The “AUAF” Model of Communication

The “AUAF” Model of Communication

Franco C. Grossi

Kazan’ State University of Architecture and Engineering,

Republic of Tatarstan, Russian Federation,

[email protected]

A model of communication designates a conceptual archetypal used to explain the human

communication process. The major model of communication was defined by Claude Shannon

and Warren Weaver for Bell Laboratories as the process of sending and receiving messages or

transferring information from one part (sender) to another (receiver). Paul Watzlawick in the

defining of his five Communication Axioms, revisited this model and introduced the paradigm of

the feedback to explain in an exhaustive way the interactions inside human communication.

Many other authors tempted to better define a more exhaustive model, but the "Shannon –

Watzlawick" is the one more accepted even today. My personal idea was to introduce a new

model, completely antithetic to that one from them suggested. In effect, I retain their model

more adaptive to machines (i.e. computers) than to man. I called my model “AUAF”, acronym

for “Active Users in Advance Feedback”, so to explain the aim to use the feedback not “a

posteriori” but “a priori”.

Keywords: human communication, models of communication, human centered communication,

AUAF model, Ergonomics.

1. DEFINITION OF HUMAN COMMUNICATION

The term "Communication", in its broadest sense, "is the establishment of a link between animate

or inanimate objects" [1]. “Communicate” [2] is to share something with someone, sharing, from

the ancient Latin “communis”: to have in common [3]. To "communicate" means then to share the

knowledge with others and, consequently, to increase our amount of information. The main effect

is to “live" the knowledge in unity with others. Inside of the "post-Fordism" factory, in which

they tried to adapt the work to the individual and not vice versa, the insertion of the

communication in the production process, increases its intrinsic value. In the Fordism factory, the

work was "dumb" and the chain of production "silent". Inside of the "post-Fordism" factory, in

which they tried to adapt the work to the individual and not vice versa, the insertion of the

communication in the production process, increases its intrinsic value. In the Fordism factory, the

work was "dumb" and the chain of production "silent". In the "post-Fordism" firm, which

operates in the environment of communication, however, the work process can be described as a

series of speech acts and symbolic interactions, especially because today the production process

have for "raw material" knowledge, information and relationships. Moreover, alongside to the

synchronic model of social interaction, joins a mediated interaction between people

communicating in a different "space-time" modality and, more often, asynchronously. Niklas

Luhmann [4] asserts that the social system "consists not of men, but of communication between

Франко К. Гросси, Профессор, Отдел архитектуры, Казанский государственный архитектурно-строительный

университет. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: Franco C. Grossi: [email protected].

mailto:[email protected]

THE GROSSI/AUAF MODEL OF COMMUNICATION

Published in Ricostruire/Реконструировать/Rebuild no.1/2015 2

men," from which the importance of communication in the study of the movement of social

transformation in contemporary society. The world, the society, the intimacy of the same people,

show up as a vast and infinitely complex network of messages, speech acts, communications that

intersect, overlap, are outlined. The extreme speeding up of the information finds us, however,

culturally unprepared and penalizes us especially in the access to the "global market". This

post-modern concept of speed brings to mind the wonderful world of "Futurism". The year was

1909, when Filippo Tommaso Marinetti launched and signed the "Manifesto of Futurism" [5]. It

was the expression of a revolutionary art, which sought to conceal the new myths of triumphant

progress, the car, the industrial city, the airplanes, the technological domination of man over

matter, pervaded everywhere from the rush of speed. That “Manifesto" remains to this day a

dramatically clear testimony of the spirit of Europe in the early twentieth century, almost

intoxicated with his success and eager to prove its strength, the exaltation of active dynamic life,

as a celebration of creative daring, speed, of the dynamic and radical renewal of the costume. In

the era of Knowledge Economy the most discriminating factor, regarding the speed of

information transfer, will be the effective management of communication in shared mode, open to

the exchange of new ideas and aware, of the multi-ethnic and inter-relational ties that will be

created. You will then need to ponder about the proper use of current and future communication

media (new media), so that they can be skillfully integrate and assayed for a successful and

targeted conveying of information, both available in the form of knowledge, both of new

production. The third millennium opens with the great challenge of global communication, which

allows the use of information and knowledge by all in real time and in any place. As regards

human communication, I report a very significant sentence of Sigmund Freud: “Our words evoke

emotions and are universally the means by which we influence others. With words we can

procure another the greatest happiness or the most complete despair” [6]. Communication then

becomes the main instrument of socialization. Now it is my aim to finally give a definition of

Human Communication [7], in other words of the transmission of meaning between man and man,

which takes place via an exchange of signs forming part of the complex system of verbal and

non-verbal language.

