Lost in Translation

Tone is a difficult thing to explain. Remember when your parents would say "Don't use that tone of voice with me?" Your feelings come across by the way you say something. It is easy to change your tone when you're speaking. When you're writing it's very hard to do. Setting the right tone in e-mail writing is more than just choosing the right wine to go with the meal. Tone in e-mail - how you say what you say - is so important because it is easy to misinterpret or overreact to email messages. I have learned this lesson the hard way quite recently. Having re-read certain emails written so long ago, I can clearly see how an email intended to convey one message could be misconstrued when read by a third-party. The outcome can be damaging.

A University of Chicago study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, shows that people overestimate their ability to convey tone in email messages. Study participants recorded messages vocally and wrote them in email messages. The message recipients' success rate at understanding the tone of the message was significantly higher verbally than via email. The reason for this communication disconnect, the researchers find, is egocentrism: the well-established social psychological phenomenon whereby people have a difficult time detaching themselves from their own perspectives and understanding how other people will interpret them.

According to the study I've only a 50-50 chance of ascertaining the tone of any e-mail message. The study also shows that people think they've correctly interpreted the tone of e-mails they receive 90 percent of the time. "People often think the tone or emotion in their messages is obvious because they 'hear' the tone they intend in their head as they write," Epley explains. At the same time, those reading messages unconsciously interpret them based on their current mood, stereotypes and expectations. Despite this, the research subjects thought they accurately interpreted the messages nine out of 10 times. This is a REALLY important point to keep in mind with any textual communication - be it email message, IM, blog or forum post. So many misunderstandings and hurt feelings and instances of offended or simply befuddled recipients could be avoided if we all assumed a little less that everyone knows we're teasing, joking or being sarcastic.

Because e-mail lacks the formatting of print, and the body language of in-person communication, the words themselves carry more feeling. And because e-mail messages are read quickly, an inappropriate tone can distract your reader and obstruct your message. "E-mail is very easy to misinterpret, which not only triggers flame wars but lots of litigation," says Nancy Flynn, executive director of the e-Policy Institute and author of guidebooks E-Mail Rules and Instant Messaging Rules. Many companies battle workplace lawsuits triggered by employee e-mail, according to Flynn.

Just let Humpty Dumpty be your guide, quoted here by Lewis Carroll: "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less."

Assertiveness

How Assertive Are You?
Ask yourself the following questions.
Do you ask for help if you need it?
Do you express anger and annoyance appropriately?
Do you ask questions when you're confused?
Do you volunteer your opinions when you think or feel differently from others?
Do you speak up in class fairly frequently?
Are you able to say "no" when you don't want to do something?
Do you speak with a generally confident manner, communicating caring and strength?
Do you look at people when you're talking to them?

4 Types of Assertion

Basic Assertion
This is a simple, straightforward expression of your beliefs, feelings, or opinions. It's usually a simple "I want" or "I feel" statement.

Empathic Assertion
This conveys some sensitivity to the other person. It usually contains two parts- a recognition of the other person's situation or feelings, followed by a statement in which you stand up for your rights.
Example: "I know you've really been busy, but I want to feel that our relationship is important to you. I want you to make time for me and for us."

Escalating Assertion
This occurs when the other person fails to respond to your basic assertion and continues to violate your rights. You gradually escalate the assertion and become increasingly firm. It may even include the mention of some type of resulting action on your part, made only after several basic assertive statements.
Example, "If you don't complete the work on my car by 5:00 tomorrow, I'll be forced to call the Better Business Bureau."

I-Language Assertion
This is especially useful for expressing negative feelings. It involves a 3-part statement:

• When you do . . . (describe the behavior).
• The effects are . . . (describe how the behavior concretely affects you).
• I'd prefer. . . (describe what you want).

The real focus in I-Language Assertion is on the "I feel," "I want" part of the statement. When expressing anger, often the tendency is to blame the other person, fly off the handle and get caught up in the emotion. I-Language Assertion can help you constructively focus that anger and be clear about your own feelings.
Example: When you didn't buy the groceries like yo said yo would, I couldn't cook the dinner for my parents. I feel hurt and angry with you. Next time, I'd like you to follow through when you agree to do something like. that."

The first step to developing assertiveness
Develop a value and belief system which allows you to assert yourself. This is the hardest part. It means giving yourself permission to be angry, to say "No," to ask for help, to make mistakes.

