advantage visual
Uploaded by
samueltaim71advantage visual
Uploaded by
samueltaim71 Business
General
Visual Communication: Advantages and
Disadvantages of Visual Communication
What is visual communication? And what are the advantages and disadvantages of visual
communication? The answers to these two questions are what this article is going to focus on.
Advertisement
Let us begin by taking a look at what a visual communication is. Visual communication is
defined as the transmission of information to another party by the use of a non-verbal medium
such as gestures, visual aids, facial expression, postures etc.
This type of communication targets the recipient(s) eyes only. That is why it is called the visual
communication.
Advantages of visual communication
Visual communication helps in re-enforcing oral communication. Simply put, it supports
an oral communication. Because not only does the recipient hear, but the recipient also
sees what is being said with his or her eyes.
It can also re-enforce written communication. For example, if you are reading about
something and visual aids such as graphs, diagrams, and charts are added to the content
that you are reading, it enhances your understanding of what you are reading.
Pictures and illustrations have stronger impact than words. Pictures can be used to tell
things that words don’t have the strength to tell.
Visual communications can be understood by both literate and illiterate people. All one
needs to understand a visual communication is the ability to be able to see things with the
eyes unlike the written communication which requires that one is educated and able to
read and write before one can understand it.
Visual communication jumps over the hurdle of language differences. With visual
communication, it does not matter whether you can speak a particular language or not.
For example, if you find yourself in China, you do not need to understand a word of
Chinese before understanding the message in a picture in China or someone’s angry
posture or gesture.
Disadvantages of visual communication
Visual communication can be very expensive. Unlike some other channels of
communication like the oral communication, visual communication can be very
expensive to produce. The cost involved in producing it is one of its biggest
disadvantages.
Storing it can also be very expensive. Not only is producing a visual form of
communication expensive, but also when it comes to storing it, it can cost quite a lot.
Take a large billboard for example.
It takes more time and effort to produce it. Just imagine the amount of time and effort that
goes into the creation of visual aids such as graphs, maps, diagrams etc.
Another disadvantage with the visual form of communication is the fact that one can
easily misunderstand or misinterpret the central meaning of the message being delivered.
Certain people can never get the message being delivered via visual communication. This
category of people are the visually impaired who can never understand any message sent
through visual communication because they cannot see the message in the first place.
The other person’s mind wandered.
Either they weren’t tuned into you or, without consciously having planned it, their brains
temporarily went offline. Or they may have been preoccupied with other matters, and just
weren't mentally available. Nonetheless, you may need to take some responsibility, for
it’s also possible that you started talking without making sure you’d secured their
attention. Remember, our minds are always occupied with something. It’s only fair that if
you want others to give you their undivided attention, you ask for it.
The other person is in a state of fatigue.
If someone is in a “brain fog”—or maybe it’s nighttime and they’re already more than
ready to hang it up for the day—and, notwithstanding, you still make efforts to engage
them, you’re significantly increasing the likelihood that you’ll be misunderstood. They may
just not have enough mental acuity at the moment to follow you—and they may be too
tired even to articulate this to you. Consider that, as any good comic would tell you,
“timing is everything.” It’s imprudent (if not downright foolish) to approach anything
complex or conflictual when your potential listener is “listened out.”
The other person is mad at you.
Keep in mind that if the other individual is emotionally upset with you, whatever you say
(or write) to them is likely to be taken unfavorably. So this is hardly the time to be making
your most forceful arguments to convince them that your point of view is justified, or
superior to theirs. Rather, in such instances, your job, if you’re willing to accept it, is to
hear them out: To not be the speaker but the auditor, and to see whether you can’t
validate where they’re coming from—though it may contrast sharply with your own
perspective. If you want them to recognize the legitimacy of your position, you’ll probably
first need to summon up the patience, understanding, and compassion to listen
sympathetically to theirs. In general, only by so doing might they be willing to listen to you
without projecting onto your words a negatively distorted meaning born of
their already being angry or irritated with you.
The other person is “negatively sensitized” to you.
Your relationship may have deteriorated to the point that almost anything that comes out
of your mouth will be received in a negative light. Especially in a, whatever you say is
likely to be interpreted unfavorably. Your partner—now afflicted with a strong bias against
you, and so no longer willing to give you the benefit of the doubt—is likely to perceive your
explicit, or implied, meaning as something opposite to your (possibly) benign or even
reconciliatory intentions. If you’re serious about quelling the hostility that’s overtaken your
relationship, here’s one of the best things you can do: As non-defensively as possible,
clarify what you meant to say, even as you empathically “identify” with your partner’s
reality, sharing that you can appreciate how—given all the disagreements and
misunderstandings that have led to your present stalemate—they might not be able to
help aversely misunderstanding you.
You’re reminding the other person of something from their past.
This particular reason for another’s mistaking your meaning is far more common than
most people realize—but psychologically, it makes perfect sense. One tip-off of such a
“mistaken identity” is when, in anger, your partner says to you: “You’re just like my mother
[or father]!” Assuming they have substantial unresolved issues with either caretaker—and
in the moment something about your behavior reminded them of that person—you can be
almost sure that whatever you said revived old feelings of parental acrimony. Even
beyond this, there’s always the possibility (and it might only be some coincidental physical
similarity) that another person misunderstood you because you unwittingly brought up
something negative for them, the dynamics of which you couldn’t possibly appreciate. So
whenever you feel seriously misconstrued, it’s wise—gingerly—to say something like:
“What did you just hear me say? I’m puzzled by your reaction. Might I have reminded you
of somebody else?”
The other person is strong-willed and rigid; has stringent, intransigent opinions;
or isn’t able to “take in” any viewpoint other than their own.
Unquestionably, whatever you might say to someone this uncompromising will pass
through a “filter” protectively held in place and rendering impossible their ability to
accurately, objectively, or sympathetically comprehend what you’re sharing. Their archly
defensive, or mentally blinded, stance inevitably leads them to twist things around so they
can remain safe and secure within their (exceedingly narrow) comfort zone. If this is the
case, you either need to be painstakingly careful in how you approach them or—if it’s a
viable option—not approach them at about topics to which they’ve already shown extreme
reactivity.
The other person might be less educated or sophisticated than you.
What assumptions might you be making about the depth or breadth of another’s
knowledge? Might your communication have included an allusion with which they
were totally unfamiliar? It could have referred to a character like Prometheus,
Sappho, or Ulysses; a literary work like Madame Bovary, The Trial, or The Sound
and the Fury; or a word like acquiescence, fulsome, or nonplussed—which you
wrongfully estimated the individual would know the meaning of, but, frankly, many
people do not. It's the same with jargon and acronyms—technical terms or verbal
short-cuts you may be so familiar with that you assume everyone else must also
be cognizant of, but many m
