Communication Skills: The Psychology of Being Heard, Understood and Remembered

Behavioural Science Foundation III | Unit 3

There are moments when we know exactly what we want to say, yet the words do not come out the way we intended. A student may know the answer to an interview question but become so nervous that the answer sounds confused. A teacher may give feedback with the intention of helping a student improve, yet the student may interpret it as criticism of their ability. A manager may believe that an instruction was perfectly clear, while the employee understands something completely different. Two colleagues may have the same information but reach completely different conclusions because they interpret the situation through different experiences and expectations.

These everyday situations tell us something important: communication is not simply speaking. Communication is the process of creating shared understanding.

This is precisely why communication occupies an important position in Behavioural Science Foundation III (LASS112). Unit 3, Communication Skills, covers effective communication, verbal and non-verbal communication, constructive feedback, handling criticism, assertiveness, negotiation skills, public speaking and interpersonal communication. The unit is designed for three hours and is mapped to CO3, which expects students to apply these skills in interpersonal, academic and professional contexts.

What makes this unit particularly meaningful is that communication is not intended to be taught merely as theoretical knowledge. The course explicitly proposes communication exercises, role plays, active listening, negotiation simulations, feedback activities and public-speaking challenges. The larger philosophy of LASS112 is also experiential: students are expected to learn through discussion, activity, practice, reflection and application rather than through a conventional theory-only lecture format.

And there is a good psychological reason for this.

You cannot learn communication merely by reading its definition.

You have to communicate.

You have to listen.

You have to disagree.

You have to receive criticism.

You have to learn how to express a boundary.

You have to negotiate.

You have to stand before an audience when your heart is beating faster than usual.

Only then does communication become a behavioural competency.

Communication Is Older Than Psychology

Human beings have been concerned with communication for thousands of years. Long before psychology became a formal scientific discipline, philosophers were asking how people persuade, influence and understand one another.

One of the most influential early thinkers was Aristotle, whose Rhetoric examined the mechanisms of persuasion. Aristotle identified three major means of persuasion: ethos, relating to the credibility and character of the speaker; pathos, relating to the emotional state of the audience; and logos, relating to argument and reasoning. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Interestingly, this ancient framework remains highly relevant to modern professional communication.

Imagine a professor presenting a research paper. The research evidence represents logos. The professor's expertise and credibility contribute to ethos. The ability to make the audience understand why the research matters involves pathos.

A presentation containing only facts may be scientifically accurate but emotionally distant. A highly emotional presentation without evidence may be memorable but unreliable. A confident speaker without credibility may sound impressive but fail to convince an informed audience.

Effective communication therefore requires more than information.

It requires credibility, reasoning and human connection.

What Actually Happens When We Communicate?

At first glance, communication seems simple. One person speaks and another person listens.

Psychologically, however, the process is much more complicated.

The speaker has an intention. That intention is converted into words, tone, gestures and behaviour. The listener receives those signals and interprets them using their own knowledge, expectations, emotional state, previous experiences and cultural framework.

This means that communication is not a simple transfer of information.

It is an interpretive process.

Imagine a professor saying to a student:

“I expected more from you.”

One student may interpret this as encouragement:

“My professor believes I am capable.”

Another may interpret it as rejection:

“My professor is disappointed in me.”

A third may think:

“Perhaps I am not good enough.”

The sentence is identical.

The psychological meaning is different.

This is why communication is so closely connected with psychology. Perception determines what we notice, cognition determines how we interpret it, emotion influences how we respond, personality influences our communication style, and previous experiences shape our expectations.

The First Principle: Communication Is More Than Words

Consider a student entering an interview room.

Before the first question is asked, communication has already begun.

The student walks into the room, greets the panel, sits down, makes eye contact, listens and responds. The interviewer is observing not only the content of the answers but also aspects of the student's behaviour.

Research supports the importance of non-verbal behaviour in employment interviews. A 2023 meta-analysis examined 63 studies involving 4,868 participants and found meaningful associations between non-verbal cues and interview performance. Professional appearance, eye contact and head movement showed particularly strong associations. The researchers also cautioned that stereotypes, including gender-related stereotypes, can influence how such behaviour is interpreted. (Wiley Online Library)

This is important, but it should not lead to simplistic interpretations of body language.

Crossed arms do not automatically mean defensiveness.

