Meaning......

[Agility Dogs]

Out of a face to face conversation with someone we take 100% meaning.

7% of this comes from the words the person uses.

38% comes from tone.

55% comes from body language.

Take away voice and body language and we are left with 7% of the intended meaning. Sound familiar?

[~Anne~]

Yes. It is a common problem on forums. It also makes for any interesting debate in relation to veils.

[TheCheekyMonster]

This is an interesting concept.... I think though for younger generations communication on the internet has become just as natural as speaking in person....

[Guest Willow]

which is why a computer geek invented emoticons!!! :laugh:

But, yes, good point :)

[tdierikx]

God gave us the internet so that we could type our answers, read and reread them to try to make sure they aren't overly ambiguous, BEFORE hitting the Post button...

Pity so many don't avail themselves of the luxury of time when they post and run... *grin*

T.

[TheCheekyMonster]

God gave us the internet so that we could type our answers, read and reread them to try to make sure they aren't overly ambiguous, BEFORE hitting the Post button...

Pity so many don't avail themselves of the luxury of time when they post and run... *grin*

T.

And the forum maker gave us an edit button.... :D

[voloclydes]

And yet some times the more you type and delete, the more likely you are getting further away from what meant and further into troubled territory, where you will post be misunderstood and spend the rest of your days having mouth surgery for foot in mouth disease.

[Marion 01]

So, when in doubt, don't.

[tdierikx]

Most of my replies on internet forums are read and reread, edited, and carefully considered (and checked for spelling) before I hit the post button... take it as read that I actually mean what I say, although there could be some ambiguous layers there by intent... *evil grin*

T.

[WreckitWhippet]

I don't have any problems, typing what I mean and the message being understood.

[persephone]

..and the forum deities gave us emoticons ! :)

[LizT]

God gave us the internet so that we could type our answers, read and reread them to try to make sure they aren't overly ambiguous, BEFORE hitting the Post button...

Pity so many don't avail themselves of the luxury of time when they post and run... *grin*

T.

Sometimes life needs an "Are you sure?" prompt. ;)

[Greytmate]

This is an internet forum, it isn't face to face. It's one person at a time addressing a larger audience.

All of the information doesn't have to come from the words chosen, as you are able to post images, videos or other visualisations to help make a point. We can also gain meaning from emoticons and even the signature and avatar of the writer.

The words that are chosen will never provide 100% of meaning, because everyone interprets meaning of words and phrases differently according to cultural context and experience.

Writing normally doesn't have body language or tone. If you take those away, you are not left with 7%, because when you take those things away, a lot more attention is paid to the words used. But even if you don't take them away, people can learn better listening skills and get much more than 7%.

Where did you get the figures from and by what logic do you only end up with 7%? I don't understand your maths. I think you would be in serious trouble if you could only comprehend 7% of what you read, and should probably avoid internet forums altogther.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Greytmate

[persephone]

So, with the quoted figures,with body language being more than half a conversation ,,,, vision- impaired conversationalists would be hard pressed to interpret what the other person was saying?

Hmmmm....

[Greytmate]

So I looked this up and found it was a conclusion reached after some studies done over 40 years ago.

But the studies were not about conversation, they were about whether a single spoken word could convey a sense of like or dislike. The word gives the meaning, but that meaning may be disbelieved if the facial expression or tone is incongruous. The studies did not involve body language. The conclusion is not about conversation, and is only about how a person would determine a meaning of either 'like' or 'dislike' based on words, tone and facial expression.

Unless people here are lying, they probably mean what they say. And there is nothing that suggests that without tone or facial expression that we would have a problem finding meaning. The studies were more about finding meaning in the non-verbal than they were about a lack of meaning in words communicated in writing. The figures just don't apply to Internet forums or anything else that people read. They don't even apply to normal conversations.

Why did you start this topic? In saying that only 7% of meaning is given, are you claiming that 93% percent of what we write here on DOL is useless rubbish? :laugh:

[raz]

Why did you start this topic? In saying that only 7% of meaning is given, are you claiming that 93% percent of what we write here on DOL is useless rubbish? :laugh:

I have to agree. What was the point of this thread? Take that as 70% posturing. Pretty much what I would do in real life asking what was your point - my tone is actually quite pleasant but my body language is probably quite belligerent.

[Greytmate]

Why did you start this topic? In saying that only 7% of meaning is given, are you claiming that 93% percent of what we write here on DOL is useless rubbish? :laugh:

I have to agree. What was the point of this thread? Take that as 70% posturing. Pretty much what I would do in real life asking what was your point - my tone is actually quite pleasant but my body language is probably quite belligerent.

*Unfolds arms, wags finger, raises one eyebrow, stamps foot, flicks hair and flounces out of the thread.*

[raz]

*Unfolds arms, wags finger, raises one eyebrow, stamps foot, flicks hair and flounces out of the thread.*

What on earth do you mean by that, GM?

*puts hands on hips and squares up to attack GM while hearing a piece on tv about kRudd being a bastard to Julia Goolia and suddenly thinks that everyone must suddenly be trying to shoot a poster in the head on the internetz*

If you cant read into what people say on the net, you probably should be playing solitaire.

[voloclydes]

*Unfolds arms, wags finger, raises one eyebrow, stamps foot, flicks hair and flounces out of the thread.*

What on earth do you mean by that, GM?

*puts hands on hips and squares up to attack GM while hearing a piece on tv about kRudd being a bastard to Julia Goolia and suddenly thinks that everyone must suddenly be trying to shoot a poster in the head on the internetz*

If you cant read into what people say on the net, you probably should be playing solitaire.

amen to that, but people do... but often you do type, re type, ponder post then as its disappearing off the screen you see a typo that some gremlin inserted on your behalf....

and then what you read one way in one tone is quite possible to read in another way, you the writer had not thought of as you were so invested... funny thing a point of view its so personal.

[Sheridan]

Shouldn't this be in Off Topic? Even the burning building and children haters threads had a tangential relationship to dogs at some point but this doesn't.