engl. follows
***
Wie ich etwas mitteile kann auch unterschiedlich wahrgenommen werden. Das wohl bekannteste Kommunikationsmodell ist das 4-Ohren-Modell von Schulz von Thun.
Die Theorie ist, der Sender sagt etwas und dies kann auf 4 verschiedene Arten empfangen werden.
Sender: "Der Mülleimer ist voll."
1. Sachebene: "Der Mülleimer ist voll"
2. Appellebene: "Bring den Müll runter."
3. Beziehungsebene: "Nie bringst du den Müll runter."
4. Selbstoffenbarung: "Ich bin enttäuscht, dass du den Müll nicht weg gebracht hast."
Der Empfänger könnte dann folgt reagieren:
1. "Ja, hast recht."
2. "Ja/Nein mache ich /nicht."
3. "Das stimmt doch gar nicht. Ich hab letztens erst den Müll weg gebracht. Jetzt bist du mal dran!"
4. "Tut mir leid, ich bringe den gleich weg."
Die Theorie hat den Beigeschmack, dass der Sender aus der Nummer raus ist, sobald die Nachricht abgeschickt wurde. So einfach ist es dann nicht. Es gibt ja auf Seiten des Senders noch 2
weitere Ebenen, die beim Empfänger mitgelesen werden.
1. Paraverbale Ebene (Tonlage, Betonung)
2. Nonverbale Ebene (Gestik, Mimik, Körperhaltung)
Was ich damit also sagen möchte ist, dass Kommunikation eh sehr komplex ist und keiner der beiden Seiten sich so einfach raus nehmen kann.
Wenn ich als Sender den Empfänger völlig entnervt sage, dass der Mülleimer schon wieder voll ist und böse gucke, wird die Nachricht eher nicht auf der Sachebene interpretiert werden. Je
nachdem, kann das einen Streit auslösen, weil der Empfänger einen Vorwurf hört.
Was aber durchaus geht ist, dass ich als Sender die Wahl habe, wie ich reagieren kann. Höre ich sonst auf dem 3. Ohr, kann ich kurz inne halten und gucken ob ich anders reagieren kann oder
möchte.
Am Ende bin ich selbst verantwortlich für meine Gefühle und wie ich was interpretiere.
***
How I communicate something can also be interpreted differently. Probably the best known communication model is Schulz von Thun's 4-ear model.
The theory is that the transmitter says something and this can be received in 4 different ways.
Sender: "The trash can is full."
Receiver understands:
1st objective level: "The garbage can is full"
2nd appeal level: "Take the bin down."
3rd relationship level: "You never take the garbage down."
4th self-revelation: "I'm disappointed that you didn't take the garbage away."
The recipient could then react as follows
1. "Yes, you're right."
2. "Yes/no, I /don't."
3. "That's not true. I just took out the garbage the other day. Now it's your turn!"
4. "Sorry, I'll take it away in a minute."
The theory smacks of the sender being out of the loop as soon as the message has been sent. It's not as simple as that. There are 2 further levels on the sender's side that are read by the recipient.
1. paraverbal level (tone of voice, intonation)
2. non-verbal level (gestures, facial expressions, posture)
So what I'm trying to say is that communication is very complex anyway and neither side can simply take itself out of it.
The theory is that the transmitter says something and this can be received in 4 different ways.
Sender: "The trash can is full."
Receiver understands:
1st objective level: "The garbage can is full"
2nd appeal level: "Take the bin down."
3rd relationship level: "You never take the garbage down."
4th self-revelation: "I'm disappointed that you didn't take the garbage away."
The recipient could then react as follows
1. "Yes, you're right."
2. "Yes/no, I /don't."
3. "That's not true. I just took out the garbage the other day. Now it's your turn!"
4. "Sorry, I'll take it away in a minute."
The theory smacks of the sender being out of the loop as soon as the message has been sent. It's not as simple as that. There are 2 further levels on the sender's side that are read by the recipient.
1. paraverbal level (tone of voice, intonation)
2. non-verbal level (gestures, facial expressions, posture)
So what I'm trying to say is that communication is very complex anyway and neither side can simply take itself out of it.
If I, as the sender, tell the recipient that the garbage can is full again and look angry, the message is unlikely to be interpreted on a objective level. Depending on the situation,
this can trigger an argument because the recipient hears a reproach.
But what does work is that I, as the sender, have the choice of how to react. If I otherwise hear in my third ear, I can pause for a moment and see if I can or want to react differently.
In the end, I am responsible for my own feelings and how I interpret what I hear.
But what does work is that I, as the sender, have the choice of how to react. If I otherwise hear in my third ear, I can pause for a moment and see if I can or want to react differently.
In the end, I am responsible for my own feelings and how I interpret what I hear.
Kommentar schreiben