aneously sent, received, interpreted, and reactions are elicited. The communicants are active participants in the process, much the same as actors who create scenes together--"each of us contributes to this collaboration, and each of us therefore influences the outcome of the collaboration" (Mader & Mader, 1993, p. 11). Transactional communication is very much a face-to-face thing.
But when one member of the circle seeks to control the responses of another, the communication takes on an unhealthy dimension. A person who can control the emotional responses of another can similarly control that individual's behavior, too (Mader & Mader, 1993, p. 13). Even though such communication may be interpersonal, the relationship is lop-sided, manipulative.
Situations involving impersonal communications are characterized by the idea that "we determine how we will behave by predicting how they will behave" (Mader & Mader, 1993, p. 14). Obviously, if our predictions are incorrect, the situation can get out of control in an instant! The police officer who expects the driver of a car to pull to the right when he turns on the red lights may be surprised to find himself involved in a high-speed pursuit.
On the other hand, interpersonal communication "implies involvement with, and commitment to, another person or persons . . . husband and wife, parent and child, and best friends" (Mader & Mader, 1993, p. 15). Yet within these relationships, each individual has a personal view of reality. We enjoy letting people know what we think, where we stand on certain issues, who we understand ourselves to be. The most positive result of our interactions with one another is gaining new insight--seeing what we have never seen before (Mader & Mader, 1993, p. 16).
In the normal course of human affairs, communication runs along a continuum from impersonal to interpersonal (Mader & Mader, 1993, p. 17). Relationships may be situational, and...