VIII. Improving Perceptions

1. Offering Empathy

Edward Bradford Titchener: Empathy is the ability to feel into other people’s thoughts and emotions. Empathy is subdivided into two separate processes: perspective-taking (seeing someone’s perspective without understanding their emotions) and empathic concern (becoming aware of feelings, feeling compassionate).

To offer empathy: (a) show genuine interest in the other person’s viewpoint; (b) disclose what you feel about their feelings; (c) share your own emotions about the situations; (d) avoid “I know how it feels.”

2. Checking Perceptions Check your punctuation: find who/what started or ended some event. Check your knowledge: learn more about the situation. Check your attributions: study various perspectives on the issue; Check your perceptual influences: analyze cultural, gender and personality stereotypes that you hold; Check your impressions: study your Gestalts, corresponding biases, and new information.

3. Practicing Responsible Perceptions: (a) what do you select as focus of your attention? (b) what attributions do you make? (c) Do you cling to wrong impressions? (d) Do you check your perceptions? (e) Do you correct your impressions? (f) Do you exercise empathy? (g) Do you honor their perceptions? (h) Do you emotionally reach out? (i) Do you communicate perspective-taking and empathic concern?

Practice

I. Opening Story: Starting the Discussion

A. Michael’s Instructions: While not obligatory for reading, the opening story in each chapter sets the mood for the rest of the reading. Stephen chooses stories that relate to several concepts in the chapter and talks about these concepts in general terms.

B. Read the opening story and identify three concepts from the chapter that characterize the communication process in the situation.

C. Then: (a) think of similar examples in your life, (b) remember the actions that the hero of the story, you, and other people around you took when they faced the situation; (c) think of the ways these actions influenced everyone involved; (d) suggest the ways which your naïve knowledge of communication offered you as remedies for whatever did not work in communication in that particular instance; (e) discuss how your scientific knowledge of communication changes your perception, and list three things that you would do now if you faced a similar situation in the future

D. An essay on the opening story can be used as an extra credit opportunity. If you would like to get more points, write a six-paragraph essay answering the questions above in good paragraphs (1 opening sentence, 2-3 main idea sentences, 1 summary and transition sentence). Make note that although this assignment is long and fairly difficult, you will be given only 10 points for it. The reason for it is that the extra credit points must be extra hard to get.

BRUTAL SPORTS BATTLE

In November 1951, the Dartmouth College football team traveled to Princeton University to play the final game of the season. For Princeton, the contest had special significance: it was the farewell performance of their All-American quarterback, Heisman Trophy winner Dick Kazmaier. Princeton had an 18–1 record at home during Kazmaier’s tenure, and they walked onto their turf that day undefeated for the season.

From the opening kickoff, it was a brutal affair. Kazmaier suffered a late hit in the second quarter that broke his nose, caused a concussion, and forced him from the field. In retaliation, Princeton defenders knocked two consecutive Dartmouth quarterbacks out of the game, one of them with a broken leg. Several fights erupted, and referees’ flags filled the afternoon air, most of them signaling “roughing.” Although Princeton prevailed, both sides left the stadium bitter and resentful about the on-field violence.

In the days that followed, perceptions of the game diverged wildly, depending on scholastic allegiance. Princeton supporters denounced Dartmouth’s “dirty play,” and the Daily Princetonian decried Dartmouth for “deliberately attempting to cripple Kazmaier.” The Dartmouth student paper countered, accusing Princeton’s coach of urging his players to “get” the Dartmouth quarterbacks.

Perceptual differences weren’t limited to players and attendees. A Dartmouth alumnus in the Midwest heard reports of his team’s “disgusting” play and requested a copy of the game film. After viewing it, he sent a telegram to the university: “Viewing of the film indicates considerable cutting of important parts. Please airmail the missing excerpts.” Why did he believe that the film had been altered? Because when he watched it, he didn’t perceive any cheap shots by his team. So he presumed that they were edited out.

Intrigued by the perceptual gulf between Princeton and Dartmouth devotees, two psychologists—Albert Hastorf from Dartmouth and Hadley Cantril from Princeton— teamed up to study reactions to the game.

What they found was striking. After viewing the game film, students from both schools were asked, “Who instigated the rough play?” Princeton students overwhelmingly blamed Dartmouth, while Dartmouth students attributed the initiation of violence to both sides. When questioned about whether Dartmouth had intentionally injured Kazmaier, Princeton students said yes; Dartmouth students said no. And when asked about penalties, Dartmouth students perceived both teams as committing the same number. Princeton students said Dartmouth committed twice as many as Princeton. Though the two groups saw the same film, they perceived two very different games.

Although Hastorf and Cantril examined rival perceptions of a historic college football game, their results tell us much about the challenges we face in responsibly perceiving other people. Each of us perceives the “games,” “cheap shots,” and “fights” that fill our lives in ways skewed to match our own beliefs and desires. All too often we fail to consider that others feel just as strongly about the “truth” of their viewpoints as we do about ours. Every time we perceive our own behavior as beyond reproach and others’ as deficient, see others as exclusively to blame for conflicts, or neglect to consider alternative perspectives and feelings, we are exactly like the Dartmouth and Princeton fans who only could perceive the transgressions of the other team.

But successful communication and healthy interpersonal relationships are not built upon belief in perceptual infallibility. Instead, they are founded upon recognition of our perceptual limitations, constant striving to correct perceptual errors, and sincere effort invested in considering others’ viewpoints.