Indirect communication: types, characteristics, examples and advantages

Indirect communication is the part of the communication process in which information is said but not clearly or concretely. It is usually diffused in the non-verbal part of the communication, usually contrary to what the person says explicitly orally.

Next we will see in more depth what this communicative style is, its characteristics, examples and some advantages that, as surprising as they may seem, have this way of communicating things in an inconspicuous way. clear.

• Related article: "The 28 types of communication and their characteristics"

What is indirect communication?

Indirect communication, also called indirect speech, is the communicative style consisting of transmitting information in a non-explicit, clear or direct way. It clearly differs from direct language for the reason that ideas are transmitted clearly, verbalizing the message and implying things as they are exposed, without interpretations or messages confused.

When a person transmits a message indirectly, he does so through his non-verbal language. That is, he does not clearly verbalize what he wants to expose, but tries to communicate it through various aspects such as tone of voice, gestures, body language and other non-verbal aspects.

indirect communication is generally used as a non-explicit attempt to persuade or influence someone to make it behave in a desired way. Although it does not necessarily have to be used in a negative way, the truth is that indirect language has a manipulative character or, at least, it serves to convey an idea that, due to sociocultural aspects, turns out to be taboo if it is said in a formal way explicit.

It is for all this that it is common for there to be a marked contradiction between what the person says and does. On the one hand, the issuer issues, either orally or in writing, a message (p. eg, "I am very calm and satisfied"), but on the other hand, either through his tone of voice (p. g., high-pitched tone is associated with irritability) or body movement (eg. eg, rapid hand movements are associated with nervousness) indicates rather the opposite.

The reasons why indirect communication appears are many, being basically the fact that the sender does not dare to say something clearly and verbally. Whatever the reason, the truth is that can be the source of misunderstandings, in addition to the fact that it is sometimes related to a passive-aggressive communicative style. It is especially not recommended in contexts in which it is necessary to be sincere and honest, such as in the sphere of the couple or the work environment.

Characteristics of indirect communication

As we have discussed, indirect communication can arise for various reasons. Whatever they may be, in any indirect communicative style the following characteristics can be found.

1. Contradiction between verbal and non-verbal

As we have commented, it often happens that the message transmitted indirectly contradicts what is said directly. There is a contradiction between the verbal and the non-verbal.

Broadly speaking, we understand as verbal communication that which is transformed into words, both orally and written, while the non-verbal is the one that is emitted in the form of gestures, body language and tone of voice, among others aspects.

In direct communication the verbal message is clear and direct, without free interpretations. On the other hand, in indirect communication, with a non-verbal component, one must rely on tone, gestures, facial expressions and body language.

Although in most cases the verbal and the non-verbal are in tune, in the case of communication indirectly the person has a non-verbal language that contradicts the message that she has emitted in an indirect way verbalized.

This is a communicative problem, since most interlocutors expect the person they are talking to to say the words. things directly and do not expect to have to interpret, through their non-verbal language, what they mean really.

• You may be interested in: "What is social psychology?"

2. The sender believes that he is transmitting his message

One of the problems that often arises in indirect communication is that it really the person believes that, through his non-verbal message, he is making himself understood. In other words, he trusts that his interlocutor will know how to read between the lines and will understand that he means the exact opposite of what he is saying verbally.

The problem is that, in reality, in most cases the receiver tends to keep the information transmitted direct, clear and specific way, while the indirect part can either be ignored, or ignored or simply not be caught. And this is the origin of many misunderstandings.

3. avoidant intention

An important aspect of indirect communication is that the sender has an avoidant intention when transmitting his actual message. He does not want to express it explicitly, for fear of offending his interlocutor or to be too abrupt, and prefers to emit it indirectly, thinking that this will soften it.

Surprising as it may seem, this way of thinking is quite common, making indirect communication a style communicative quite frequent, especially in cultures in which special care is taken not to harm the feelings of the person other part.

Types of indirect communication

When it comes to understanding indirect communication in greater depth, we can talk about two levels: the cultural and the individual.

