Abstract
This paper proposes that _effort_ must be taken into account in both theorization and assessments of communication and, accordingly, offers an exploratory consideration of effort in communication encounters. As a subjective element of communication, operationalizing effort in communication encounters is very difficult. As a result, there has been very little research taking up effort as a factor in communication. The present research proposes that effort be viewed in communication as one element to be contrasted with others. In this research, effort is cast as one of four communication encounter success factors, along with topic knowledge, communication skill and comfortable communication. As a means of preliminarily testing the proposition, research participants were asked to assess these four factors—effort, knowledge, skill and cordiality—both for themselves and for the other in their communication interaction and as reflective of success in a professional communication encounter (or not) or satisfaction with a personal communication encounter (or not). The research tentatively points toward effort as a meaningful construct in interpersonal communication studies, with indication of several identifiable patterns. However, as preliminary research, the paper concludes by noting that the concepts must be more clearly delineated and the methodology and tools more robustly designed.
Full text
621 characters
· extracted from
oa-doi-fallback
· click to expand
There is a newer version available for this {{ publicationType }}. View latest version
{{ publication.field_name }}
{{ publication.subfield_name }}
Copyright: © {{ publicationYear }} {{ publication.presentation_authors[0].full_name + (publication.presentation_authors.length > 1 ? ' et al' : '') }}. This is an open access publication distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Check the {{ publicationType | capitalize }} Source for copyright and license information.
Listen on
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.