Looking away does not automatically mean dishonesty.

A quiet voice does not automatically indicate low confidence.

A person may avoid eye contact because they are anxious, concentrating, culturally accustomed to less direct eye contact or simply because that is their habitual behaviour.

Psychology does not support a universal dictionary of gestures.

Behaviour needs to be interpreted within context.

The 7–38–55 Myth: What Psychology Actually Says

Communication training often repeats the statement that communication is 7% words, 38% tone and 55% body language. This is popularly associated with psychologist Albert Mehrabian, but the finding is frequently taken out of context.

Mehrabian's research concerned communication of feelings and attitudes, particularly situations where verbal and non-verbal messages were inconsistent. It was not intended to establish a universal rule that words constitute only 7% of human communication.

Consider a doctor explaining:

“Take this medication twice a day.”

The words are critically important.

Or imagine a university announcing:

“The examination begins at 10 a.m.”

No amount of smiling, eye contact or confident posture can replace the information contained in those words.

The psychologically appropriate conclusion is therefore more nuanced: verbal and non-verbal communication interact, and their relative importance depends on the situation.

Listening: The Forgotten Half of Communication

One of the biggest mistakes people make is assuming that communication is primarily about speaking.

In reality, some of the most serious communication failures occur because people do not listen.

We often listen while preparing our response.

A friend says, “I am very stressed about my dissertation,” and before they finish, we are already thinking about what advice to give. A colleague raises a concern, and instead of understanding the concern, we begin preparing a defence. A student asks a question, and the teacher assumes they already know what the question will be.

We may be hearing the words.

But we are not necessarily listening to the person.

Imagine two responses to the same student:

Student: “I'm really stressed about my dissertation.”

Response 1: “Don't worry. Just make a timetable.”

Response 2: “You sound really overwhelmed. Is it the amount of work, or are you finding it difficult to know where to begin?”

The first response immediately provides a solution.

The second attempts to understand the problem.

This distinction is fundamental to psychology and counselling.

A psychologist does not simply listen for facts. They listen for meaning, context and the individual's experience, while avoiding premature assumptions.

If a student says:

“I'm fine.”

and appears uncomfortable while discussing a particular subject, the psychologically informed response is not:

“You are obviously anxious.”

A more appropriate response might be:

“You said you're fine, but I notice that this topic seems difficult to talk about. Would you like to tell me more?”

The first statement imposes an interpretation.

The second creates an opportunity for the person to explain.

Good listening does not tell another person what they feel. It gives them the psychological space to explain what they feel.

Constructive Feedback: The Difference Between Correction and Development

Feedback is unavoidable in education and professional life.

Students receive feedback on assignments, presentations, research proposals and internships. Employees receive feedback from supervisors and colleagues. Managers provide feedback to teams.

But feedback is not automatically helpful.

Imagine a student completes a presentation and the teacher says:

“Your presentation was poor.”

The student may leave without knowing what to improve.

Now imagine the teacher says:

“Your content was well researched, but you spoke very quickly during the final section, which made the conclusion difficult to follow.”

The second statement is much more useful because it identifies a specific and changeable behaviour.

This distinction is strongly supported by research.

In their landmark 1996 meta-analysis, Avraham Kluger and Angelo DeNisi examined 607 effect sizes from 131 studies involving 23,663 observations. Feedback improved performance overall, but more than one-third of the feedback interventions were associated with decreased performance. (ResearchGate)

This is a fascinating finding because we often assume:

Feedback = improvement.

The research tells us that it is not that simple.

Feedback can direct attention toward the task:

“Your literature review needs stronger evidence.”

Or it can direct attention toward the self:

“You are not a good researcher.”

The first statement gives information that can guide improvement.

The second may threaten identity and produce defensiveness.

This is one reason constructive feedback should focus on behaviour, evidence and improvement, rather than attacking the person's identity.

A Useful Psychological Formula

Observation → Impact → Improvement

Instead of:

“You are careless.”

Try:

“Two references are missing from this section, which makes the argument difficult to verify. Let's check the sources before submission.”

The standard has not been lowered.

The communication has simply become more developmental.

Handling Criticism: What Happens Inside the Mind?

Receiving criticism is psychologically difficult because human beings naturally care about competence, acceptance and self-worth.

