InThinking Revision Sites

INTHINKING REVISION SITES

Own your learning

Why not also try our independent learning self-study & revision websites for students?

We currenly offer the following DP Sites: Biology, Chemistry, English A Lang & Lit, Maths A&A, Maths A&I, Physics, Spanish B

"The site is great for revising the basic understandings of each topic quickly. Especially since you are able to test yourself at the end of each page and easily see where yo need to improve."

"It is life saving... I am passing IB because of this site!"

Basic (limited access) subscriptions are FREE. Check them out at:

www.StudyIB.net

Exemplar: Communication

  • /
  • Student resources/
  • Human relationships/
  • Writing samples: Relationships/
  • Exemplar: Communication

The following sample is a response to the question: Discuss the role of communication in relationships. Discuss asks students to consider a range of arguments.

The sample response is an example of an exemplary response that should receive top marks. Comments about the essay are included below.

The highlighted areas of the essay demonstrate critical thinking.

Sample essay

Essay contentMarker's comment
Communication plays a key role in all aspects of human relationships. It plays a role in our attraction to others, the way we solve problems and how much we trust one another. Marriage counsellors often focus on communication as a way to improve a relationship, but often problems in a relationship are complex.  Poor communication between partners may be a symptom, rather than the cause of the end of a relationship.   The role of communication in relationships is identified and a statement of position is made in the last sentence of the introduction.
Research by Bradbury & Fincham found that couples engage in "relationship enhancing strategies" - that is, when a partner attributes good things to the disposition of their partner, and bad things to situational factors. This helps to maintain the relationship because it can enhance the self-esteem of the partner.  Couples in crisis tend to use distress-maintaining patterns - that is, they attribute good things to situational factors and bad things to disposition - meaning that the partner is unlikely to change. Although Bradbury and Fincham have documented this trend in relationships through years of working with couples in need of counselling, it is difficult to determine if this is a cause or a symptom of the health of a relationship.The theory is well outlined and there is some explanation of the research.  Minimal evaluation here, but there is critical thinking below in the discussion paragraphs.
Gottman argues that it is not what we say, but how we say it. Our facial expressions communicate how we really feel about our partners. Gottman has couples come into his lab and observes them as they discuss a non-threatening topic and then a controversial topic. Gottman measures their physiological responses (heart rate and galvanic skin response) and he codes their facial expressions. Gottman argues that there are four “horses of the apocalypse” that help to predict if a relationship will end: criticism, defensiveness, contempt and stonewalling. Gottman argues that if a partner shows contempt during a discussion, this is a sign that the relationship is heading for divorce. One of the problems with this research, however, is that when Gottman tells couples that they are expressing these emotions, it may lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy. This would compromise the predictive validity of his theory.  In addition, most of the couples that come to him for help are already in severe crisis. This may mean that the high predictive validity of his research has more to do with the fact that at least one of the partners may have already decided to end the relationship.Gottman's research is clearly described.  The evaluation focuses on the predictive validity of the findings of the studies.
A final way that we use communication in relationships is disclosure – or the sharing of personal information with a partner. This is the basis of Social Penetration theory. Disclosure builds trust between partners. Research has shown that we like people who disclose personal information. Although this seems logical, it is difficult to determine a cause and effect relationship between the level of disclosure and the health of a relationship. It may be more likely that disclosure is the result of a healthy relationship, rather the cause of one.  Also, it is debatable whether we can objectively measure one's level of disclosure. The theory is outlined and evaluated.
There are many concerns about the study of the role of communication in relationships. First, how do psychologists “observe” communication in a relationship? Often self-reported measures are used  – such as a questionnaire – to determine what the normal communication patterns are. This is difficult because the actual communications cannot be verified, so it is up to the perception of the person filling out the questionnaire. The information is open to distortion, especially if there is anger between the two partners. It can also be open to distortion if questions are asked about the history of the relationship. The peak-end rule argues that we tend to remember the most recent part of our relationship (the end) and specific events that stand out as rather exceptional (the peak). So, if the relationship is in bad shape, then the partners may only think about recent communication and this may distort their perception of the way that they have communicated throughout the relationship.This paragraph is a good discussion of the difficulties of studying the role of communication in relationships.  Concerns are identified and "unpacked."
Another question is who is actually studied. A lot of research done on communication is done on couples that are struggling with their relationship. Although some prospective research is now being done, traditionally it has been done with couples in counselling. Research should be done that looks at couples from the beginning of their relationship to truly measure how communication affects relationships over time.  It is also possible that although it is usually done with couples having problems, that the sample is also biased in other ways. A lot of research is done on Western couples.  In addition, the couples seek counselling, which may indicate a certain level of education or socioeconomic status. Finally, there is the problem of bidirectional ambiguity -  that is, we cannot tell if the communication style leads to the quality of the relationship or vice versa. It could be that there is a correlation, but no causation in either direction. Most importantly, the way we communicate is only one facet of a relationship.  It is a reductionist approach to assess the health of a relationship only on communication styles.Issues of sampling bias are identified and their significance is explained.
The study of communication has led to successful strategies in marriage counselling that have helped people to save their marriage by becoming more aware of how and what they say (or don't say). However, labs like Gottman’s may communicate information to a couple – such as, she actually finds him disgusting – that may help to end the relationship. In this sense, the psychologist may validate one or both partners’ perceptions of the state of the relationship and decide to get divorced. Clearly, more research is necessary.A satisfactory conclusion that summarizes the argument.
Words: 912