to that person specifically. People
with this MDL try to argue things so that it would result into something
positive. They try to negotiate in order to achieve a common good. Below is an
example of a rhetorical MDL.
Note: The comments used as examples are retrieved from the comment section of a political news article. Link to news article and comment section: https://www.facebook.com/inquirerdotnet/posts/10156194807594453?pnref=story
REAL WORLD APPLICATION
For today’s sharing time, our team analyzed the types
of MDL that arose and the themes of the messages of the 40 comments from an
online news article with politics as the topic. Below is a screenshot of the
specific news article in Facebook:
 |
Link to news article:
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/932816/palace-welcomes-publics-unwavering-support-for-drug-war?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#link_time=1506147506
|
According to our analysis of the MDLs, there are 30 expressive MDLs and 10 conventional MDLs. Based on these responses, we can conclude that most Filipinos use expressive MDL. Some use conventional MDL to be polite and to be able to deliver their message without being judged immediately.
 |
Link to comment section:
https://www.facebook.com/inquirerdotnet/posts/10156203899184453?pnref=story
|
The news article is all about an American survey regarding
the drug war which is happening throughout our country right now. Based on our
thematic analysis, it shows that majority of our countrymen support this drug
war despite of the killings that happened. However, majority of them plead that
the government should change the way it carries out capturing drug
personalities.
Interpretation
Based on the analysis, majority of the people from
the sample of comments support the ongoing war on illegal drugs but they
condemn the rising number of extrajudicial killings. Most of them are not
satisfied with the results of the war on illegal drugs and are pushing for due
process. These people exhibited Conventional Message Design Logic. They try to
send out a message that they are an ally but there are current events that they
disapprove of. Even if the others did not directly express their disapproval of
the current state of the war on illegal drugs, mocking the government and
insulting both Spokesperson Abella and Duterte supporters show their
dissatisfaction with the procedures of the war. On the other side of the issue,
the ones who support the war on illegal drugs with no complaints also included
people who labelled those who are against the procedures of the government as
criminals and “dilawan.” These supporters as a whole exhibited Expressive
Message Design Logic. Lastly, there are a few who are questioning the
credibility of the survey and the war on illegal drugs itself. These people are
expressing doubts abou the nature of the investigation on the 6.4 B worth of
shabu seized in the Bureau of Customs-led operations and the involvement of
Paulo Duterte in the operations. Despite their critical questions which could
have started a discussion, they did not exhibit the initiative to have a
consensus with others. They fell into the category of Expressive Message Design
Logic.
TAKING ACTION
We posted a comment with rhetorical MDL to see if a discussion will
start and how it will turn out. Based on their replies to our comment, there
was no ill intent and hatred. While expressing our point of view, we tried to
negotiate with others and constructed a more balanced view on the issue to
engage with both sides – those who are against the killings and those who have
no objections. They were encouraged to share their perspectives. It pays to consider the language used in conveying a message, clarifying perspectives, and trying to reach out to people in constructing the image of the situation. In this way, we learn from each other without receiving hate or pain of having a different opinion.
 |
Link to news article and comment section:
https://www.facebook.com/inquirerdotnet/posts/10156203899184453?pnref=story
|
In our view, all MDLs are equally important. We hope that you learned from today's post and become more conscious of what you communicate and what others want to communicate to you. It depends on the situation and the goals of the person. Nevertheless, we encourage using rhetorical MDL in national matters and social issues.
Edwards, Autumn, Lindsey Rose, Chad Edwards, and Linsay Singer. "An Investigation of the Relationships among Implicit Personal Theories of Communication, Social Support and Loneliness." Human Communication. A Publication of the Pacific and Asian Communication Association. 11 (4): 437–54. Accessed on September 24, 2017. http://www.uab.edu/Communicationstudies/humancommunication/11.4.4.pdf.
Written & Modified by: Ren Escosio, Celine Jimenez, Chelsea Serezo
0 comments:
Post a Comment