A student who has spent three days preparing an assignment may hear:

“Your argument is not sufficiently supported.”

and internally translate it into:

“I am not intelligent.”

But those two statements are completely different.

The first evaluates a piece of work.

The second evaluates the entire person.

Professional maturity requires learning to separate feedback about performance from judgement of personal worth.

A useful response to criticism can therefore be:

“Could you show me where the argument needs strengthening?”

That response does not mean blindly accepting the criticism.

It means investigating it.

A psychologically mature person can listen to criticism, examine its validity, use what is useful and reject what is unfair without becoming emotionally overwhelmed.

Assertiveness: The Healthy Middle Ground

Communication becomes especially difficult when our needs conflict with those of other people.

A student may want to say no to a friend.

An employee may need to challenge an unrealistic deadline.

A junior researcher may disagree with a methodological decision.

A colleague may need to address repeated interruptions.

People commonly respond to these situations in one of three ways: they remain passive, they become aggressive, or they learn to communicate assertively.

Imagine a teammate asks:

“Can you complete my section too?”

A passive response might be:

“Okay.”

even though you are already overloaded.

An aggressive response might be:

“Why should I always do your work?”

An assertive response could be:

“I can help you understand the task, but I cannot complete your section because I have my own deadline.”

Assertiveness is therefore not about being loud or dominant.

It is about expressing one's needs and boundaries clearly while respecting the other person's rights.

Research supports the idea that assertiveness can be developed through structured training. A 2017 systematic review of assertiveness communication training involving healthcare professionals and students found that training interventions showed some effectiveness across the targeted groups, with face-to-face and multimethod approaches—including discussion, role-play and team training—identified as useful approaches. (PubMed)

This is particularly relevant for university education because students can practise difficult conversations before they encounter them in high-stakes professional situations.

When Assertiveness Becomes an Ethical Responsibility

Sometimes speaking up is not merely a matter of confidence.

It is a matter of responsibility.

Imagine a junior researcher notices a possible error in a senior researcher's data.

Imagine a healthcare professional notices something that could affect patient safety.

Imagine an employee discovers an important mistake in a report that is about to be sent to a client.

Silence may feel safer.

But silence can sometimes have consequences.

This is why high-risk professions such as aviation and healthcare place considerable emphasis on communication across hierarchy and the ability to speak up when a concern needs attention.

A professional should be able to say:

“I may be mistaken, but I think we should verify this before proceeding.”

This is assertiveness combined with humility.

It does not challenge authority for the sake of challenging authority.

It communicates information that may matter.

Negotiation: Moving From “Me Versus You” to “What Is the Problem?”

Negotiation is another communication skill that students use much more often than they realise.

Two students may want the same presentation role.

Two team members may want different deadlines.

A student may need an extension while a teacher has academic constraints.

An employee may want flexible working arrangements while an organization has operational requirements.

The easiest way to make negotiation difficult is to focus only on positions.

“I want Friday.”

“No, I want Monday.”

A more psychologically sophisticated approach is to explore the interests behind those positions.

Perhaps one student wants Friday because they have an interview on Monday.

Perhaps the other wants Monday because they need additional preparation time.

Once the underlying interests become visible, new solutions become possible.

One person may present the first section while the other presents the second. A deadline may be divided into stages. Responsibilities may be redistributed.

The question changes from:

“Who is going to win?”

to:

“What are we actually trying to solve?”

This is the basis of principled negotiation associated with Roger Fisher and William Ury's work and the Harvard Negotiation Project.

Ethical negotiation is not manipulation.

It involves understanding one's own interests, understanding the other person's interests and searching for solutions that respect legitimate needs.

Public Speaking: When Knowledge Meets Anxiety

One of the most familiar communication challenges among university students is public speaking.

A student can know the subject perfectly and still become extremely nervous when asked to present it.

The heart begins beating faster.

The mouth becomes dry.

The hands feel uncomfortable.

The student forgets the first sentence.

This does not necessarily mean the student lacks knowledge.

It may mean that the situation has triggered social-evaluative anxiety.

A study of college students found that 63.9% reported fear of public speaking, while 89.3% said they would like their undergraduate programme to include classes aimed at improving public-speaking skills. (PubMed)

The problem often becomes worse because the speaker starts monitoring themselves:

Am I shaking?

Can everyone see that I'm nervous?

What if I forget?

What if they think I'm stupid?

