Building Rapport

K.D. Hoffman has expertise in applying theoretical communication to real world endeavors. Her blog is Healthy Change Communications. This is a blog about health communications. Hoffman says, “It’s about using behavioral science to deeply understand specific audiences. With deep understanding, health communicators can engage and inspire change, whether in the individual or in society.”

A current series of blog posts addresses the idea of Targeting vs Tailoring communication. The second post is relevant to our discussion and offers some more introductory-level explanation of cognitive fluency.

Part Two: Engagement…or how to make it matter

“We process messages in two ways, via central or peripheral processing… When people have little interest in a message, they tend to process it peripherally. When processing peripherally, they don’t think about the arguments in the message but rather they use cues like attractiveness, reputation or credibility to guide their decision to perform a behavior….

Alternatively, central processing is energy consuming. It is only engaged in when a message is very important and relevant to the person and when the person has the intellectual or technical ability… Processing centrally requires careful listening and evaluation of message content… Central processing is more likely to lead to long-term and stable change.

One of the best ways to engage the central processing route is to make your message relevant to the audience.  Tailoring achieves relevance.”

The full series of posts is available here, and there is more to come:

Part One Part Two PartThree

 
Expertise as Peripheral Processing

Now consider this older, alternate perspective from our new lens of cognitive fluency.  It provides a hint of the transition to be made in our thinking about writing to make thinking easy for readers with different levels of contextual knowledge.
 

From Farnam Street blog, On expertness and intuition, An excerpt fromHerbert Simon:
“We have seen that a major component of expertise is the ability to recognize a very large number of specific relevant cues when they are present in any situation, and then to retrieve from memory information about what to do when those particular cues are noticed.

“Because of this knowledge and recognition capability, experts can respond to new situations very rapidly- and usually with considerable accuracy. Of course, on further thought, the initial reaction may not be the correct one, but it is correct in a substantial number of cases and is rarely irrelevant. We usually use the word “intuition” – sometimes also “judgment” or even “creativity” – to refer to this ability of experts to respond to situations in their domains of expertise almost instantaneously and relatively accurately. [these] skills have the same basis in knowledge and recognition capability.”

From Simon’s book, Models of My Life. For more: Solution by Recognition and Choice Under Uncertainty.

I’d like to invite you to join me in a conversation on how recent discoveries in cognitive psychology and neuroscience affect how we go about producing plain language and how we define or describe it.

Twenty years ago, we were saying to training groups that “recent brain research” was changing what we knew about how people process language. Now we are being told that the research in the past 10 to 15 years has dramatically changed what we know about memory and thinking processes.

The volume of that research has now reached a point that it can be consolidated and applied to practical fields—like plain language writing. Luckily for me, articles are now being written that can be understood by those of us who are not scientists. As these articles begin to popularize these new concepts and their practical applications, we need to reinterpret “plain language”.

I’d like to start that discussion here and now. We can’t wait for papers to be delivered at biennial conferences.

I am not a scientist, so I could only summarize what I have read. I would prefer to exchange ideas and interpretations with my peers before stating anything with a sense of certainty. And I welcome you to invite any cognitive psychologist to join our discussion.

First, here are a few definitions:

“..Psychological research on meta-cognition: thoughts about other thoughts. Whether or not something is easy to think about—cognitive fluency—is one important type of meta-cognition, with all sorts of benefits accruing to things that are easily processed…”

http://www.spring.org.uk/2010/03/8-studies-demonstrating-the-power-of-simplicity.php

“Processing fluency is the ease with which information is processed in the mind. The ease with which perceptual stimuli are processed is perceptual fluency; the ease with which information can be retrieved from memory is retrieval fluency.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_fluency

The current notion seems to be that writing that uses familiar words and concepts and presented in familiar formats will be quickly and easily processed by using a default method of thinking.

Julia Baker describes the 2 mental processes:

Psychology – and cognitive theory in particular – recognize two unique systems for information processing. The first system is the “associative system,” which operates by comparing a novel stimulus with known information about the world. This system of analysis is based primarily on probabilities and assessing new stimuli by referencing previously perceived objects. This system is often characterized by quick, automatic reasoning decisions based on inferences.

The second system is referred to as a “rule-based,” product, or analytic system. It allows for a conscious consideration of the stimulus in decision-making situations. By actively considering multiple options, explanations and deviations, this system attempts to describe the world through logical analysis. Decisions made via this system can produce thorough reasoning, rather than mere predictions as offered by the associative system, which relies on known experiences.