At the cultural level

Indirect communication can be a very important aspect in certain cultures, especially those in which offending the interlocutor is avoided by all means. For it it is about communicating the information in a non-verbal way, although this may be contrary to what the issuer is saying, in an explicit and clearer way.

This is especially visible in Asian cultures. For example, in the case of Japan, it is quite frowned upon to say something that might upset the other party, since there is a lot of importance of protecting the feelings of others (not expressing them) and avoiding embarrassment and social unrest at all coast.

This is especially understandable with an anecdote that often happens to westerners residing in the country of the Rising Sun.

On more than one occasion it has happened that he has gone to a store to buy a certain item, whatever. If it is not in that store, and the clerk knows it, instead of being clear and direct and saying that he does not have it in that store, he prefers to say "I am going to the store to look" or "I'm going to check with the manager" and, perfectly, you can "hide" in the back room waiting for the client to leave and "get" that you don't have.

From our Western point of view, we may think that this way of behaving implies a significant loss of time, and it is undoubtedly so. However, for the Japanese citizen, who has been raised in that culture and knows what the rules are sociocultural that govern their world, they understand, first of all, what is the hidden meaning behind that "I'm going to store to look”.

Instead, and for better or worse, we don't go around worrying if saying “no” is going to offend the other person. It is clear that, depending on which occasions, being too abrupt does not compensate (p. e.g., trying to break up with our partner and saying that it is because we are not sexually satisfied as before and we prefer sleeping with the neighbor.), however, in other contexts it is clear that saying a simple “no” helps us save a lot time.

• You may be interested in: "What is Cultural Psychology?"

on an individual level

On an individual level, indirect communication can be an indicator of a problem, especially if it is belongs to a culture where being clear is prioritized, as is the case in most cultures westerners.

If that is the case, you may be facing a person who has a problem, who does not dare to say things clearly or has a passive-aggressive communication style. It does not compensate anyone, both the sender and the interlocutor, that encrypted messages are sent in the form of gestures and see if there is luck and the interlocutor ends up understanding them.

Does it have advantages?

Indirect communication gets a bad rap, and no wonder. Compared to its direct counterpart, which is clear, honest, and concise, the indirect one seems only weak, dishonest, inefficient, and confusing. It is not surprising that because of this, phrases of the type are heard:

• If you don't say things clearly, don't expect the rest of us to understand you..
• It would be so much easier if you said things the way you mean them..
• I'm not a fortune teller: tell me what you want and that's it.

However, in some specific cases, this communicative style can have its pros, especially if you know how to use it and if our interlocutor is able to understand what we are saying between the lines.

1. artistic component

There is an artistic side to indirect communication. We are used to logical thinking, where a clear and pragmatic strategy is established by following a specific number of steps.

However, with indirect communication we have a way of transmitting information that is not governed by specific guidelines, is not limited or can be broken with brute force. There is a certain degree of softness and artistic freedom.

2. Allows editing while speaking

One of the main advantages of indirect communication is that it allows you to “edit while you talk”. That is to say, it allows us to constantly adjust the message depending on the feedback we receive, modifying it depending on how convenient we consider it to be issued or not.

3. Go beyond what is explicitly said

Indirect communication forces us to go a little further than the expressed message. That is to say, forces us to try to read between the lines, try to understand if the person is comfortable or tells us everything he would like directly.

Relying too much on verbal communication, both oral and written, can make us lose a significant content in the message, a part that can give us a clue as to whether the person is comfortable or has any criticism that make us.

Bibliographic references:

• Serra, M. (2013) Psychology of communication and language. Barcelona: Editions and Publications of the University of Barcelona.
• Berko Gleason, J. and Bernstein Ratner, N. (1999) Psycholinguistics. Aravaca (Madrid): McGraw Hill.
• Cortès-Colome, M. (2006). Introduction to the psychology of language and communication. Barcelona: Publications and Editions of the University of Barcelona.