Multiple choice (all correct options required) · #512
A wife says to her husband: "You never care about the kids—you're so selfish. You forgot my birthday last time, and you were late for the family trip last year. You clearly don't care about this family at all. I want you to completely change your attitude." From the perspective of structured communication, what problems does this statement have?
Show answer & explanation
Answer: ABC
- APiling several past incidents together with current grievances, which easily turns into dredging up old scores✓ Correct. Family communication should focus on one issue at a time: throwing out old grievances like the forgotten birthday and the late arrival all at once usually leads the other person to pick just one of them to argue with, and the conversation quickly drifts away from the core present concern.
- BUsing character judgments like 'selfish' and 'you don't care about this family' instead of describing specific behaviors✓ Correct. This is exactly the problem targeted by the requirement not to attack the person: character attacks trigger defensiveness and counterattacks; they should be replaced with verifiable concrete facts, such as "when you came home late, I had to handle the kids and housework alone on short notice."
- C"Completely change your attitude" is not a concrete request, so the other person doesn't know what to do next✓ Correct. An effective request must land on specific actions, such as giving advance notice when coming home late or jointly handling housework two fixed evenings a week; "change your attitude" can neither be carried out nor verified as done, so it amounts to making no answerable request at all.
- DThe main problem is the lack of statistical support; adding specific counts would make the point clear✗ Incorrect. This reflects the misconception that an expression problem equals a data problem: the real faults here are structural—multiple issues bundled together, character attacks, and a vague request. The fix is to state the core request first, then list concrete facts, and finally propose concrete actions, not to add statistics.
Explanation:Checking each item against the three taboos of family communication: bundling several past incidents together corresponds to "dredging up old scores"; "selfish" and "you don't care about this family" correspond to "character attack"; "completely change your attitude" corresponds to "vague request." All three violate the structure of "state the core request first, then the concrete facts, and finally the concrete action." The lack of statistics is a misdiagnosis—the problem lies not in the quantity of evidence but in an expression structure that tangles accusations, feelings, and demands into one.