Communication 205
Discussion Paper

Question: Anxiety/uncertainty management theory proposes that the reason intercultural encounters are difficult is because anxiety and uncertainty are high. The theory argues that by reducing these two variables intercultural communication will be facilitated. Can you think of an example of when the reduction of anxiety and uncertainty might hinder rather than help facilitate effective communication?

Focusing on multi-cultural encounters, Gudykunst suggests that the wider the "gap" between the cultures (i.e., the more different they are), the more likely the people interacting will experience anxiety and uncertainty (Griffin, 1997). Anxiety is affective or emotional; it is a feeling that occurs when the communicator doesn't feel comfortable or secure (Griffin, 1997). Uncertainty is cognitive; it is a thought that occurs when the communicator doesn't know what to do (Griffin, 1997). Gudykunst (cited in Griffin, 1997) says that the causes to anxiety and uncertainty are (1) motivations (i.e., not knowing what others want or need); (2) knowledge (i.e., not knowing the other culture, not knowing what is expected); and (3) skills (i.e., not knowing how to do something). All three lead to both anxiety and uncertainty, which reduces effective communication. Gudykunst says we should reduce our anxiety and uncertainty through "mindfulness" so that we can better communicate (Griffin, 1997).

I'm not sure that reducing anxiety or uncertainty is a guarantee to better communication. I'm going to provide some examples to prove my claim. First, I think that sometimes anxiety can increase communication competence. When I took interpersonal communication, everything seemed to make sense. None of the ideas or concepts seemed particularly difficult, so when it came time for the first exam, I didn't study very hard; I didn't feel any anxiety. I walked into the exam confident that I could perform effectively. Unfortunately, the test questions asked me to remember terms that seemed really obvious in class, but didn't seem so obvious on the exam. I got a poor grade, one that could have been avoided if I had felt more anxiety and tried a bit harder. Gudykunst says that anxiety increases the chance for a poor performance, but in this case I think a lack of anxiety caused a poor performance. After that first exam I was a lot more anxious, I studied harder, and my grades improved.

I also believe that a certain amount of uncertainty can increase communication effectiveness. Although I don't have a personal example, I think I can use Gudykunst's own ideas to argue against him. Gudykunst says there are four levels of competence: unconscious incompetence, conscious incompetence, conscious competence, and unconscious competence. He says level three is the best, because we are actively trying to be competent. I think this contradicts his own claim that we need to reduce uncertainty to be competent. A level four person, who is able to perform competently without thinking about it, is a person who has no uncertainty-they have the knowledge, the motivation, and the skill to be effective. A level three person, who consciously tries to change how they behave, inherently is experiencing more uncertainty; he or she needs to think about what to do (the knowledge factor) and how to do it (the skills factor). Thus, uncertainty cannot be an entirely bad thing if level three competence is the best, as Gudykunst says.

In sum, although Gudykunst says that increased levels of anxiety and uncertainty is what gets in the way of effective intercultural communication, based on my own experiences, and some flaws in Gudykunst's logic, I think that anxiety and uncertainty can in fact make you a more effective communicator.