Essay and referencing

The three communication theories I have apply to provide the most insight into understanding the dynamics of the observed discourse between two people are the transmission stupefy (Shannon & weaver 1949), Fullers ecological model (Fouler 2004), and an expand model of communication (Munson 2012). In this digestvass I have go ford a confabulation I had listened to which was between my friend (from present on will be named George) and his friend (from here on will be named crossbreed). Problems that arose during the colloquy will be explained as well as how George and observe overcame them.From there the essay will contrast and contrast the three communication theories and decide which of these best simplify the conversation. Complexities of the conversation I was asked by George to take him down to the pub to meet up with take down for a couple of games of pool, whilst chatting over a cold beer. George is close to completely illiterate due to him leaving school at the m ount up of 12, moving to the Northern territory and working on a kine farm up until the age of 19, where he whence moved support to Lissome.Mark is completely deaf and has next to no ability to lip larn (this I had not known until I met him). Both George and Mark do not know sign quarrel of any kind. George and has learnt to engross abbreviations in text subject matters, which is about the extent of his written language capabilities. Problems that arose George had been avoiding this meeting because he finds the conversations very difficult, and this usually leads to het up discussions, especially when the conversations centered on Marks granddaughter (which George has of all time had affectionate feelings for but never acted upon).Both George and Mark have their own perceptions on what is going on in her life, which has, and still causes either Mark or George to have expectations from the other, and creates discriminating perceptions (Withes 2009). This introduces psycholog ical noise and detracts from the meanings of some of the pass ons in the conversation. A one way lack of tone and inflection in the verbalise to communicate feelings and emotions more than clearly can provide misunderstanding in the meaning of some messages. Language barrier from non-literate to literate people poses the sterling(prenominal) barrier to messages both to and from each other.Feedback is restricted to kinesics emblems, regulators, and illustrators (De Vito 2001). George aged 2 and Mark aged 64 both have different educational backgrounds in which written communication differs. Text messaging or testing (Shaw et al. 2007) can be a major source of misinterpretation, though Mark has been employ his mobile phone for some time now. This leads to the conclusion that this increases the communication abilities of how Mark can interact with George, though there is still the written language barrier between them (Kumara et al. 2011).How George and Mark overcome these problems The over emphasis of kinesics emblems, regulators, and illustrators (De Vito 2001) had o be used as feedback due to the lack of language be used by George. Facial expressions become very important for Mark and George to try to convey their own, and comprehend each others emotions, from understanding to frustration. Increased middle contact which would make most people more nervous and en garde (De Vito 2001) become a highly prized resource for feedback as well it had helped regularize the control of the conversation.Shannon and weavers transmission model (Shannon & Weaver 1949) seems to be the simplest model, and therefore peradventure the est. for most situations however, it lacks the detail in which the complexities of this particular conversation pose, and that need to be addressed, in particular the noise sources. Figure 1 Transactional model (Source Shannon & Weaver 1949) Fullers ecological model is an elaboration of (Alleles 1948) model of Who, says what, in which chan nel, to whom, with what effect (Fouler 2004) though it takes into account of the use of different languages using modern mediums.This model is an first-class model but focuses on more of the use of the language and the media it is conveyed in and to so much on person to person communications. Figure 2 An Ecological Model of the Communication (Source Fouler 2004) Unions expanded model of communication is more complex than Fullers as well as Shannon and Weavers models, though it is more enamour to this conversation had between George and Mark due to the fact it shows that in regularise for the communication to happen the sender must pre-edit and then encode the message pass the message onto the receiver where he decodes and edits the message.Munson also takes into account the use of mechanical, behavioral and semantic actors of encoding, and understands that if the message is to be understood the receiver must be open to decode the message. This is particularly relevant, and high ly important to this conversation between George and Mark due to the factors mentioned before. Context Figure 3 An expanded model of communication (Source Munson 2012) Conclusion I have found Shannon and Weavers transactional model too simple and cannot evaluate the complexities of this situation, and that Fullers model too broad and not able to focus on the problems that need to be addressed.Therefore, I hope hat Unions expanded model of communication is the most adequate to use out of the three models that were written about because Unions model has shown how a message from George is first pre-edited (thoughts), then encoded (written on paper), passed on through noise (physical, psychological as well as expectations and selective perception), decoded by the receiver (reading Georges writing) and then finally edited to Marks own meaning and interpretation.This explains how there was some heated discussions in the past, and will continue to be so until they are able to actively lis ten to each other before they place their own selective perceptions and expectations on their conversation.