Article Critique Shared Talking Styles Herald New and Lasting Romance

SHARED TALKING STYLES HERALD NEW AND LASTING ROMANCE 1

ArticleCritique: Shared Talking Styles Herald New and Lasting Romance

Article Critique: Shared Talking Styles Herald New and LastingRomance

The articleattempts to explain the reason why people with similar conversationslanguage and technique tend to be attached and have fruitful lastingrelationships. The paper critiques the article, more so in regard toLanguage Style Matching. As much as what the article claims are true,some sections are not realistic. According to Bower (2010), languagecan be an important tool to any conversation. However, people mayalso communicate by use of non-verbal techniques to show theiremotions and feelings.

It is hard forcommunication between two people to be effective, especially whenthey are distracted. Exact same communication styles appear tobenefit people that are in any kind of relationship. Bower (2010)noted that verbal coordination works better for people in a romanticrelationship. Application of LSM between couples is seen to result ina more stable relationship with mutual interests. The actions betweeneach other determine the level in which the two will relate andconnect with each other. However, the article fails to highlight thisas much as those in romantic relationship are joined throughemotional tones and touch.

The use oflanguage depends on the kind of communication between people, whetherverbal or written (Parker, 2005). Even when extensive analysis isused in the article, emails, letters, and messages are not allowedwith much premise. The research may lack a clear system to such kindof communication due to its rigid and limiting characteristics. Inthe article, face to face kind of communication has been givenpremise (Bevan &amp Sole, 2014). Individuals from different placesof work, class or gender appear to communicate differently. Thefunction works helps them connect with one another.

The use offunction words while conversing can develop an attachment between twopeople for a lasting relationship. Other factors however, influencesome things that attract people towards one another. Such factorsinclude interests, environment, background, and personal preferences(Preston, 2005). This article fails to give a general consensus incommunication experts, in that when certain couples are in aface-to-face conversation, small percentage of the message can beretrieved from the worlds used. A large percentage is found in theused vocal elements types.

I took a LMStest using written samples between a couple aged 22 and 24 years inthe LSM website. The score was 0.88 that is above average. It isevident that the score is high in a more consistent telephone andface-to-face score. LSM score is lower when conversationalinteractions are lower especially in mails, letters, and messages(Bevan &amp Sole, 2014). The LSM score is again higher when thetopic and mindset between the couple is exact same. The other reasonsfor low scores are the use of few words, many IM misspellings andshortcuts, and writing genes.

When writtencommunication is calculated by the system, the results may beinaccurate. The written communication offers a definite and clear setof information used for analyzing communications. Unfortunately, itsrigidity may limit the information, which provides broaderunderstanding of words used. It is hard for verbal communication tobe calculated by the LSM since face-to-face conversations are notinfluenced by words alone but also by the tone. The limitations forinstance the use of different genres and few words may also result toinaccurate calculation.

LSM is not areliable method to predict relationships quality. Focus on the wordtypes used while relating it to the relationship is inconclusivesince it is not the only determinant. Different couples understandand communicate differently and in their own way. A lot of peopleunderstand each other more when they integrate other methods ofcommunication.

References

Bevan, J. L., &amp Sole, K. (2014). Making connections:Understanding interpersonal communication (2nd ed.). San Diego,CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.

Bower, B. (2010). Shared talking styles herald new and lastingromance. Science News. Retrieved fromwww.usnews.com/science/articles/

Preston, P. (2005). Nonverbal communication: do you really saywhat you mean? Journal of Healthcare Management/American Collegeof Healthcare Executives, 50, 2