Komunikasi dalam Keluarga (Psikologi Keluarga Pertemuan 6) Ari Pratiwi, S.Psi., M.Psi 26 Maret 2014

I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant. (Anonymous, from Randal, 2003)

Introduction Communication is at the heart of expressive family processes How family members communicate, what they communicate about, and how they resolve differences are examples of these expressive family processes

Introduction The most frequent activity you do with friends and family members is, most probably, TALK! Communicating is a fundamental activity of life. We communicate about who we are, our dreams, our goals, what we think is good or bad, we critique those around us, we negotiate conflict, start fights, and try to find forgiveness. When we communicate, we reveal our weaknesses and strengths and explore our expectations, hopes, and dis- appointments (Duck, 1997). Obviously, communication is more than just talking.

Special communication relationships developed from an early age Pertama, kita menonton dan berkomunikasi dengan orangtua dan anggota keluarga terdekat. Lalu kita keluar dari rumah dan melihat interaksi orang di televisi atau film Kita mengobservasi bagaimana saudara kita memecahkan masalah dan berkomunikasi dengan teman mereka Kita berlanjut lagi dengan belajar melalui melihat orangtua dan orang dewasa yang lainnya Setiap kali terbentuk pertemanan atau hubungan, cara kita berkomunikasi dan berinteraksi berubah dan beradaptasi Perubahannya tidak tampak jelas dan seringkali kita tidak berbincang tentang bagaimana kita berkomunikasi satu sama lain. T

Bagaimana komunikasi ketika kita sedang jatuh cinta? Meminimalisir kesalahan pasangan Berbagi perasaan dan pengalaman & berkata dengan lembut Memaklumi secara ekstra, menggunakan ekspresi sopan, “tolong, terimakasih” Menggunakan “personalized communication”  termasuk rahasia yang disimpan dari orang lain dan dan pesan yang hanya dimiliki bersama dalam hubungan yang khusus Membuat personal idiom (panggilan sayang, nama untuk hewan milik bersama) Mengkomunikasikan cinta secara verbal untuk mengekspresikan dukungan, membicarakan banyak hal Mengkomunikasikan cinta secara non verbal (menyentuh, pandangan mata, berpegangan tangan, berciuman, nada suara yang berbeda) Menyadari ada yang “tidak beres” pada diri orang yang dicintai

The parts of communication Message Observable / overt (tampak, jelas) Intent / covert  non verbal Decoding

The parts of communication : decoding Decoding mengarah pada ide bahwa orang kita kirimi pesan menginterpretasikan pesan kita Mereka akan menerjemahkan kata-kata (bagian yang terbuka) sebaik ekspresi wajah yang tidak tampak, nada suara, postur dan tanda-tanda lainnya sesuai konteks pesan dan berusaha menebak pesan apa yang berusaha kita kirim. Masalah bisa muncul dari proses ini ketika orang lain melakukan decode tidak sesuai dengan yang kita inginkan/maksudkan Beberapa pesan dikirim dan penerima pesan tidak melakukan decode sebagaimana yang kita harapkan. Namun di waktu lain, pesan yang diterima dan yang dikirim bisa selaras. Kita bisa menilai kualitas suatu hubungan dengan mendengarkan bagaimana gaya berkomunikasi seseorang dalam hubungan yang dekat

Research Research Dickson-Markman & Markman (1988) : Rata-rata, pasangan melakukan 1.24 interaksi setiap hari yang cukup panjang untuk dianggap sebagai conversational exchange. Pertukaran percakapan ini rata-rata berlangsung 2 jam. Topik yang sering muncul meliputi pekerjaan, perawatan rumah, anak dan anggota keluarga yang lain, percakapan yang dilakukan sepanjang hari tersebut dengan orang-orang lain dan makanan. Study by Noller and Feeny (1998) : Pasangan melaporkan bahwa mereka melakukan rata-rata 22 komunikasi per minggu (sekitar 3x sehari) dengan masing-masing percakapan sekitar 20 – 30 menit. Panjang percakapan dipengaruhi oleh jadwal pekerjaan, jumlah anak di rumah dan umur/tahapan anggota keluarga yang lain

TYPES AND KINDS Miller, Nunnally, Wackman, and Miller (1988). These family scientists suggested that communication in close relationships could be organized into four types : small talk competition/ control talk meta communication cooperative/straight talk

TYPES AND KINDS : Small Talk Small talk. When we encounter a friend, stranger, or family member, we often just want to chat (news items, the recent rainstorm, daily routines, something silly a child said, or what’s on for dinner). The purpose of this type of conversation is to build trust and establish bonds of connection. People who are not skilled at making small talk are sometimes seen as intrusive when they skip it and move immediately to requests, lectures, or inquiries. Conversely, if one only knows how to engage in small talk, then it is difficult to build lasting rela- tionships with others. Shop talk. Shop talk is really small talk that happens at or about the workplace  boaring!

TYPES AND KINDS : Competitive / Control Talk Control talk is about influence and change. When we praise, lecture, direct, request, or suggest things to family members we are using control talk. Parents often supervise their chil- dren, monitor their activities by asking where they have been, and teach them about while the children are doing homework. All of these activities are control related. As can be easily imagined, too much control talk can lead to trouble.