The following is my definition of Human Communication [8].

I define, for "Human Communication", any Shared Symbolic Interaction.

Shared, because each communication process also requires a system of signification (the

Code) as its necessary condition, and if none of them who are involved in the

communication process know the encoding, there is not possibility of understanding.

Symbolic, because there is needed a signifier or sign, which allows the transmission of the

message. Communication takes place by means of signs or phenomena; they mean

something else than the phenomenon itself.

Interaction, since it involves two or more people, resulting in a further increase of

knowledge on the part of all those who interact.

2. THE MODEL OF COMMUNICATION BY SHANNON - WEATHER

The “Classical” Theory of Communication, developed by Claude Shannon [9] studies the



transmission of information (or a message) from a transmitter site to another receiver, leading to

the so-called “Shannon–Hartley theorem” which states the maximum rate at which information

can be transmitted over a communications channel of a specified bandwidth in the presence of

noise. The theorem is expressed by the following formula: C = log2 (1+S/N), where C is the

channel capacity (in bits per second), W is the bandwidth of the channel (in Hertz), S is the

average received signal power over the bandwidth (in Watts, or Volt squared), N is the average

noise or interference power over the bandwidth (in watts, or volts squared) and S/N is the

Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) of the communication signal. Before describing the model, it is

worth noting here that Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver were not social scientists, but

engineers working for Bell Telephone Labs in the United States. Therefore, their goal was to ensure

the maximum efficiency of telephone cables and radio waves. They developed a model of

communication, which was intended to assist in developing the mathematical theory of

communication as described above [10]. The Shannon–Weaver model of communication has been

also called the "mother of all models” [11] and it punctually describes the process whereby the

communication is carried out, taking into account in the order:

Figure 1 - The Communication Model by Shannon

The SOURCE, in other words the sender or communicator (the person who initiates a

message).

The RECEIVER, or the interpreter (the person to whom a message is directed).

The MESSAGE (the verbal and/or nonverbal content that must be encoded by the sender and

decoded by the receiver).

The CHANNEL (the medium by which the message is delivered and received).

NOISE (anything that interferes with the accurate expression or reception of a message).

Taking, for example, the conversation between two people, their mouths are the transmitters, the

messages are transmitted through the sound waves in air, and their ears are the receivers. Noise

would include any distraction they might experience as they are speaking, so, in the presence of a

strong buzz, they will need to raise the tone of voice. The strengths of Shannon and Weaver's

model are its simplicity, generality, and quantifiability and such advantages made this model

attractive to several academic disciplines. However, many researchers have challenged this model

because they claim that it "is of little direct value to social science research into human

communication, and its endurance in popular discussion is a real liability. Its reductive influence



has implications not only for the commonsense understanding of communication in general, but

also for specific forms of communication such as speaking and listening, writing and reading,

watching television and so on. In education, it represents a similarly transmissive model of

teaching and learning. Moreover, in perception in general, it reflects the naive 'realist' notion that

meanings exist in the world awaiting only decoding by the passive spectator. In all these contexts,

such a model underestimates the creativity of the act of interpretation" [12].

3. THE ‘RELOADED’ MODEL OF COMMUNICATION BY PAUL WATZLAVICK

Paul Watzlawick, was a theoretician in communication theory seeing it in radical constructivism

and at the Mental Research Institute in Palo Alto, he defined five basic axioms in his theory on

communication, popularly known as the "Interactional View" [13]. The communication within

the "Interactional View" is based on what is happening, and not necessarily associated with who,

when, where, or why it takes place, since it results from an interpretive theory drawing after the

cybernetic tradition. The following enunciation of the five axioms [14] can explain how

miscommunication can occur if all the communicators are not on the same line:

I. One Cannot Not Communicate. Because “every behavior” is a form of communication.

II. Every communication has a content and relationship aspect such that the latter classifies

the former and is therefore a meta-communication. Each person responds to the ‘content’ of

communication in the ‘context’ of the relationship between the communicators. The content

is sometimes called the denotative level of communication, and the relational meaning is

sometimes called the connotative or interpretive level of communication.

