Қызылорда облысы, Қызылорда қаласы

ЖШС «125 QYZYLORDA» мектебі

Ағылшын пәні мұғалімі: Есембаева Молдир Полатовна

The main factors influencing the willingness to communicate

Abstract: One of the most important factors that affects a person’s willingness to communicate are situational variables, such as how a person feels on that day, whether he knows the speaker or not, and how this person looks and presents himself in communication, what he can gain or lose in this communication, the demand of the time and the atmosphere of the conversation, etc. Based on this, one could say that the willingness to communicate mainly depends on the situation. Nevertheless, some researchers have noted permanent personality tendencies explaining why one person is ready to communicate under any circumstances, while the other is not.

Keywords: «willingness to communicate, communication apprehension, extroversion, introversion, verbal behavior predisposition, anomie, alienation».

The Willingness To Communicate construct itself was formed by studying and analyzing Burgoon's (1976) work on Unwillingness to Communicate and its causes, from a study by Mortenson, Armston and Lustich (1977) which spoke of a predisposition to verbal behavior. And also from McCroskey and Richmond (1982) where they explain shyness as a major factor in reluctance to communicate.

Burgoon (1976) was the first to describe this tendency as a "chronic tendency to avoid verbal communication" based on research in the areas of anomie and alienation, introversion, self-esteem and communication apprehension.

Mortenson (1977) based on the results of a 25-year study indicates the constancy of human communication in different communicative situations. He calls this phenomenon "verbal behavior predisposition," which explains the characteristic predisposition to speak a certain amount within individual situations. To measure it, Mortenson (1977) proposes a scale called the Verbal Behavior Predisposition Scale.

The concept of "shyness" is used by many researchers when studying the predisposition to communicate. Larry (1981), based on her observations, describes shyness as "social anxiety", noting two main components - internal discomfort and externally observable behavior.

McCroskey and Richmond (1982) refer to the second category of outwardly observable behavior, explaining shyness as a "tendency to be reserved" and noting that social anxiety is the factor influencing this tendency. And to measure the level of shyness, McCroskey created a tool called the Verbal Activity Scale. Although the Verbal Activity Scale scores show significant results, this does not confirm the presence of a characteristically based predisposition to communicate or not to communicate.

McCroskey (1987) developed a self-report tool called the Communication Willingness Scale, which he says has strong validity. The willingness to communicate construct is based on the assumption that a trait-like disposition to communicate tends to persist despite different contexts and speaking people in a given situation. Based on this assumption, it can be argued that the level of a person's willingness to communicate, for example, in a small group, coincides with the level of the same person in public speeches and meetings or in dyads. This assumption does not confirm that a person is equally willing to communicate in all these contexts, however, the level of willingness to talk in different contexts with different people remains unchanged.

Many researchers have found that there is a regularity about the communicative behavior of a person in various situations, which they called Willingness for Communication. The researchers of this issue have done a great job and were able to explain a lot in this area. However, why do people differ in their predisposition to communicate? In order to answer this question, it is worth referring to variables such as introversion, anomie and alienation, the level of communication skills and cultural divergence.

The design "extroversion-introversion" has been studied by many scientists for decades. According to Eysenck (1971) “the closer a person is to an extreme degree of extraversion, the more “people-oriented” a person can be; the more introverted a person is, the less he needs to communicate and the less he appreciates communication. Introverts are by nature timid, shy and quiet, less willing to socialize. Studies have shown that the line between introversion and communication apprehension is very inconspicuous.

One of the significant factors influencing the unwillingness to communicate is anomie and alienation. If anomie is the situation when a person has not mastered the norms and values ​​of society, including the values ​​of communication, alienation is when a person is distant and isolated from society as a whole. Giffin (1970) found that this was directly related to the refusal to communicate, while Heston and Anderson (1972) argue that anomie and alienation are associated with negative attitudes towards communication.

How ready and proactive a person is to communicate is directly related to self-esteem. It is known that self-esteem is an assessment of this person's own significance. A person with low self-esteem will be less likely to communicate due to the feeling that he has nothing to offer, and also that others may react negatively to what he has to say (McCroskey, 1987).

Since culture is an integral part of the communication skills and competence of the people, it is worth mentioning that the cultural difference of the speakers certainly affects the level and willingness to communicate. The difference is that a culturally divergent may have excellent communication skills for one culture but not for another (McCroskey, 1987).

One of the main reasons why some people are more social than others is their lack of communication skills. Research on the subject by Philips and others shows that the more communication skills improve, the higher the level of willingness to communicate. The relationship between communication skills and willingness to communicate is very complex, as the loss of skills can lead to a decrease in willingness and vice versa, low willingness can lead to a decrease in communication experience and therefore a decrease in skills. At the same time, it is worth considering low self-esteem and high communication apprehension, which can lead to a decrease in the level of both skills and willingness.

Communication apprehension, which is by far the strongest precursor to communication readiness, is divided into four types: trait-like, context-oriented, recipient-oriented, and situational. The trait-like communication apprehension is a stable predisposition to experience. An example for context-based communication phobia is the fear of public speaking. With regard to the type based on the recipient, here we consider how stable the orientation to communication with this particular person is. For example, a teacher may have very little level of communication apprehension when he goes to a student, but a lot when he talks to the headmaster. As Richmond (1978) mentioned, the dating period plays an important role. The situational type will be predicted based on features, recipient, and context.

There are two reasons explaining the communication apprehension: congenital and acquired. McCroskey believes it's an acquired phenomenon. McCroskey and Betty (1984) explain that this is preceded by an accumulation of experience and a permanent state of anxiety, as well as anticipation and fear of other people. The interesting thing is that when appropriate expectations are not formed, anxiety arises. And in the absence of regular expectations, no matter positive or negative, helplessness develops. And when helplessness is learned, it is accompanied by a strong sense of anxiety. This learned helplessness and regular negative expectations are the most fundamental components of communication anxiety.

Studies have also been conducted on the impact of readiness to communicate on interpersonal communication from various angles, such as shyness, unwillingness to communicate, predisposition to verbal behavior, talkativeness, restraint, silence and social anxiety, and many others. Most interpersonal communication takes place in three general environments: school, organizational and social. Despite the difference in the communication environment, the results of the study are quite consistent and the same. The conclusion is that there is a personal global focus on the willingness to communicate, which has a great influence on interpersonal communication in different environments. No matter what environment the person is in, low willingness to communicate is associated with less frequency and amount of communication, likely associated with negative outcomes. Accordingly, a high willingness to communicate is associated with an increase in the number and frequency of communication, as well as previous positive results.

REFERENCES

1. Burgoon J.K. The unwillingness-to-communicate scale: Development and Validation. Communication Monographs, 43, - 1976. –P. 60-69.

2. McCroskey J.C. An introduction to rhetorical communication. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, - 1982.

3. McCroskey J.C. Oral communication apprehension: A summary of recent theory and research. Human Communication Research, 4, - P.78-96, - 1987.

4. Eysenck H.J. Readings in extraversion-introversion. New York: Wiley-Interscience, - 1971.

5. Giffin K. Social alienation by communication denial. Research report, 32. University of Kanzas. – 1970.

6. Heston J.K., Anderson P. Anomie-alienation and restrained communication among high school students. – 1972.