TYPES AND KINDS : Competitive / Control Talk Some kinds of destructive, competitive fight talk strategies : Interrupting. Often when we are impatient and controlling, we interrupt the other person and try to redirect the conversation to go in the direction we want. Kennedy and Camden (1993) : not all interruptions are a sign of dominating and controlling communication ; women are far more likely to interrupt than are men; most of the interruptions that occurred in their study were confirmation interruptions Non sequitur. The term non sequitur is a logical term indicating that one idea does not follow from the next; interrupts the flow of the conversation and interjects a thought seemingly unconnected to the conversation.

TYPES AND KINDS : Competitive / Control Talk Some kinds of destructive, competitive fight talk strategies : Sarcasm and cutting humor. In current usage, sarcasm and cutting humor means to make someone look foolish or unworthy. Distancing. When we give up on the other person, decide we have had enough, and disengage we are distancing. Rather than battle with someone, we choose to retreat and build barriers. Martyring. The martyr seeks control through a particular type of distancing strategyThe intent is clearly manipulative and controlling

TYPES AND KINDS : Meta-communication/Search talk Miller et al. (1988) also list search talk as an important type of relationship communication. When we talk about how we talk about things, we call this search talk or meta-communication. Meta-communication is important because it allows us to put the normal flow of decision-making, problem solving, and conflict resolution on hold.

TYPES AND KINDS : Cooperative/Straight talk. Seeking meaning. One way to send non-defensive, non-combative, non- competitive intent and content messages to those close to us is to seek meaning. When we seek meaning, we listen carefully, non-judgmentally, and without thinking about what we want to say next. Seeking clarification. When we seek clarification we go beyond seeking the meaning of the interaction. In this situation, we are listening closely and find some aspect of the message unclear to us. Reinforcing. As the sender is explaining an important message to us, it is important that we tell him or her (using both intent and content messages) that we appreciate the story or concern. We reinforce or reward the disclosure by saying sim- ple things like, “uh-huh,” “sure,” “I see,” or “really?”

TYPES AND KINDS : Cooperative/Straight talk Seeking congruence.. Congruency occurs when we take the time to make sure that the intent and content aspects of messages are similar, or congruent. If one partner says, “I love you” with the content message, but the intent message is one of distance and coolness, then the messages are not congruent and the chances for building relationship strength decrease. Appropriate self-disclosure.. This occurs when an individual reveals to one or more people some personal information they would not other- wise learn. We acquire information through daily interactions. As we become more confident in the reliability of those close to us, we reveal more and more about who we are, what our needs are, and what we need from others.

4 pola komunikasi dalam keluarga secara umum (Devito, 2004): The Equality Pattern  setara dalam berkomunikasi (menyampaikan ide, pendapat & keyakinan, masing-masing pihak terbuka,secara langsung, jujur, tidak ada pemimpin & pengikut, keputusan dibuat bersama  kelemahan : equality pattern = equitable (equity theory). Kepuasaan tertinggi akan didapat ketika ada keseimbangan (reward = cost). Ketika terjadi ketidakseimbangan, bisa saja pihak yang merasakan akan mencari keseimbangan dari pihak lain (bukan pasangannya)

4 pola komunikasi dalam keluarga secara umum (Devito, 2004): The Balanced Split Pattern  hubungan sejajar, namun masing-masing pihak memiliki otoritas dalam domain yang berbeda The Unbalanced Split Pattern  salah satu pihak yang memimpin adalah yang dianggap lebih pintar & lebih mampu, biasanya juga yang lebih menarik secara fisik, pihak yang memimpin jarang bertanya pada yang dipimpin & meminta masukan

4 pola komunikasi dalam keluarga secara umum (Devito, 2004): The Monopoly pattern  salah satu pihak memonopoli segalanya. Pihak yang dimonopoli bertanya tentang segala hal, meminta ijin, menunggu pihak yang memonopoli untuk mengambil keputusan. Pihak lain akan tahu siapa bos & siapa yang akan memenangkan argumentasi. Seringkali terjadi konflik karena pihak yang memonopoli biasanya kurang mengerti bagaimana mengatasi konflik & sering menyakiti pihak lain.

Gender in communication Men, generally, are socialized to communicate differently than women. They see the world of relationships with a slightly different hue. To learn how to strengthen relationship ties between men and women, one must attend to those differences. For example, Beck (1988) re-substantiated the idea that men don’t talk about personal things as much as women do. He found that women think their marriages are stronger and working better when there is plenty of dialogue and exchange about the relationship. On the other hand, the men in this study generally felt the opposite: when communication turned to topics of relationships and marital evaluation, they felt the relationship was much more likely to be in trouble.

Gender in communication When problems arise, women usually respond with more understanding; men tend to give advice and try to solve the problems (Tannen, 1990). This can result in relationship problems: in times of distress, what may be needed are supportive, encouraging, and nurturing responses. Men may be slower to realize those needs and, instead, be quicker to give a lecture, provide solutions, and sermonize. Some have suggested that this is because men see the world as more hierarchical; women see the world as cooperative and focus on connectivity (Olson & DeFrain, 1994).

Gender in communication Directness. One gender difference in communication style is how direct men and women are in conversation. Women usually approach conflict indirectly. This means they will try to solve the situation and possibly take some type of conflict- reducing measures that their partners do not recognize. When men are faced with confrontation, conflict, and disagreements they use direct approaches such as bargaining and negotiation.