III. The nature of a relationship is dependent on the punctuation of the partners communication

procedures. Both the talker and the receiver of information structure the communication flow

differently and therefore interpret their own behavior during communicating as merely a

reaction on the other's behavior (i.e. every partner thinks the other one is the cause of a

specific behavior). Human communication cannot be dissolved into plain causation and

reaction strings, communication rather appears to be cyclic.

IV. Human communication involves both digital and analog modalities. Communication does

not involve the merely spoken words (digital communication), but non-verbal and

analog-verbal communication as well.

V. Inter-human communication procedures are either symmetric or complementary. This

axiom focuses that in a symmetrical relationship, the people treat each other as equals. In a

complementary relationship, they are unequal. They could be parent and child, boss and

employee, senior and freshman, or even simply an aggressive person and a timid person.

These relationships will determine the course of the communication.

The review of the Shannon's Model, carried out by Watzlawick in a cybernetic key, provides the

"feedback process" between the “source” and the “receiver” and this leads to the following



graphic reformulation:

Figure 2 -The Model of Communication by Watzlawick

In the study of the process of communication is here introduced the feedback from the

receiver, which can affect the transmitter. The nature of a interrelationship depends on the

sequence of communication between the communicators and the receivers. The sequence of

interactions between two individuals is never linear but circular, each subsequent message being

influenced by the reaction of the recipient. Two types of feedback are taken into account, the

"Negative Feedback" (Homeostasis) which characterizes the steady state of things, so nothing

changes than before, it is crucial for the balance of the system and the "Positive Feedback", which

causes changes in the balance, changing relationships and hierarchies. The Feedback allows you

to adjust subsequent messages to the characteristics of the environment, the context or the

interlocutor.

4. THE PROPOSED “AUAF” NEW MODEL OF COMMUNICATION

The Era of Communication introduces new paradigms as "Shared Knowledge", Anywhere and

Anytime (always), making use of the New Media. We saw the arise of Multimedia ('80s),

Convergence (90s), Shared Knowledge (Twentieth century) and Co-production of Knowledge

(Twenty-first century). Communication is also changed because the old media have been placed

alongside the new digital media. The digital extensions of our senses [15] allow us today to

receive feedback almost instantly and this made me think that it was necessary to study a new

model for adapting to our times the representation of the actual communication methods. This

need is felt especially in the field of interrelation, just think regarding the trade, where the

marketing tools are developed with web analytics. Information travels today at speeds

approaching that of light, so we can get feedbacks almost instantly. In addition, the new ways of

communication are very different from those of the last century, when there was talk of

"massification", as mass production, mass consumption, mass media, and thus a communication

of broadcast type, or one-to-many. Today, however, people tend to personalization also in

communication, which becomes a many-to-many, returning to the "discussion". Even the new



markets are today, "debates", since the arrival of Web 2.0 and the rising of "Social Media" have

changed radically the interrelationship between the "sender" and "recipient" and so the

information gap between businesses and consumers. As part of an Economy based on knowledge,

the user-generated content are now basic in business marketing. The interactivity implemented by

the Social Media, as opposed to the now obsolete media, allows the use of feedbacks from

consumers in real time, thus contributing a great deal of knowing as regards the desires and needs

of users. As concerns the digital interactions, it involves transmitting information to put them

(post) on social networks, where knowledge is shared inside the context of personal exchanges.