Attention shifts from the message to the self.

A useful psychological shift is therefore:

Don't ask only, “How am I performing?” Ask, “What does my audience need to understand?”

This moves the speaker from self-evaluation to communication.

Swami Vivekananda and the Power of Audience Connection

One of the most significant examples of public communication in Indian history is Swami Vivekananda's address at the World's Parliament of Religions in Chicago on 11 September 1893. His opening established an immediate sense of warmth and connection with the audience before he moved into his broader message. (Swami Vivekananda)

From the perspective of communication psychology, the lesson is important.

A speaker should not think only about:

“What do I know?”

The speaker should also think:

“Who is listening?”

A first-year university class, a group of corporate executives and a room full of researchers may all be listening to the same topic, but they do not have the same background knowledge, expectations or communication needs.

Effective public speaking therefore involves audience adaptation.

Why Some Speeches Stay in Memory

Another historic example is Martin Luther King Jr.'s “I Have a Dream” speech, delivered on 28 August 1963.

Its continuing cultural influence cannot be explained simply by vocabulary or factual content. The speech combined repetition, rhythm, imagery, emotional appeal and a powerful vision.

The audience was not simply being given information.

They were being invited to imagine a future.

This illustrates a useful principle for students:

People do not remember information only because it is correct; they often remember it because it becomes meaningful.

This is one reason case studies are powerful in teaching.

Instead of simply defining social anxiety, we can introduce a student who avoids presentations because they fear embarrassment.

Instead of defining workplace conflict, we can examine a real situation in which two employees interpret the same decision differently.

Instead of explaining negotiation abstractly, we can simulate a group-project conflict.

The abstract becomes concrete.

Case Study: Apollo 13 and Communication Under Pressure

A particularly powerful real-world case is Apollo 13, launched in April 1970.

After an explosion severely damaged the spacecraft, NASA engineers, astronauts and mission controllers had to coordinate complex decisions under extreme pressure. The mission eventually returned safely to Earth, with splashdown occurring on 17 April 1970. NASA's account of the mission highlights the importance of reliable communication systems throughout the crisis. (NASA)

Communication was not simply about giving instructions.

Information had to be exchanged quickly.

Conditions had to be reported accurately.

Engineers had to explain technical constraints.

Astronauts had to communicate what was happening inside the spacecraft.

Mission control had to coordinate multiple teams.

A scholarly analysis of NASA's crisis communication during Apollo 13 argued that the agency's rapid, open and honest communication helped manage the crisis and maintain public and institutional support. (ScienceDirect)

The lesson is highly relevant to students.

When something goes wrong, ineffective teams often begin with:

“Whose fault is this?”

Effective teams are more likely to begin with:

“What happened?”

“What do we know?”

“What information is missing?”

“What needs to happen next?”

Communication under pressure is a test of professional maturity.

Interpersonal Communication: The Relationship Behind the Words

Communication does not happen between two abstract individuals.

It happens within relationships.

A professor saying:

“Please revise this section.”

may be experienced as academic guidance.

A close friend saying:

“You really need to revise this.”

may be interpreted differently.

A supervisor saying:

“We need to discuss your performance.”

may immediately produce anxiety.

The words are only one part of the communication.

The relationship contributes another layer.

Interpersonal communication therefore contains both content and relational meaning.

The content asks:

What is being said?

The relational layer asks:

How should I understand this interaction?

Do I feel respected?

Do I feel judged?

Do I feel safe enough to disagree?

Do I believe the other person is genuinely listening?

These questions influence whether communication becomes constructive or defensive.

Communication Across Cultures

In today's educational and professional environments, communication increasingly takes place across cultural boundaries.

Different cultures may have different expectations about directness, hierarchy, silence, eye contact, formality, disagreement and interpersonal distance.

A communication style that appears confident in one cultural context may appear excessively direct in another.

Someone who avoids directly saying “no” may not actually agree. They may be attempting to maintain interpersonal harmony.

Even a phrase such as:

“We'll see.”

can have very different meanings depending on the cultural and interpersonal context.

This is why cultural humility is becoming an increasingly important communication competency.

Instead of assuming:

“I know what this behaviour means,”

a culturally sensitive communicator asks:

“Could there be another interpretation?”

That small question can prevent significant misunderstanding.

Communication in the Digital Age

Communication today increasingly occurs through screens.