Spousal Violence After Marital Separation

Research Highlights:
• According to the 1999 General Social Survey on Victimization, 28% of women and 22% of men who had been in contact with a previous spouse in the five years prior to the survey had experienced some type of violence by that partner, either while living together or after separation.
• Marital separation does not necessarily mark the end of a violent relationship. Forty percent of women and 32% of men with a former violent marriage or common-law relationship reported that violence occurred after the couple separated.
• Most of those who reported violence after separation stated that the assaults became more severe or began after separation. In 37% of cases the assaults did not increase in severity, in 24% the violence became more serious, and in 39% of cases the violence first began after the separation.
• Both women and men were more likely to have contact with the police when violence occurred after separation as
compared with other cases of spousal violence, but men were only about half as likely as women to report these incidents to the police (55% of women compared with 30% of men).
• Children are frequently the unintended observers of violence between spouses. Among those cases where violence occurred after separation, children were witnesses to at least one violent occurrence in 50% of cases.
• Women made up 77% of criminal harassment victims reported to police in 1999. Current or former husbands and boyfriends were offenders in about half of these incidents.
• Women have a heightened risk of homicide after marital separation. Between 1991 and 1999, separated women were killed by estranged partners at a rate of 39 per million couples. In comparison, an average of 26 women per million couples were killed by current common-law partners, and 5 women per million couples were killed by current husbands.
Risk of spousal homicide was lower on average for men, and men were at greater risk of homicide by a current commonlaw spouse than an ex-spouse. An average of 12 men per million couples were killed by a current common-law partner, 2 men per million couples were killed by an ex-partner, and 1 man per million couples was killed by a current marital partner.
• Men who killed an ex-partner were most often motivated by jealousy (44%), while arguments or quarrels (41%) most frequently motivated women.
• Estranged husbands were twice as likely as current husbands to have multiple victims. When marital relationships were still intact at the time of spousal homicides, children were the most likely victims other than the spouse. In estranged marriages, the victim’s new partner was the most frequent third party victim.

Police intervention
Police not aware of the majority of violent relationships

The majority of spousal assault victims do not contact the police for assistance. Incidents of spousal violence in current relationships were brought to the attention of the police in only 26% of cases involving female victims and 6%† of cases with male victims over the five-year period. Although seeking police assistance was more common among women and men assaulted by a previous partner (44% and 25% respectively), those who contacted the police remain a minority. The police were more likely to become aware of violent incidents when women experienced abuse after separation, which may be linked to the severity and persistence of violence experienced. In relationships with violence that continued or first occurred after separation, 55% of women reported having contact with the police compared with 37% if the violence ceased prior to separation. For men, the proportions with police contact were 30% and 23%, respectively.

Respondents who had police contact were asked if they thought the violence had increased in severity, decreased/stopped or stayed the same after police intervention. Both women and men were likely to report that the violence stopped after police contact (44% and 50%, respectively). Approximately 33% of women and 39% of men reported no change, and a minority (19% of women and 11% of men) reported an increase in violence. However, without accurate information about the outcome of police intervention (i.e. whether or not formal charges were laid, if the case was taken to court and prosecuted), it is difficult to assess whether it was simply police presence or a combination of factors that had an impact on subsequent violence.

Reasons for not reporting to police
The reasons given by women and men for not reporting the incident(s) to the police were that it was a personal matter (54% and 75%, respectively), it was dealt with another way (61% and 67%, respectively), and the victim did not want to involve the police (47% and 50%, respectively). Many women also indicated that they did not contact the police for fear of the abuser (34%). Further, women were more likely to report that fear of reprisal was taken into consideration when deciding whether or not to involve police when violence continued than
when violence ended at separation (45% and 28%, respectively).

References

* Research Program: This publication was produced with the financial support of the Research and Statistics Division, Justice Canada.

Browne, A. 1986. “Assault and Homicide at Home: When Battered Women Kill”. Advances in Applied Social Psychology 3:57-79.

Dauvergne, M. and H. Johnson. 2001. “Children Witnessing Family Violence”. Juristat. Statistics Canada Vol. 21, No. 6. Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics.

Department of Justice, Canada. September, 1999. A Handbook for Police and Crown Prosecutors on Criminal Harassment. Ottawa: Communications and Executive Services Branch, Department of Justice Canada.

Edleson, J.L. 1999. “Children’s witnessing of adult domestic violence.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 6: 526-534.

Fantuzzo, J.W., L.J. Depaola, L.Lambert, T. Martino, G. Anderson, and S. Sutton. 1991. Effects of interpersonal violence on the psychological adjustiment and competencies of young children.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 59: 258-265.

Follingstad, D., L. Rutledge, B. Berg, E. Hause, and D. Polek. 1990. “The Role of Emotional Abuse in Physically Abusive Relationships.” Journal of Family Violence 5(2): 107-120.