The clear distinction between the producer and the consumer of information is relativized and

communication is no longer a mere exchange of data, but more and more a share [16]. The result

is an increasing involvement of people in the "Digital Agorà", especially with the accomplice of

the Social Network, bringing to the establishment of new forms of interpersonal relationships and,

above all, by putting the problem of acting correctly according to the rules of social life. So I

realized that it was necessary to study a new model to explain the present-day forms of

communication and, to do it, I referred to the so-called "Second Copernican Revolution" carried

out by Immanuel Kant in Philosophy [17]. At that time, the epistemological problem, after

several attempts and oscillations, assumed its final shape and rigorously logical, which was thus

expressed: "How are possible the synthetic judgments a priori?" [18] introduces this new concept ,

setting aside the traditional opposition between "analytical" and "synthetic" and the plan inside

which moves the critical inquiry is transcendental, that is not the object of the investigation, but

the way we know it. The thought of Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804) is the point of convergence of

the whole philosophy of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and in particular, he makes a

"fusion" of the theories of judgment between:

• The Rationalists (whose judgments were “analytical a priori”: e.g. Descartes ), whose

decisions do not depend from experience, are a priori and having no logical necessity, are

universal; moreover they are merely explanatory, as they do not add anything to the content of

knowledge, are therefore universal but not innovative.

• The Empiricists (whose judgments were “synthetic a posteriori”: e.g. Hobbes, Newton,

Hume), whose decisions add by synthesis new concepts and so extend our knowledge, but being

derived from experience, they are therefore devoid of universality; that is they are innovative but

are neither necessary nor universal.

The Copernican revolution wrought by Kant in philosophy is expressed with the formulation of

the "synthetic a priori" judgments, which are crucial for knowledge, since experience models

itself on our faculty of guessing; but they are purely and necessarily well thought through reason

(they are offered to us by mathematics: eg . the straight line is the shortest distance between two

points and by physics); they not derived from experience and have universality and necessity.

The same as regards to the AUAF model of Communication, which id based on Ergonomics [19].

The Ergonomic Design is essentially to design for the user and consequently to answer above of

all the real needs of final users as regards a product, a system, or a service. In the Human Factors



Engineering process, the design's action is understood as an "analysis - design - carrying out -

test" continuum, in particular, using the TOTE model [20].

Figure 3 - The TOTE Model

The TOTE model, used to improve Ergonomic models, includes four phases: analysis, design,

testing, implementation and testing again before exit. In detail, we mean these moments as a

circular sequence (non-linear) of events.

1. In-depth analysis of the user;

2. Communication design, developed according to the analysis of the user,

3. Test the user feedback on a sample of users (1);

4. Operate the required changes according to the feedback of the user sample (2);

5. Test again the communication process (3)

6. Repeat steps 2 and 3 until the achievement of satisfactory results,

7. Finally Exit

Therefore, the ergonomic action begins before of the real planning stage and it does not exhaust

with the human interaction, but it proceeds with check actions for verifying its value.

Consequently, this in a constant research work directed to improve the balance between the

communication qualities and its usability characteristics (Efficacy, Efficiency and User

Satisfaction) [21]. Regarding the planning work, in addition to the proper functionality needs

which a product / service must have, it is now very important to consider the user's psychological

and psychosocial aspects, having in the due consideration the style's phenomenon too. All these

elements have moreover a common characteristic; they vary continuously in the space and in the

time. Success in Human-Centered Design requires giving equal weight to user experience,

marketing and technology, the result is increased customer satisfaction, coupled with lower costs

and rapid uses. The substantial difference between my model, the Shannon’s one and the

successive concerning "Feedback" (by Watzlawick), is that in my case we use the feedback of

users in an aprioristically manner. As we have already seen, Shannon's model must necessarily be

reviewed in order to also represent the ergonomic factor. This new model can well be used to

exemplify the classic communication process and is implemented with the feedback variable, in

the cybernetic case. In such application, so that to respect the Human Centered Design, the new



communication model must necessarily foresee an Active User in Advance Feedback. Hence

the acronym “AUAF”. In this case, the user is not only the customer, but also all those are

implied in the process of communication (technicians, operators, etc.) as well as the end users.

Figure 4 - The Grossi/AUAF Model of Communication

In the study of the communication process, we know that the feedback of the receiver influences

the transmitter, so here it is extremely important to analyze a priori the feedback coming by users.