Fluency plays a role in determining which mental operation is used for information processing. In familiar situations, individuals are likely to employ System 1 processing. Because an analogy can be formed from past experience, the more detailed analysis of System 2 is not needed. Importantly, the root of the analysis (and system choice) is the formulation of a confidence judgment, based on fluency, about how known or familiar a new stimulus seems. Where the stimulus is novel or “disfluent,” the problem solver will likely opt to use a System 2 analysis and thoroughly.

Julie Baker also describes the tactic of moderating fluency:

Fluent writing inspires feelings of ease, confidence, and trust in readers (while legalese is “disfluent,” engendering feelings of dislike and mistrust).

(I’ll give you Baker’s citation Monday)

So sometimes, when our purpose is to invoke analytical thinking or to be persuasive, we may choose more difficult, less fluent language that will engage the logical system of thought processing. This suggests we can “moderate the fluency” of writing to produce the most effective writing by engaging the anyalytical processing level when we want readers to learn or make important decisions.

I will be giving you links to current articles that might serve as a basis for our conversation. These items starting with the most popular in style. Wikipedia does have some articles on this. Each day, I will introduce you to a new article. And please tell us about the ones that you find.

The must-read article today:

Easy = True

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/01/31/easy__true/?page=full

Many companies try to communicate calm to their shareholders to keep them from panic.  As often as not they produce the opposite results. Here is a case-study.

Press Release: 3-31-2011

Wanderport Corp. (PINKSHEETS: WDRP) today announced that procurement authorization has been granted and approved for the remaining equipment and provisions, which were quoted by engineering and design partners for its microwave energy tankless water heater (MHU).

In conjunction with said engineering and design partners, the Company is well within the end process of procurement in order to complete the single cavity MHU.

“This is significant because the pieces of the puzzle are finally coming together and it symbolizes the transition of my long held vision into reality,” said Robert Simoneau, Wanderport’s Technical Advisor and Product Licensor.

The procurement list includes the advanced heat exchanger unit fabricated using a ceramic type material and customized to exact specifications. This unique enclosure or chamber was designed using thermal dynamic techniques and forms an integral and key component of the baseline single cavity unit. Other items include the metal enclosure, tubes and fittings for plumbing and some miscellaneous items.

“This juncture has been long awaited, as we take the final steps to producing the MHU expected this April 2011. Proceeding with a single cavity ‘point of use’ MHU provides a premise to evaluate the function of our product prior to expansion toward a ‘Point of Entry’ MHU,” said Wanderport’s CEO, Richard Martel. “Suddenly, the immense ‘point of use’ revenue steam is within sight, while we anticipate preparations toward a ‘Point of Entry’ MHU and the considerable market it represents,” further added Mr. Martel.”

After receiving this release, one shareholder posted online:

…it would be nice if the company would just speak to investors in plain language. Once again, they have chosen words which can and are being interpreted differently by different investors. I don’t understand why they have to choose words which cause confusion. A PR is a company’s opportunity to create excitement and generate public interest. Although they have provided some information they have also created doubt.

Many of you know I’ve been here for over a year and am a long-term investor. I’m not a trader and and don’t flip anything here. I believe in the potential of this product and would be thrilled if this PR left me warm and fuzzy…but it doesn’t. Today, one of my friends who invested in the company at my recommendation asked me if there is something wrong after reading today’s PR. Another said that much of it was just mumbo-jumbo. That is not what a PR should instill in someone invested in the company. ..

I am not going to write here about the benefits of using plain language, which include costs savings and other bottom-line advantages. My complaint here is about those clients who do not understand how much time and effort we expend to transform their drab, wordy documents into plain language. First, I have to discuss what is actually involved.

South African Dr Sarah Slabbert, of the Plain Language Institute, has said:

“Editing or translation: First of all, the ‘linguistically complex document’, i.e. the document that needs to be converted into plain language, is rewritten or translated into plain language. During this phase, the document is analysed and the linguistic structure of the document is simplified, while taking care that the meaning is not distorted. Formal words are substituted with less formal words; for example, ‘accomplish’ will be replaced with ‘do’”

Quoted at http://www.enterpriserisk.co.za/forum/topics/what-is-plain-language-and-why

This may be what most general editors think should happen first. Plain Language is more than an editing job following the guidelines seen here and there. Maybe she incorporates this (below) when she says the document is analyzed.

