Why should a Psychotherapist be interested in the problems of communication? Let us start our discussion by defining the meaning of Psychotherapy. The science of Psychotherapy is to understand the issues revolving around the failure to communicate, effectively and clearly, to the other person or group of people. The failure to communicate clearly results in a breakdown of communication internally. We have a problem in communicating within ourselves, we therefore have a problem of unclear or failed communication to others, often resulting in an unresolved conflict. Typically, the desires within ourselves distort the way we try to get the message across to others. Those desires that are repressed is what the Psychotherapist tries to uncover, so he can help the individual communicate his conflict, in order for the problem to be resolved. This is why the Psychotherapist is interested in the problems of communication. The objective of Psychotherapy is to help the individual achieve an excellent communication level within him. This then, in turn, results in the individual being able to talk about his problems, therefore being able to communicate with others as well. The Psychotherapist’s goal is to uncover those distorted views that are repressed internally, to help bring to the surface the communication problems that exist. By communicating about the individuals' problems, the Psychotherapist is able to help him resolve the issue at hand. For this technique to be effective, it is vitally important that communication from the individual to the Psychotherapist, and vice versa, be free, clear, and effective. This benefits the individual, the Psychotherapist, and all other parties involved. This way, the communication is more rational in thought, and emotions are diminished.

Unfortunately, while people are communicating, they have a tendency to evaluate, or judge others on how they look, act, dress, et cetera. If people can learn to understand while they are listening, and control the amount of evaluation, they can improve their communication universally. This is one of the main barriers to communication. The tendency to evaluate the sender of the message, is typical, instead of listening to the message itself. This creates distorted views before the sender of the message voices the thought.

For example, the receiver of the message may be reacting to how the sender is dressed, instead of listening to the message thoroughly. The first step is usually to evaluate, and the second step is usually to react to the message that is sent. The third step is to agree or disagree, from your point of view, that may be distorted from the evaluative tendency. So, in reality, the sent message did not get received at all, but the evaluative, distorted message did get sent to the receiver.

The barrier of evaluation is at its peak when emotions are stirred, especially when the emotions are deeply involved in the situation at hand. The individual has a tendency to evaluate more harshly when he or she is triggered by an emotional onset. The feelings are then being evaluated, not the actual issue at hand. The parties involved will completely miss each other’s understanding of the sent messages, and therefore distorting them. This natural process evolves into poor communication.

 A bystander in an argument can clearly see the miscommunication between the two parties. They, in reality, are probably not discussing the same issue, but there are most likely underlying problems underneath the surface. This unintentionally blocks interpersonal communication.

A gateway is listening with understanding. We can avoid evaluating others if we try to listen with understanding. Try to look at the situation from the other person’s point of view. This is a widely used approach to Psychotherapy. Listening with understanding is the most effective way to help the other person. We understand with the person, not about the person. To determine if one listens well, restate the previous speaker’s ideas. This helps the emotion to diminish, and makes the conversation more rational. It also helps the listener retain the thoughts more effectively in his mind.

Most people are afraid to listen with understanding because what they hear might make them change. Again, this stems from the tendency to evaluate. The lack of courage is a factor in not being able to listen well. The person might be afraid that listening with understanding might change him or her. We tend to evaluate more often because it is easier on ourselves.

When emotions are at a peak that is when good listening should be used, if communication is to be clear. A third person is often used to clarify and summarize each person’s points, in order to settle a dispute. This leads to a decrease in defensiveness. We can understand larger groups of people better by a third party, who summarizes the other groups for them. Using a moderator or a third party has proven effective in any situation. The neutral third party helps to uncover and solve the problem, and emotions are calmed. All sides of the dispute or situation reach communication and understanding at hand.

The definition of the problem is that people have a difficult time understanding each other. Therefore, how is communication possible? The difficulty to understand each other has arisen from barriers such as background, experiences, and motivation, according to Roethlisburger. Roethlisburger expresses disbelief that any individuals can ever understand each other.

To further delve into that idea, Roethlisburger expresses two schools of thought. One school of thought is that the assumption that communication between two individuals has collapsed. The second individual does not accept what the first individual has to say of having any validity whatsoever. The goal of this thought is to get the second person to agree with the first person. Roethlisburger’s second school of thought is stated as follows: the assumption of communication has collapsed when the second individual does not feel free to state what he thinks to the first individual. The second individual feels that the first individual will, under no circumstances, accept his thoughts. When both parties are willing to understand each other’s differences, clearer communication is a result. To summarize, each person is unique, therefore each person has a difficult time understanding other person. The problem arises when the person’s try to communicate effectively, but cannot, due to dissimilar experiences and/or background. It is agreed that this is an issue and should be addressed.

Here are some short-term and long-term recommendations. For the short-term, try to find out about the other person as much as possible. Ask questions of that person. Do some research on the person you are interacting with. Try and get hold of some of his or her vocabulary, especially on the job, so that you can win their favor. This is especially true of boss and employee relations. In the long-term, this can lead up to a promotion or a salary increase, or both.

Short-term, this will also help you understand your boss, or whomever the other person is that you are dealing with. Understanding the other person will also help you understand his or her verbal and non-verbal communication skills, facial expressions, nervous habits, et cetera.

Long-term, try to understand views that are different from your own. This will also help you and the other person achieve a higher, mutual level of understanding between each other. If one follows these recommendations, this will lead to a more satisfactory relationship with the other individual.

Here are the supporting reasons for implementing these documented recommendations. If an employee, who is low on the organization chart, attempts to understand his supervisor, long-term results could be beneficial. If the employee does research, asks questions, learns the jargon, and has an outstanding job performance, then the employee may move up to a higher position. This has proven itself time and time again. If the employee attempts to understand the boss, communication is facilitated, therefore attaining a great interpersonal, professional, relationship that would have projected great benefits to both involved. If the two parties understand each other, this is a good way to diminish emotions and irrational thinking, which, in the long run, could have a huge impact on the company. I believe this to be true and factual, as I have seen it repetitively in the workplace.

The benefit of implementing these ideas results in negativity and defensiveness decreasing. This would therefore raise morale, and faster productivity. Clear communication is established on a certain level of understanding between the people involved. I believe that higher morale would increase the value, gain and profit overall.

Business Communications-Anne Arundel Community College