In this way, knowing how our interlocutor usually communicates and getting in tune with him,

relating to his needs, our communication will be finally: Effective, Efficient and with Satisfaction

for the users (ISO CD 9241). In a human (or human/machine) environment, is obviously

insufficient, although fundamental, the contribution that the Palo Alto school gave to the creation

of its communication model. This, realizing the recipient as an active part of the process, utilizing

feedback. Therefore, I now propose the “exchange of roles” between addresser and addressee. In

fact, as we have seen, the ergonomic design needs that the user feedback will be analyzed before

the communication may begin. In this Logic, I presented at the 108th Congress of the Audio

Engineering Society, held in Paris in the year 2000 [22], the “AUAF” model of communication

reviewed following the ergonomic rules. This model studies the design in an anthropocentric key,

providing a response in advance, before users will produce the interaction. In the model proposed

by Watzlawick, the feedback from the receiving station affect the transmitter; here, on the

contrary, it is important to analyze a priori the feedback coming from the users. In a nutshell, this

new model will give specific attention to the fact that, before transmitting a communication, it

would be appropriate to test the users' needs, in order to pack conveniently message. This taking

into account the "lexicon" accepted and liked by our "public" (socio-cultural context, technical

terms, idioms, etc.), or interlocutors, and send it through the most appropriate media (currently to

consider carefully both the new media, as "old" media). Take for example the case of

communication H2H (Human to Human), the result will be better if you analyze a priori the

feedback, for example nonverbal, of our interlocutor. We can thus "modular" our communication

process by observing his physiognomy, the mimic muscles of his face, the position of his hands

and his attitude in general. The goal is to achieve in advance the feedbacks of the other part, so to

communicate more efficacy and friendly. In business communications (B2B, B2C) will be

important to understand "a priori" our usual and potential users and so to utilize the most suitable



communications medium. Before preparing the communique, we should get precise information

on the "environment" of the users, so to write it in a language they can understand, both in lexical

and cultural terms. We should then submit the text to a sample of users in order to gain more

feedback and minimize the errors of understanding. The text should be drawn up taking into

account gender equality; in fact, the communication to the "male" is different from the "feminine"

one. Therefore, the group that will work on preparation of the writing will be made up with male

and female elements, in order to fully satisfy users (male and female). As regards the use of "new

media" is to consider the main paradigm that marks the onset of the third millennium and that is

expressed in the so-called "principle of co-production and sharing" of resources. Resources, risks

and profit are now co-produced and shared, so to ensure satisfaction and profitability for all. The

starting point for reaching these new goals is sharing information, which comes with the

introduction of internal company networks and extends in a whole manner with the Web.

Therefore, I wanted to propose a model which can represent the use of the latest scientific

findings regarding the study on cognitive processes [23], to those on the generative semiotics, to

Gestalt psychology, the synesthetic sensory applications, up to the new studies about the

evolution the neocortex (mirror neurons, memes, etc.), in close connection with the

communicative value of the new media. Using the media (old & new), in shared mode, we will

get an increase in the interrelationships that the company has internally or outside, contributing to

changing the organizational choices, based so far only on energy or raw materials cheaply, and

enlarging them with the technologies that lead to the acquisition of information in increasingly

lower costs. The web analytics will be the winning horse to get prior information on our users and

be able to fully utilize the new communication model: “AUAF” [24].

5. REFERENCES

[1] Reimann H. (edited by), Introduction to Sociology. The basic concepts - Introduzione alla

sociologia. I concetti fondamentali, Il Mulino, Bologna, 2002, ISBN 978-88-15-09108-6.

[2] From the ancient Latin "cum" (with) and "munire" (bind, build).

[3] Georges C. E., Calonghi F., Latin Dictionary, Rosenberg & Sellier, Torino, 1910.

[4] Luhmann N., Social systems. Fundamentals of a general theory - Sistemi sociali. Fondamenti

di una teoria generale, Il Mulino, Bologna, 2001, ISBN 88-15-08358-8.

[5] The Founding and Manifesto of Futurism:

http://www.italianfuturism.org/manifestos/foundingmanifesto/

[6] Freud S., Zur Psychopathologie des Alltagslebens, 1901.

[7] Grossi F., Communication and Ergonomics - Comunicazione ed Ergonomia, Confartigianato

cultura, Pordenone, 2003.