Here: PlainLanguage.gov http://www.plainlanguage.gov/howto/guidelines/bigdoc/fullbigdoc.pdf

There:
• using short sentences and clear language
• using words consistently
• using the active voice
• avoiding strings of synonyms
• avoiding unnecessarily formal language
• replacing “legalese” and jargon with familiar terms and phrases

The PlainLanguage.Gov site does remind its users that plain language involves organization and design as well as language. But something is still missing from the early stage. Guidelines are fine as they are, but mine are more like these Writing Guidelines: http://plainlanguage.com/newintro.html#guide

What is in the magic?

I do have a recurring client who gets it. They send me a document and ask me to do my “magic.” Other people can do the magic. Writer or editor, you must know the readers well. Some understand their readers’ needs because they work with the same demographic repeatedly. The rest of us have to do the research to get to know the reader.

My own client does know their readers well. This client often hires academic experts to tell them what they need to teach their readers. The academics usually produce a thorough report using academic language, both jargon and necessary technical language.

So I get the document and do the magic so the information is understandable and usable by a group of readers, like one of these:

1. Women whose families are new immigrants to Canada from war-torn countries, whose first language is not English,
2. Aboriginal women, on reserve or in urban environments
3. Parents, with limited education, living in rural or isolated Northern areas of Canada

After doing the necessary reader research, the plain language editor must try to see the information through the eyes of the ultimate reader.

These days we try to ignore differences between ourselves and others, so we do not discriminate from prejudice. Plain language editors must acknowledge differences between people to benefit from seeing the world from the other person’s perspective.

Good clients understand the making information understandable requires more than editing. Being able to see the world differently, that is the magic.

Now, I will be talking dollar values in the next part of this article.

Language-Change Index

Oxford University Press reports that the third edition of Garner’s Modern American Usage has a most interesting new feature: the Language-Change Index categorizes the level of acceptance of changes in adoption of new usages for words or phrases.

Five stages of language change

Stage 1 – rejected except by a minority of the language experts

Stage 2 – rejected by those who insist on “standard usage” but spreading fast

Stage 3 – used widely, even among the well-educated, but still avoided by the language mavens

Stage 4 – ubiquitous, meaning virtually universal, but still argued against by grammar police

Stage 5 – fully accepted by rational people

Evolving English

For another perspective on changing usage, we can turn to Robert Levy’s blog Save the Semicolon:

The Six Stages of Word Grief http://savethesemicolon.com/2010/05/11/the-six-stages-of-word-grief/
You will have to read his post for the explanations.

The Six Stages of Word Grief

1. Confusion

2. Amusement

3. Annoyance

4. Exasperation

5. Acceptance when OTHER people do it

6. Complete Acceptance or death

And, in “Very Unique” is Here to Stay, http://savethesemicolon.com/2007/07/29/unique-and-monique/

Robert says:

I think that there are at least two phases after a word becomes well-known, but before it becomes really standard.

The first is when people who care about these things (and even people who don’t, but who consider themselves educated) would never use it that way, and in fact, they sort of judge people who do use it. They roll eyes, or cringe a bit, or get annoyed when they hear role-models (like politicians) use it. They consider the usage a pet-peeve, or laughable.

The second is when the people who care about these things would still not use the word, but they accept that even educated, intelligent, well-read people do use it the new way. They start to feel curmudgeonly, or pedantic, if they insist that others avoid the new usage. They recognize that they’re on the way out.

So, for my call to action: Pick the stage with which you are comfortable, write there, and stop your belly-aching.

That prescription-drug info from the pharmacy can fall short

The LA Times has reported that the legally required type of medical information given out by pharmacies is not doing the job of communciating risk.

Researchers at the University of Florida found shortcomings in the written information for on “directions for use” and “comprehensibility/legibility”.

They wrote: “Many leaflets failed to meet the minimum requirements, such as provision of a complete list of absolute contraindications, and more than half lacked specific directions that would allow patients to manage problems. Because CMI [consumer medical information] was the sole written information dispensed, some patients had no information about the risk of lactic acidosis associated with metformin or related warning signs or action steps. The high reading level required to comprehend the presented information and the inadequate formatting suggest additional shortcomings.”

Drugstores are for ‘One-Document Solution’ for patient information

The National Association of Chain Drug Stores says pharmacy and consumer groups should collaborate with the government to develop a “one-document solution” for information provided to patients regarding prescription drugs.

NACDS submitted its letter in response to an August 9, 2010, article in the newspaper that was critical of such information. NACDS President and Chief Executive Officer Steven C. Anderson says:

“Pharmacy is working with the government to help provide enhanced user-friendly information to patients about their prescription drugs. The National Association of Chain Drug Stores submitted a Citizen Petition to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in June 2008. Seven additional organizations, including other pharmacy and consumer groups, joined in the petition.

