Dance's model emphasized the complexity of communication. He was interested in the evolutionary nature of the process of communication. Dance said that if communication is complex, it was the responsibility of the scholar to adapt our examination of communication to the challenge of studying something in motion. Dance includes the concept of time - this model emphasizes time in that each act can be said to be built on the others that come before it.
Osgood and Schramm’s Circular model (1954) and Dance’s Helical model (1967). Posted by topswot on January 01st 2010 to Communications Tagged models of communication My goodness this is a really old level 3 essay, i had a great laugh reading this one…as i am sure you will too!
The aims of this essay are to describe in detail different forms and models of communication and to evaluate their influence on health and well-being. The models chosen to be explored are Osgood and Schramm’s Circular model (1954) and Dance’s Helical model (1967). Furthermore, this essay will look at the different forms of interpersonal communication and how they can impact both positively and negatively on health and well-being throughout communication. Additionally, it will explore ways in which professionals can modify and improve their interpersonal communication in health and social care settings.
Osgood and Schramm’s Circular model of communication (1954) was an attempt to rectify the earlier linear models of communication. Schramm (1954) stated “It is misleading to think of the communications process as starting somewhere and ending somewhere. It is really endless. We are little switchboard centers [sic] handling and re-routing the great endless current of information”. Therefore, the Circular model is devoted to two actors who reciprocate in identical functions throughout: encoding, decoding, and interpreting. Additionally the model offers some explanation in semantic noise and interpersonal communication and how these might affect the communication process as a whole. The model presented by Osgood and Schramm shows not only the transmission and hearing of a message, but offers explanations in how it can be perceived and understood. The process of understanding what has been said can vary widely from person to person as there will always be a degree of semantic noise to be taken into account, such as cultural differences, background, socioeconomics, education and values. The degree of semantic noise may impact on how a message is perceived; it would also be fair to say that it can determine the feedback given, thus shape the development of future communication. One such example of semantic interference could be whereby a patient approaches his doctor who is foreign. The patient will present and describe their symptoms, the doctor then decodes what they have heard offering a remedy. It could be that the doctor does not fully understand what symptoms the patient has verbally presented and therefore misdiagnoses. Alternatively the patient may not be able to understand the advice of the doctor due to a heavy accent. The semantic noise in this case would be language; this misinterpretation could have an impact on the health and wellbeing of the patient. Additionally it should be bore in mind that this type of semantic noise could occur more specifically in the elderly, as they may not have a great deal experience of communicating with persons who have foreign accents. Semantic noise is hard to define, it is not always audible. An individual might be attracted to the person who is conveying a message; therefore they may not be listening to what is being said. This type of semantic noise is visual distraction. The depth of a person’s knowledge can also be seen as semantic noise. An individual may not understand what is being said but feel they cannot express this for fear of being seen as inadequate or unintelligent; this could result in a breakdown of effective communication. Such a...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document