“How do open-ended questions improve interpersonal communication?”
TL;DR: They do not.
Let’s explore a common #communication assumption about 'open' and 'closed' questions with some data to see what they look like, and what they do, in real interaction.
1. Thread. 🧵
2. Google "open and closed questions” and you’ll find loads of articles and (often written or hypothetical) examples about them - tweet 1 is just one of many.
As @d_galasinski pondered recently: “I wonder who is responsible for fetishising open questions.”
3. When we examine questions as they are actually used - ‘in the wild’ - we find that yes/no (‘closed’) questions routinely receive more than ‘yes/no’ in response.
And just because a question is ‘open’ doesn’t mean it'll be answered.
Let’s see some examples.
4. Here's another example from a group of friends chatting.
[#EMCA researchers use the 'Jefferson' system for transcription - to find out more, see @alexahepburn@BoldenGalina's book 'Transcribing for Social Research'.]
5. Just saying 'yes' or 'no' - even when the question requires 'yes' or 'no' - can even seem a bit rude ...
6. Here's an example from a first date. The couple has been talking about what they like in a partner.
If someone answers an 'open' ('wh-') question with a a closed response (line 11), perhaps the date isn't going well... 😬
7. Why do people so regularly give more than a 'closed' response to an apparently 'closed' question?
When we look at real talk, rather than imagine talk, it seems pretty ordinary to do so (as in this example from research with @S_Parslow@MFlinkfeldt)
8. In response to a 'closed' question from the patient, the #GP receptionist doesn’t just say ‘no’.
Her response conveys ‘no’ while ALSO providing an account for not saying ‘yes’ (as in this example from research with @rein_ove@symondsjon) - because the question is a request.
9. Here's an example of rapidly repeated responses to a 'closed' question - again, doing more than required and doing it early (it's from a study of antenatal consultations conducted with @MagnusHamann@DoctorDot2@jayne_wagstaff)
10. Here's an elaborate 'no'.
11. In this example, the cafe staff apparently doesn't understand that people make requests by asking a yes/no closed question 🤔
12. Of course, there are always survey questions, where responses can be constrained by the design of the form, like in these examples from my friends @typeform
13. Politicians often resist answering 'closed' questions, like this famous example from 1997 in which Jeremy Paxman asks Michael Howard the same yes/no question - "Did you threaten to overrule him?” - 14 times 🤔
14. Since #LineOfDuty is back, it's timely to also show that some questions will not be answered no matter what the design of the question.
15. Here’s an article by @LucasSeuren & Mike Huiskes showing how ‘very closed’ questions readily get 'open' long answers.
An article by @JakobSteensig & Trine Heinemann shows that “certain actions, which are carried out as yes/no questions, demand a response unit that consists of ‘yes’ plus an elaboration.”
17. Finally, grammar and question design can save lives, as this call to 911 shows.
The dispatcher asks 'yes/no' questions to enable the caller to get emergency help without asking for it.
18. In sum:
Questions are vehicles for different actions. They are always embedded a sequence. They're not simply 'open' or 'closed'.
Regarding the UK gov's new Covid campaign (“Act like you've got the virus”), I was asked on @SkyNews yesterday if “there is a problem with compliance now in terms of people adhering ... is the message is clear enough?”
Preparing took me down messaging rabbit holes.
🧵
2. On Friday night, to prepare for the interview, I duly looked at @DHSCgovuk's campaign.
Prof Whitty speaks to camera: “We must all stay home. If it is essential to go out, remember wash your hands, cover your face indoors, and keep your distance from others.”
3. The new campaign combines March 2020's strap-line – “Stay Home>Protect the NHS>Save Lives” with new messages (e.g., about the new variant).
“We all NEED” (below) is not the same as Whitty's “We MUST” - or the very clear "You MUST stay at home" text message from March 2020.
1. From Stay Home to Stay Alert, UK government messaging has been much discussed during the #COVID19 pandemic. #IndieSAGE has analysed its effects (March-Oct 2020) and makes recommendations for a communication reset.
2. It is through language that #COVID19 laws, regulations, rules, and guidance are written - which must be understood, interpreted, and acted upon by people. Precise messaging is easier to understand and act upon.
3. While 90% of people believed that “Stay home, protect the NHS, save lives” was clear, "Stay Alert" was immediately challenged, rejected by other UK nations, criticized, satirized, and - crucially - not understood by 65% of people.
2. #IndependentSAGE agrees with SAGE that, in Autumn in HE, “significant outbreaks are likely" that "could amplify local & national transmission"; that "this requires national oversight”, & that “asymptomatic transmission may make these harder to detect”.
3. Our report published yesterday maps, in detail, the overlap between SAGE and #IndependentSAGE's principles and recommendations, and is summarized below:
3. If I do my job from home for a while longer, which I'm lucky enough to be able to (although my partner, a keyworker, is not), I reduce transmission risk for myself AND others - by being one less body to d i s t a n c e from, need a mask for, etc.
A thread on the 'quality’ of F2F vs online interaction.
While ‘communication is key’, what we know about communication, inc. online, often rests on stereotypes or anecdata.
So when it comes to the ‘quality’ of online interaction, what is fact and what is communication myth?
1. The biggest assumption is that being ‘in person’ equates to better ‘quality’ (I’m mostly avoiding 'F2F' because we *are* F2F when video is enabled). But I’m putting a hypothesis out there:
(In)effective communicators are (in)effective communicators regardless of modality 😉
2. There are lots of myths about what constitutes communication ‘quality’ even before we get to differentials across modalities. When it comes to remote interaction, the focus is often on already-tenuous things (e.g., rapport) rather than how people simply *get stuff done*.