Students communicate through email, WhatsApp, learning platforms, video meetings and social media. Professionals collaborate across cities and countries without necessarily meeting face-to-face.

The advantage is speed.

The challenge is that many non-verbal cues disappear.

Consider these two messages:

“Send it again.”

and:

“Could you please resend the file? I seem to have missed the attachment.”

The informational request is almost identical.

The psychological experience may be very different.

In face-to-face communication, facial expression and tone may soften a short statement.

In text communication, those cues may be absent.

This means digital professionalism requires greater attention to tone, wording, context and timing.

Before sending an important message, it is worth asking:

How might this sound to someone who cannot see my facial expression or hear my voice?

That is a small but powerful communication habit.

Communication and Personality: Why People Communicate Differently

Communication is also connected to personality.

A highly agreeable individual may avoid disagreement because maintaining harmony is important to them. A dominant person may naturally take control of conversations. An anxious person may speak quickly when being evaluated. A highly conscientious person may provide excessive detail because accuracy is important to them. An introverted student may prefer one-to-one interaction but feel less comfortable speaking in a large group.

These tendencies are not automatically problems.

The difficulty arises when a person becomes behaviourally inflexible.

An agreeable person who cannot say no may eventually become resentful.

A dominant person who never listens may damage relationships.

An anxious student who permanently avoids public speaking may limit career opportunities.

An introverted student who never participates in group discussions may remain unseen despite having valuable ideas.

Personality development therefore does not mean changing someone's basic personality.

It means expanding behavioural choices.

The introvert can learn public speaking.

The agreeable student can learn assertiveness.

The dominant student can learn active listening.

The anxious student can learn to regulate performance anxiety.

The confident student can learn to receive criticism.

That is meaningful personality development.

From Knowledge to Competence

A student may be able to define active listening perfectly in an examination.

That demonstrates knowledge.

But if the same student can sit with another person, listen without interrupting, ask a relevant question and accurately understand the person's concern, that demonstrates competence.

The same applies to assertiveness.

A student may know the definition of assertiveness and still be unable to say no.

They may understand negotiation theory but become rigid during a disagreement.

They may know the principles of constructive feedback but still attack a classmate personally.

They may understand public-speaking anxiety but avoid every presentation.

This is why the LASS112 course deliberately emphasizes practice, role play, simulations, feedback and reflection.

The intended learning cycle is particularly relevant:

EXPERIENCE → PARTICIPATE → REFLECT → APPLY → CREATE → IMPROVE

Communication development happens through this cycle.

You communicate.

You observe what happened.

You receive feedback.

You reflect.

You change your behaviour.

You try again.

That is behavioural learning.

A Student's Communication Journey

Consider Aarav, a university student who is academically strong but initially struggles in group discussions.

He frequently interrupts others because he becomes excited when he has an idea. His teacher points this out. Aarav initially feels embarrassed, but instead of rejecting the feedback, he begins observing his own behaviour.

He discovers that he interrupts because he is afraid he will forget his idea.

So he begins writing down a keyword instead of immediately speaking.

He waits.

The other person finishes.

Then Aarav responds.

His listening improves.

A few weeks later, one of his teammates repeatedly misses deadlines. Aarav becomes frustrated, but instead of saying:

“You never take the project seriously,”

he says:

“I need your section by Thursday because the remaining work depends on it. Is there something preventing you from completing it?”

He is practising assertiveness.

Later, two members of the group disagree about the presentation. Aarav asks why each person wants the role. One wants public-speaking practice; the other is more comfortable explaining the technical material.

They divide the presentation.

He has practised negotiation.

During the final presentation, Aarav is nervous. But instead of focusing entirely on whether his hands are shaking, he focuses on explaining the topic.

He completes the presentation.

His professor says:

“Your explanation was clear, but your conclusion was rushed.”

Aarav writes the feedback down.

He practises.

He improves.

His personality has not been replaced.

His behavioural repertoire has expanded.

That is the essence of behavioural development.

Why Communication Matters for Employability

Communication becomes particularly important when students move from university into employment.

Current employer data provide an interesting picture. NACE's Job Outlook 2025 survey found that 96.1% of employers rated communication as very or extremely important, while only 53.5% rated recent graduates as highly proficient in communication. (Default)

This creates a substantial perceived competency gap.

