This negative take on silence apparently arises out of a belief that putting ideas into words is a primary modality through which learning occurs, along with a further belief that, “course discussions are one of the most frequent and best opportunities” for such learning to occur (Davis, 2009, p. 97; Lang, 2008, p. 87-88, 97). While I accept that there is sufficient research to support this contention, I believe the role of silence within discussions/conversations warrants further considerations.
Air Time and Pause Time
Perhaps since the days of radio, the idea of “air time” - time spent speaking – has become a generally understood construct in US culture; the idea of “pause time” however, is less well-renowned. Pause time refers to the pauses between conversational turns. Pause times vary across families, regions, and cultures and this is sometimes referred to as “pacing and pausing” (Tannen, 1984). Differences in pause time among conversational partners may be responsible for many communication problems including negative assumptions made about one another and an eventual unwillingness to continue communication efforts (Aaronson, 1973; Greenbaum, 1985; Shigemitsu, 2005). In a 2009 interview Tannen described how communication style can impact discussion flow (Retrieved 8/30/10 http://www.vision.org/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=1305):
“If you talk to somebody who has a different sense of timing (pacing and pausing), then whoever is expecting the longer pause will find that they can’t get the floor. And whoever is expecting the shorter pause will find themselves doing all the talking… if you tell someone, “Be aware of conversational style differences,” then you stand to solve the problem.”Differences in pace-pause styles may represent additional cultural communication-style variations. For example, in some Indigenous (Tafoya, 1989) and Asian cultures (Shigemitsu, 2005), conversational pause times are longer than majority/dominant US culture pause times; moreover, the majority/dominant culture expectations for discussion participation described by Davis (2009, p. 107) sit in nearly direct opposition to culturally-appropriate practices in several Asian cultures (Shigemitsu, 2005) and to norms identified as culturally-appropriate by various Indigenous peoples (Retrieved 8/30/10 (http://www.lpi.usra.edu/education/lpsc_wksp_2007/resources/heit_report.pdf).
Thus, a principle of discussion would be to purposefully create group norms that, to paraphrase a Peggy McIntosh quote regarding ethnic/racial diversity, allow discussants to “become comfortable being uncomfortable” with silence. One concrete example might be to establish a practice of 2- 5 second pause times between speakers.
References
Aaronson, D. (1973). A refreshing monograph on the pause that refreshes: Rhythms of dialogue. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2(4), 369-374.
Greenbaum, P. E. (1985). Nonverbal Differences in Communication Style Between American Indian and Anglo Elementary Classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 22(1), 101-115.
Shigemitsu, Y. (2005). Different interpretations of pauses, Japanese, Chinese, and Americans: Discoursal Problems in Cross-Cultural Conversations. Paper presented at the 9th International Pragmatics Conference, Riva del Garda, Italy.
Tafoya, T. (1989). Circles and Cedar -- Native Americans and Family Therapy. Journal of Psychotherapy & The Family, 6(1), 71 - 98.
Tannen, D. (1984). The Pragmatics of Cross-Cultural Communication. Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 189-195.