“The petition requests FDA guidance describing the parameters for a voluntary, FDA-approved, concise, plain-language document for patients. Such a format could consolidate and replace the multiple written communications pharmacies must now distribute to patients.

“This ‘one-document solution’ could harmonize multiple documents that arise from different FDA-imposed legal requirements or information interpretations, and from different offices and constituencies within FDA.

The Los Angeles Times article is available by clicking here http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-prescription-information-20100809,0,3840303,print.story

The Empathic Civilization by Jeremy Rifkin

From the International Association of Business Communicators,
http://www.iabc.com/cwb/archive/2004/0504/mistakes.htm

Making a Crisis Worse: The Biggest Mistakes in Crisis Communication
by Jonathan Bernstein

One of eleven mistakes discussed:

Use language your audience doesn’t understand. Jargon and arcane acronyms are but two of the ways you can be sure to confuse your audiences and a surefire way to make most crises worse. Let’s check out a few of these taken-from-real-situations gems:

* The rate went up 10 basis points.
* We’re considering development of a SNFF or a CCRC.
* We ask that you submit exculpatory evidence to the grand jury.
* The material has less than 0.65 ppm benzene as measured by the TCLP.

To the average member of the public, and to most of the media who serve them, the general reaction to such statements is “Huh?”

A new, international, logo has been developed to represent information literacy.

The sponsor, Information Literacy Section of IFLA, for UNESCO, says:

The aim of creating this Logo is to make communication easier between those who carry out information literacy projects, their communities, and society in general. The Logo will be available free of charge and promoted as an international symbol of information literacy.

The American Library Association describes information literacy this way:

“To be information literate, a person must be able to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information. The information literate individuals are those who have learned how to learn”

(ALA, 1998)

I prefer the perspective adopted by Sheila Webber at the Information Literacy Weblog:

“Information Literacy–
the adoption of appropriate information behaviour to identify, through whatever channel or medium, information well fitted to information needs, leading to wise and ethical use of information in society”

Edgar Luy Pérez, the artist, says of the design:

“The book, open and next to the circle [representing study], comprises with it a visual metaphor representing those people who have the cognitive tools to reach information in a nimble way, as well as the desire to share this ability.”

I found out about Lisa Braithwaite’s Speak Schmeak blog and this post:
What if your worst public speaking fear comes true? through Business Communication Headline News.

Preparing to share some of it with you, I discovered I have not addressed public speaking on this blog. so it is definitely time to break the ice.

Lisa has allowed me to share her remarks with you in order to provide my added comments. The headings below are Lisa’s. The block-quotes are hers also. My thoughts are added after her comments.

Lisa titled her post: What if your worst public speaking fear comes true?

I used to teach public speaking skills to people who would become interpretors in courtrooms and elsewhere. I posed that question to them at the beginning of the course. Someone would always say, I am afraid I will have a heart attack and die.

So I would tell them that very rarely this does happen–to experienced speakers whose time has come. I ask how realistic this fear is: “Not very likely.” So we are able to put this aside and move on.

You’re afraid of losing your place

Bring notes! Put them to the side so you don’t use them as a crutch. If you forget what you were going to say, take a moment to look at the notes and move on.

You are not reading from a typed speech, are you? Use notes only, as Lisa suggests.

Or make a key-word outline of your remarks on a 3×5 card. Keep it in your hand, then you can step away from the podium and speak extemporaneously* without going to far off base. A quick glance at a card in your palm draws no special attention.

I prepare I set of cards and number them in the upper right corner. I can carry them with me around the room, or just pick them up a couple at a time.

You’re afraid your computer will freeze up or your PowerPoint will fail

Have a plan B. Have a backup laptop, a backup disk of your presentation, a flip chart, or be prepared to present without technology (this is how we all did it back in the day). Read this interview for an example of how plan B (and almost plan C) was put into action.

It is always wise to plan for how you will manage without computer aid.

I once turned up for a presentation where the hosts had promised a laptop would be there, but they forgot they might need an extension cord. While the host ran off to an office supply store at 7 p.m., I gave my presentation without the technology.

I also collect physical objects that will serve to make my point. I have a small triangular board that I use whenever talking about the communication triad: Audience-Purpose-Message.

I’ll post more on this tomorrow…

* Dictionary.com – extemporaneous
…2. previously planned but delivered with the help of few or no notes: extemporaneous lectures.