In the first case, the problems raised originate, as we say, from the very structure of the process (or processes), while in the second possibility, only the interpretations/responses that, in an observable way, occur in the process are contemplated. receiver when he receives what could be called the communicative "stimulus".
So to speak: we are not interested in the process itself, we are interested in the consequences it has on the individual.
It is becoming more and more common to see how the "manifestations" of level 1 that, initially, should not be loaded with meaning, are filled with it.
Sometimes, even to the detriment of level 2, which would be the one that, in principle, would provide the true communication data. Dressing in a certain way, smelling a specific perfume, combing your hair in a special way or moving with skillful learned gestures, today is usually a clear sign of meaning, basically focused on inclusion within a prestigious social group or with clear desired identifications.
The effects of interpretation This "global" communication process (without sender/receiver/sender "balancing", since, at one level or another, one is always the sender and always the receiver), originates in both participants an accumulation of effects that are worth listing.
The sender's credibility The efficiency in the transmission of a message (in this case "coded message", words) is directly proportional to the degree of CREDIBILITY that the receiver grants to the sender. That is to say: the certain guarantee that a message will be decoded in the sense in which it is emitted ("understanding" the same semantic content that is expressed).
The "myths" of communication according to the Palo Alto school (Pierre Dionne and Gilles Ouellet) Following are the 19 myths regarding communication that, according to the Palo Alto School, society has commonly understood. The myths are enunciated in the form of a "sentence" of popular domain to then refute them according to the new interpretation.
Myth 1: The human being directs communication We understand from the beginning that, on the contrary, communication surpasses us and above all it does not imply the will to communicate.
Myth 2: There is only one level of language which is manifested by writing or speech On the contrary, communication occurs at several levels simultaneously. There are a multitude of languages besides writing or speech and they all contribute to communication.
Myth 3: Communication is limited to explicit information that circulates between individuals.
Myth 4: The meaning of a communication lies in the purposes exchanged Again, limiting the meaning of communication to the purposes exchanged leads to unacceptable narrowing.
Myth 5: Whether or not to communicate depends on an individual choice On the contrary, the only freedom in this matter consists in making the desire to avoid communication understood, in reducing its obligation to a minimum.
Myth 6: Avoiding communication puts an end to the relationship and, consequently, to communication On the contrary, this rejection of communication that one wishes to make evident through adapted behaviors does not achieve the proposed goal.
Myth 7: During a communication, the information circulates according to the principle of "balancing" We do not usually take into account that during a communication we "bathe" in the information.