Advertisement

Mental Imagery pp 139-143 | Cite as

Influence of Imagined Interactions on Communicative Outcomes: The Case of Forensic Competition

  • James M. Honeycutt
  • J. Michael Gotcher

Abstract

Scholars have posited that the role of communication is to control the environment so as to realize physical, economic, or social rewards (Miller & Steinberg, 1975), the underlying assumption being that the message making process is not a random activity. Instead, in seeking to control the environment, communicators purposively weigh the perceived available message alternatives and select the one expected to produce the most favorable outcome. In other words, individuals use language to create and/or alter the world around them.

Keywords

Mental Imagery Actual Success Mental Simulation Psychosomatic Research Intercollegiate Athletic Competition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bombeck, E. (1989). I want to grow hair, I want to grow up, I want to go to Boise: Children surviving cancer. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers.Google Scholar
  2. Cousins, N. (1988). Intangibles in medicine: An attempt at balancing perspective. Journal of the American Medical Association, 260, 1610–1612.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Edwards, R., Honeycutt, J.M., and Zagacki, K.S. (1988). Imagined interaction as an element of social cognition. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 52, 23–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  5. Goodkin, K., Antoni, M.H., and Blaney, P.H. (1986). Stress and hopelessness in the promotion of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia to invasive squamous cell carcinomia of the cervix. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 30, 67–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gotcher, J.M., and Edwards, R. (in press). Coping strategies of cancer patients: Actual communication and imagined interactions. Health Communication.Google Scholar
  7. Gotcher, J.M., and Honeycutt, J.M. (1989). An analysis of imagined interactions of forensic participants. National Forensic Journal, 7, 1–19.Google Scholar
  8. Honeycutt, J. M. (1990). A functional analysis of imagined interaction activity in everyday life. In Joseph E. Shorr, Pennee Robin, Jack A. Connelia, and Milton Wolpin (Eds.), Imagery: Current Perspectives (pp.13–25). Baywood/Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  9. Honeycutt, J. M., Zagacki, K. S., and Edwards, R. (1989). Intrapersonal communication and imagined interactions. In Charles Roberts and Kittie Watson (Eds.), Readings in Intrapersonal Communication (pp. 167–184 ). Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Honeycutt, J. M., Edwards, R., and Zagacki, K. S. (1989–1990). Using imagined interaction features to predict measures of self-awareness: Loneliness, locus of control, self-dominance, and emotional intensity. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 9, 17–31.Google Scholar
  11. Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A. (1982). The simulation heuristic. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic and A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Manis, J.G. and Meltzer, B.N. (1978). Symbolic interaction: A reader in social psychology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  13. May, J.R., and Asken, M.J. (1987). Sports psychology. New York: PMA Publishing Corp. Mead, G.H. (1934). Mind, self and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Miller, G.R., and Steinberg, M. (1975). Between people: A new analysis of interpersonal communication. Chicago: Science Research Associates.Google Scholar
  15. Orlick, T. (1980). In pursuit of excellence. Champaign, IL: Human Kinestics Publishers, Inc. Ornstein, R., and Sobel, D. (1988). The healing brain. New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc.Google Scholar
  16. Pettingale, K.W., Burgess, C., and Greer, S. (1988). Psychological response to cancer diagnosis-I. Correlations with prognostic variables. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 32, 255–261.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schank, R., and Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  18. Siegel, B.S. (1988). Love, medicine, and miracles. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. Sherman, S. J. and Corty, E. (1984). Cognitive heuristics. In R. S. Wyer, Jr. and T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (Vol. 1 ). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Stavraky, K.W., Buck, C.N., Lott, J.S., and Worklin, J.M. (1968). Psychological factors in the outcome of human cancer. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 12, 251–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • James M. Honeycutt
    • 1
  • J. Michael Gotcher
    • 1
  1. 1.Center of Imagined Interaction Research Department of Speech CommunicationLouisiana State UniversityBaton RougeUSA

Personalised recommendations