Students may believe:

“I can communicate.”

Employers may be asking a more demanding question:

“Can you communicate effectively in a professional situation?”

There is a difference.

Professional communication may require explaining complex information to a non-specialist, handling an unhappy client, negotiating a deadline, disagreeing with a senior colleague respectfully, giving feedback, presenting research or communicating during a crisis.

These situations require more than vocabulary.

They require judgement, emotional regulation, perspective-taking and adaptability.

That is why communication is not simply a soft skill.

It is a professional competency.

Communication as an Ethical Responsibility

Communication also has an ethical dimension.

A psychologist's words can influence how a client understands themselves.

A teacher's feedback can influence a student's confidence.

A researcher's interpretation can influence how evidence is understood.

A manager's communication can affect an employee's motivation and professional identity.

A leader's words can influence organizational behaviour.

Therefore, being a good communicator is not simply about being persuasive.

It is also about asking:

Is what I am saying accurate?

Is it respectful?

Is it appropriate to the context?

Could it be misunderstood?

Am I influencing the person ethically or manipulating them?

This is particularly important in psychology because communication can have real consequences for people's emotions, decisions and behaviour.

Communication in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

The emergence of artificial intelligence makes communication even more interesting.

AI can help draft emails, summarize reports, structure presentations and generate written material. But producing language is not the same as understanding the human consequences of communication.

A professional still has to ask:

Is this accurate?

Is the tone appropriate?

Does the message respect confidentiality?

Could the recipient interpret it differently from what I intend?

Is the information ethically appropriate to share?

Technology can generate sentences.

Human beings remain responsible for meaning, judgement and consequences.

As AI becomes more capable of producing communication, distinctly human skills such as empathy, critical thinking, contextual judgement, ethical reasoning and interpersonal sensitivity become even more valuable.

Communication Is Not About Speaking the Most

One of the biggest misconceptions about communication is that a good communicator is someone who talks confidently and continuously.

Sometimes the strongest communicator in a room is the person who listens carefully.

Sometimes the most professional sentence is:

“I don't understand. Could you explain that again?”

Sometimes it is:

“I disagree, but I would like to understand your reasoning.”

Sometimes it is:

“I made a mistake.”

Sometimes it is:

“I need some time to think before I respond.”

And sometimes it is simply:

“Tell me more.”

These statements require more than vocabulary.

They require self-awareness, emotional regulation, humility and psychological maturity.

Bringing Unit 3 Together

When the different components of this unit are viewed together, communication emerges as a much larger psychological competency.

Effective communication provides clarity.

Listening allows us to understand another person's perspective.

Non-verbal communication influences how messages are perceived.

Constructive feedback creates opportunities for improvement.

Handling criticism develops emotional maturity.

Assertiveness allows people to express needs and boundaries respectfully.

Negotiation helps people manage differences in interests.

Public speaking allows knowledge and ideas to reach larger audiences.

Interpersonal communication builds and maintains relationships.

These are not separate skills operating in isolation.

They influence one another.

A person who cannot listen will struggle with negotiation.

A person who cannot regulate emotions may struggle with criticism.

A person who lacks assertiveness may struggle with workplace boundaries.

A person who cannot understand an audience may struggle with public speaking.

A person who communicates without empathy may struggle with interpersonal relationships.

Communication competence is therefore an integrated behavioural capacity.

Communication: The Bridge Between Knowledge and Human Connection

A student may spend years acquiring knowledge.

But knowledge becomes professionally useful when it can be explained, discussed, questioned and shared.

A psychologist needs communication to establish trust.

A teacher needs communication to facilitate learning.

A researcher needs communication to make evidence understandable.

A manager needs communication to coordinate people.

A leader needs communication to create direction.

A counsellor needs communication to understand another person's experience.

A professional needs communication to manage disagreement, uncertainty, feedback and change.

That is why communication should not be dismissed as merely a “soft skill.”

It involves some of the most important processes studied by psychology: attention, perception, cognition, emotion, self-regulation, social influence, personality and interpersonal relationships.

The research tells us that communication competence matters. Employers overwhelmingly identify communication as important, yet there remains a substantial gap between employer expectations and perceived graduate proficiency. (Default) Research on feedback demonstrates that feedback can improve performance but can also become counterproductive depending on how it directs attention. (ResearchGate) Research on non-verbal behaviour shows that how a candidate communicates can influence interview evaluations, although interpretation is also affected by contextual and social factors. (Wiley Online Library) Research on assertiveness shows that communication behaviours can be developed through structured practice, while research on public speaking demonstrates how widespread speaking anxiety is among university students. (PubMed)

The historical examples tell the same story.

Aristotle demonstrated that effective public communication involves credibility, emotion and reasoning. Swami Vivekananda's 1893 Chicago address demonstrates the power of connecting with an audience. Martin Luther King Jr.'s 1963 speech demonstrates how language can transform an audience's emotional and moral imagination. Apollo 13 demonstrates that communication becomes particularly important when people are working under uncertainty and pressure.

Ultimately, communication is not about having the most sophisticated vocabulary.

It is not about talking the most.

It is not even about appearing confident all the time.

It is about creating understanding.

It is being able to explain what you know without making another person feel inadequate. It is listening without immediately preparing a defence. It is receiving criticism without turning every correction into a judgement of your worth. It is expressing disagreement without disrespect. It is saying no without unnecessary hostility or guilt. It is negotiating differences without treating every conversation as a competition. It is standing before an audience while nervous and still communicating effectively.

And perhaps the deepest form of communication is simply this:

making another person feel heard.

Because our words communicate information.

Our listening communicates respect.

Our response to criticism communicates maturity.

Our ability to disagree communicates emotional regulation.

Our ability to negotiate communicates social intelligence.

And the way we communicate under pressure often reveals our professional readiness more clearly than a rehearsed answer ever could.

The real purpose of Unit 3, therefore, is not to produce students who merely speak well.

It is to develop individuals who can listen deeply, express clearly, respond thoughtfully, disagree respectfully, negotiate intelligently, speak confidently and communicate ethically.

That is communication competence.

That is professional maturity.

And ultimately, communication is not simply the movement of words from one person to another.

It is the creation of understanding between human beings.

Key Takeaways for Students

Before moving forward, students can reflect on a few questions:

Do I listen to understand, or do I listen to reply?

How do I behave when someone disagrees with me?

Can I receive criticism without immediately becoming defensive?

Can I say “no” respectfully when necessary?

What happens to my communication when I become anxious?

Can I speak confidently even when I feel nervous?

Do my verbal and non-verbal messages support each other?

Do I adapt my communication to different people and situations?

Can I communicate a difficult message without attacking the person?

Can I speak up when something important needs to be said?

These questions transform communication from an academic topic into an exercise in self-awareness and behavioural change.

And that is exactly where communication belongs within behavioural science.

References

Aristotle. (n.d.). Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem)

Martín-Raugh, M. P., et al. (2023). Speaking without words: A meta-analysis of over 70 years of research on the power of nonverbal cues in job interviews. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 44, 132–156. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2670 (Wiley Online Library)

Omura, M., Maguire, J., Levett-Jones, T., & Stone, T. E. (2017). The effectiveness of assertiveness communication training programs for healthcare professionals and students: A systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 76, 120–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.09.001 (PubMed)

NACE. (2025). The Gap in Perceptions of New Grads’ Competency Proficiency and Resources to Shrink It: Job Outlook 2025. National Association of Colleges and Employers. (Default)

Wolff, F., et al. (2016). Fear of public speaking: Perception of college students and correlates. Journal of Voice. (PubMed)

NASA. (2023). The Hard-won Triumph of the Apollo 13 Mission – 45 Years Later. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (NASA)

Sellnow, T. L., & Seeger, M. W. (2001). A successful failure: NASA’s crisis communications regarding Apollo 13. Public Relations Review, 27(4), 437–448. (ScienceDirect)

Vivekananda, S. (1893). Address at the World's Parliament of Religions, Chicago, 11 September 1893. (Swami Vivekananda)

Course Source: Behavioural Science Foundation III (LASS112), Semester III, Academic Year 2026–27, School of Behavioural Sciences. The syllabus identifies Communication Skills as Unit 3 and maps the unit to CO3.

Recommended course readings also include Hurlock's Personality Development, Singh's Personality Development and Soft Skills, Robbins and Judge's Organizational Behavior, Goleman's Emotional Intelligence, Lucas's The Art of Public Speaking, Carnegie's work on public speaking, NACE's Career Readiness Competencies and Kolb's Experiential Learning.