CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >   Analyse the following passage and provide ap... Start Learning for Free
Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:
An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.
Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message).
Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.
Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.
This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.
Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.
Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.
Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.
One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.
Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.
Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlap
increases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.
Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.
Q. The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping-Pong as a metaphor for communication are:
  • a)
    It is governed by conventions with possibility for appeal; it has clear rules.
  • b)
    The operating model is win-lose because only one individual or team can win; the receiver can always predict the spin.
  • c)
    The number of players is limited as very few can be meaningfully engaged at a time; the rules of the game are fixed by the regulators.
  • d)
    It demands more skills of the receiver than of the speaker; it is as passive as bowling.
  • e)
    Real life communications is like Dumb Charade with multiple players; there are multiple balls used in Dumb Charade.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Verified Answer
Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the...
In option A both statements record the positives of Ping-Pong as a metaphor.
In option B the first statement is a limitation and the second statement is incorrect.
In option C the first statement is a limitation and the second statement is a limitation of all three metaphors.
In option D, the first statement is correct but the second statement is incorrect as Ping-Pong is interactive.
In option E, both statements are unrelated to Ping-Pong as a metaphor.
Therefore C is the correct answer.
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the...
In option A both statements record the positives of Ping-Pong as a metaphor.
In option B the first statement is a limitation and the second statement is incorrect.
In option C the first statement is a limitation and the second statement is a limitation of all three metaphors.
In option D, the first statement is correct but the second statement is incorrect as Ping-Pong is interactive.
In option E, both statements are unrelated to Ping-Pong as a metaphor.
Therefore C is the correct answer.
Attention CAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CAT.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (nois e) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The meaning CLOSEST to 'interchangeable' in the 'Communication as Bowling' paragraph is

Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (nois e) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. Which  of the  following  options   is  the   CLOSEST to  the  necessary  condition  of communication

Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (nois e) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, Ping Pong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. Ping Pong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. Action, interaction and transaction is CLOSEST to

Answer the following question based on the information given below.Claude Elwood Shannon, a mathematician born in Gaylord, Michigan (U.S.) in 1916, is credited with two important contributions to information technology: the application of Boolean theory to electronic switching, thus laying the groundwork for the digital computer, and developing the new field called information theory. It is difficult to overstate the impact which Claude Shannon has had on the 20th century and the way we live and work in it, yet he remains practically unknown to the general public. Shannon spent the bulk of his career, a span of over 30 years from 1941 to 1972, at Bell Labs where he worked as a mathematician dedicated to research.While a graduate student at MIT in the late 1930s, Shannon worked for Vannevar Bush who was at that time building a mechanical computer, the Differential Analyser. Shannon had the insight to apply the two-valued Boolean logic to electrical circuits (which could be in either of two states - on or off). This syncretism of two hitherto distinct fields earned Shannon his MS in 1937 and his doctorate in 1940.Not content with laying the logical foundations of both the modern telephone switch and the digital computer, Shannon went on to invent the discipline of information theory and revolutionize the field of communications. He developed the concept of entropy in communication systems, the idea that information is based on uncertainty. This concept says that the more uncertainty in a communication channel, the more information that can be transmitted and vice versa. Shannon used mathematics to define the capacity of any communications channel to optimize the signal-to-noise ratio. He envisioned the possibility of error-free communications for telecommunications, the Internet, and satellite systems.A Mathematical Theory Of Communication , published in the Bell Systems Technical Journal in 1948, outlines the principles of his information theory. Information Theory also has important ramifications for the field of cryptography as explained in his 1949 paper Communication Theory of Secrecy Systems- in a nutshell, the more entropy a cryptographic system has, the harder the resulting encryption is to break.Shannon's varied retirement interests included inventing unicycles, motorized pogo sticks, and chess-playing robots as well as juggling - he developed an equation describing the relationship between the position of the balls and the action of the hands. Claude Shannon died on February 24, 2001.Q. What is the concept of entropy described in the passage?

Claude Elwood Shannon, a mathematician born in Gaylord, Michigan (U.S.) in 1916, is credited with two important contributions to information technology: the application of Boolean theory to electronic switching, thus laying the groundwork for the digital computer, and developing the new field called information theory. It is difficult to overstate the impact which Claude Shannon has had on the 20th century and the way we live and work in it, yet he remains practically unknown to the general public. Shannon spent the bulk of his career, a span of over 30 years from 1941 to 1972, at Bell Labs where he worked as a mathematician dedicated to research.While a graduate student at MIT in the late 1930s, Shannon worked for Vannevar Bush who was at that time building a mechanical computer, the Differential Analyser. Shannon had the insight to apply the two-valued Boolean logic to electrical circuits (which could be in either of two states - on or off). This syncretism of two hitherto distinct fields earned Shannon his MS in 1937 and his doctorate in 1940.Not content with laying the logical foundations of both the modern telephone switch and the digital computer, Shannon went on to invent the discipline of information theory and revolutionize the field of communications. He developed the concept of entropy in communication systems, the idea that information is based on uncertainty. This concept says that the more uncertainty in a communication channel, the more information that can be transmitted and vice versa. Shannon used mathematics to define the capacity of any communications channel to optimize the signal-to-noise ratio. He envisioned the possibility of error-free communications for telecommunications, the Internet, and satellite systems.A Mathematical Theory Of Communication , published in the Bell Systems Technical Journal in 1948, outlines the principles of his information theory. Information Theory also has important ramifications for the field of cryptography as explained in his 1949 paper Communication Theory of Secrecy Systems- in a nutshell, the more entropy a cryptographic system has, the harder the resulting encryption is to break.Shannons varied retirement interests included inventing unicycles, motorized pogo sticks, and chess-playing robots as well as juggling - he developed an equation describing the relationship between the position of the balls and the action of the hands. Claude Shannon died on February 24, 2001.Q. What is the concept of entropy described in the passage?

Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping-Pong as a metaphor for communication are:a) It is governed by conventions with possibility for appeal; it has clear rules.b) The operating model is win-lose because only one individual or team can win; the receiver can always predict the spin.c) The number of players is limited as very few can be meaningfully engaged at a time; the rules of the game are fixed by the regulators.d) It demands more skills of the receiver than of the speaker; it is as passive as bowling.e) Real life communications is like Dumb Charade with multiple players; there are multiple balls used in Dumb Charade.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping-Pong as a metaphor for communication are:a) It is governed by conventions with possibility for appeal; it has clear rules.b) The operating model is win-lose because only one individual or team can win; the receiver can always predict the spin.c) The number of players is limited as very few can be meaningfully engaged at a time; the rules of the game are fixed by the regulators.d) It demands more skills of the receiver than of the speaker; it is as passive as bowling.e) Real life communications is like Dumb Charade with multiple players; there are multiple balls used in Dumb Charade.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping-Pong as a metaphor for communication are:a) It is governed by conventions with possibility for appeal; it has clear rules.b) The operating model is win-lose because only one individual or team can win; the receiver can always predict the spin.c) The number of players is limited as very few can be meaningfully engaged at a time; the rules of the game are fixed by the regulators.d) It demands more skills of the receiver than of the speaker; it is as passive as bowling.e) Real life communications is like Dumb Charade with multiple players; there are multiple balls used in Dumb Charade.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping-Pong as a metaphor for communication are:a) It is governed by conventions with possibility for appeal; it has clear rules.b) The operating model is win-lose because only one individual or team can win; the receiver can always predict the spin.c) The number of players is limited as very few can be meaningfully engaged at a time; the rules of the game are fixed by the regulators.d) It demands more skills of the receiver than of the speaker; it is as passive as bowling.e) Real life communications is like Dumb Charade with multiple players; there are multiple balls used in Dumb Charade.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping-Pong as a metaphor for communication are:a) It is governed by conventions with possibility for appeal; it has clear rules.b) The operating model is win-lose because only one individual or team can win; the receiver can always predict the spin.c) The number of players is limited as very few can be meaningfully engaged at a time; the rules of the game are fixed by the regulators.d) It demands more skills of the receiver than of the speaker; it is as passive as bowling.e) Real life communications is like Dumb Charade with multiple players; there are multiple balls used in Dumb Charade.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping-Pong as a metaphor for communication are:a) It is governed by conventions with possibility for appeal; it has clear rules.b) The operating model is win-lose because only one individual or team can win; the receiver can always predict the spin.c) The number of players is limited as very few can be meaningfully engaged at a time; the rules of the game are fixed by the regulators.d) It demands more skills of the receiver than of the speaker; it is as passive as bowling.e) Real life communications is like Dumb Charade with multiple players; there are multiple balls used in Dumb Charade.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping-Pong as a metaphor for communication are:a) It is governed by conventions with possibility for appeal; it has clear rules.b) The operating model is win-lose because only one individual or team can win; the receiver can always predict the spin.c) The number of players is limited as very few can be meaningfully engaged at a time; the rules of the game are fixed by the regulators.d) It demands more skills of the receiver than of the speaker; it is as passive as bowling.e) Real life communications is like Dumb Charade with multiple players; there are multiple balls used in Dumb Charade.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping-Pong as a metaphor for communication are:a) It is governed by conventions with possibility for appeal; it has clear rules.b) The operating model is win-lose because only one individual or team can win; the receiver can always predict the spin.c) The number of players is limited as very few can be meaningfully engaged at a time; the rules of the game are fixed by the regulators.d) It demands more skills of the receiver than of the speaker; it is as passive as bowling.e) Real life communications is like Dumb Charade with multiple players; there are multiple balls used in Dumb Charade.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping-Pong as a metaphor for communication are:a) It is governed by conventions with possibility for appeal; it has clear rules.b) The operating model is win-lose because only one individual or team can win; the receiver can always predict the spin.c) The number of players is limited as very few can be meaningfully engaged at a time; the rules of the game are fixed by the regulators.d) It demands more skills of the receiver than of the speaker; it is as passive as bowling.e) Real life communications is like Dumb Charade with multiple players; there are multiple balls used in Dumb Charade.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping-Pong as a metaphor for communication are:a) It is governed by conventions with possibility for appeal; it has clear rules.b) The operating model is win-lose because only one individual or team can win; the receiver can always predict the spin.c) The number of players is limited as very few can be meaningfully engaged at a time; the rules of the game are fixed by the regulators.d) It demands more skills of the receiver than of the speaker; it is as passive as bowling.e) Real life communications is like Dumb Charade with multiple players; there are multiple balls used in Dumb Charade.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Top Courses for CAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev