Psicologo | Counselor

The third axiom of human communication, which pertains to the punctuation of communicative events, offers fundamental insights into understanding the dynamics of human interactions. While an external observer may perceive a series of communications as a continuous sequence of exchanges, those involved in the interaction bring with them a crucial element: their own “punctuation” of events. This concept implies that within a communication, participants assign meaning and structure to exchanges in subjective ways, thereby influencing their interpretation and response.

When a psychologist studies the stimulus-response process, they often focus on sequences of very brief interactions. In these cases, elements can be defined as “stimuli,” “responses,” and “reinforcements.” For example, a behavior (behavior A) is considered a stimulus when it is followed by a reaction from another participant (B), and A’s response to this exchange can be labeled as a reaction. However, this reductive view does not reflect the complex dynamics of longer and more articulated human interactions.

In extended interactions, each element of communication simultaneously becomes a stimulus, a response, and a reinforcement. This means that behavior A serves as a stimulus for B and, at the same time, acts as a response to a previous action by B. This interrelationship makes each exchange equivalent to a chain of triads – stimulus-response-reinforcement – that overlap, creating a complex and dynamic communicative fabric.

Considering these triads, we can think of each communicative exchange as a single trial of a learning experiment. In repeated exchanges, a differentiation process emerges that influences the relationship between the two participants, the “experimenter” and the “subject.” However, it is crucial to recognize that the definition of these roles is constructed through the punctuation of communicative events, an element that depends on the subjective perception of each participant.

An evident example of this dynamic is provided by a trained rat’s statement: “I have trained my experimenter; every time I press the lever, I get food.” In this context, the rat ignores the punctuation imposed by the “experimenter” and redefines the role of the interaction. Similarly, in human relationships, people tend to punctuate exchanges in ways that create perceptions of initiative and dependence among participants. This subjective punctuation establishes interaction patterns upon which agreement may or may not be reached, significantly influencing the ongoing relationship and communication.

Interaction Models in Human Communication

The interaction models that emerge in human communications are established as true rules of reinforcement exchange. These rules are not universally good or bad; rather, they serve as organizational guides that structure behaviors and facilitate interactions among people. The punctuation of behavioral events thus becomes a crucial element for the quality and effectiveness of ongoing relationships, as it determines how each participant interprets and responds to exchanges.

Culture plays a significant role in determining the conventions of punctuation. At a sociocultural level, we share common norms that help us interpret interactions. For example, within a group, we might identify an individual as a “leader” based on certain behaviors, while other members may be labeled as “followers.” However, reflecting on this dynamic raises a complex question: who among them is the first to establish this hierarchy? The position of leader or follower is intrinsically dependent on mutual actions and the way each person punctuates the sequence of exchanges.

This raises questions about the dynamism and interdependence of human relationships. It is difficult to isolate a single behavior or attitude as the initial cause, because each interaction is influenced by reciprocal responses. Even if one person may begin to lead a group with certain leadership characteristics, the presence and attitude of the followers can, in turn, shape and define the behavior of the leader themselves. In this sense, an individual’s position in an interaction is not static but is in constant evolution, manipulated by shared punctuation.

Moreover, punctuation also gives meaning and structure to events that may appear confusing or ambiguous. Thanks to social and cultural conventions, individuals are able to organize and ascribe meaning to exchanges, which is essential for social cohesion and the functioning of groups. Without these conventions, communication could lead to misunderstandings and conflicts.

The third axiom of human communication highlights the importance of punctuation in shaping interactions and defining roles within relationships. Recognizing how each participant attributes meaning and structure to exchanges provides a fundamental key to understanding relational dynamics and improving interaction modalities, promoting an awareness that can lead to more effective and harmonious communication. This process of mutual learning and adaptation is essential for individual and collective growth in our relationships, both personal and professional.