[8] Grossi F., “Human Communication”,

http://www.academia.edu/6654760/GROSSI_Franco_Human_Communication/.

[9] Warren Weaver and Claude Elwood Shannon (1963). The Mathematical Theory of

Communication. Univ. of Illinois Press. ISBN 0-252-72548-4.

[10] Chandler D., http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/short/trans.html/

[11] David D. Woods and Erik Hollnagel (2005). Joint Cognitive Systems: Foundations of

Cognitive Systems Engineering. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis. ISBN 0-8493-2821-7.)

[12] Chandler D., “The Transmission Model of Communication”

http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/short/trans.html 1994)

[13] Weakland, John H. "Chapter 1 - Theory." The Interactional View. Ed. Paul Watzlawick. 1st

ed. N.p.: W. W. Norton &, 1977. 1-13. Print.)

[14] Watzlawick, P., Beavin-Bavelas, J., Jackson, D. 1967. Some Tentative Axioms of Communication.

In Pragmatics of Human Communication - A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies and Paradoxes.

W. W. Norton, New York.

[15] McLuhan M, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964,

ISBN 81-14-67535-7.

[16] Petti D., Dialogo sull'educazione con papa Benedetto XVI, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Roma,

2011

[17] Grossi F., Tecnologie per l'informazione e la comunicazione. Conoscere e capire i nuovi

media, Franco Angeli, Milano, 1999.

[18] The "Reinen Kritik der Vernunft " (The Critique of Pure Reason) ( Immanuel Kant : Kritik

der Vernunft reinen . Meiner Verlag , Hamburg , 1998 , first edition Immanuel Kant : Critik

reinen der Vernunft . Riga, 1781. Digitalisat Volltext im Deutschen und Textarchiv).

[19] Ergonomics, also called Human Factors Engineering or Human Centered Design, is a

multidisciplinary science, which studies the interface between man and machine, oriented

towards the man.

[20] The T.O.T.E. or TOTE, standing for "Test - Operate - Test - Exit", is an iterative problem

solving strategy based on feedback loops. It was described by George A. Miller, Eugene Galanter,

and Karl H. Pribram in their 1960 book, Plans and the Structure of Behavior which outlined their

conception of cognitive psychology.

[21] Cf. ISO CD 9241 international quality standard, part. 11.3, "Guidance on specifying and

measuring usability", 1993, in which Usability is definite as: “Effectiveness (Task completion by

users), Efficiency (Task in time) and Satisfaction (responded by user in term of experience) with

which specified users achieve specified goals in a specified context of use (users, tasks,

equipments & environments)”. ISO 9241 is a multi-part standard covering ergonomics of

human-computer interaction. It is managed by the ISO Technical Committee 159. It was

http://books.google.com/?id=IwRHwOK2IzYC&pg=PA11&dq=Shannon%E2%80%93Weaver+model

http://books.google.com/?id=IwRHwOK2IzYC&pg=PA11&dq=Shannon%E2%80%93Weaver+model

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Book_Number

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0-8493-2821-7

http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/short/trans.html%201994



originally titled Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs).

From 2006 on, the standards were retitled to the more generic Ergonomics of Human System

Interaction. As part of this change, ISO is renumbering some parts of the standard so that it can

cover more topics, e.g. tactile and haptic interaction. The first part to be renumbered was part 10

in 2006, now part 110.

[22] Grossi F., Ergonomic Evaluation of Audio Components and Systems, presented at the AES

108th. Convention – Paris, 19-22 Febbraio 2000, published by the Audio Engineering Society,

New York - Preprint No. 5086 (C – 3).

[23] Grossi F., Cognitive Marketing. The Next Marketing Trend, presented at the “Virtual

International Conference on Advanced Research in Scientific Areas” (ARSA-2012) Slovakia,

December 3 - 7, 2012 - Proceedings ISBN 978-80-554-0606-0 e ISSN 1338-9831 - Bratislava

(Repubblica Slovacca).

[24] Ricostruire/Реконструировать/Rebuild, ISSN 1593-4535, is Published by GTC editrice,

[email protected]

The “AUAF” Model of Communication

Documents

Transcript of The “AUAF” Model of Communication