Pros And Cons Of Anchoring

(Mis)anchoring is based on the claim that there may be a difference between the intention (stimulus) of the speaker/writer and that of the listener/reader. Both may refer to the same thing/concept but each reference retains a distinct situational meaning (response). Such a difference creates a double meaning which perceived by the reader who, in a way or another, builds up his own interpretation blended from both intentions he reads, or from the one intention that strikes a chord in him or finds an immediate anchor in his memory. As for the listener, his response, whether it is a state of anchoring or misanchoring, depends upon what his memory prioritizes as the best fit for the situation. Accordingly, incidents of everyday life, a movie or of a literary work may take an unexpected turn which produces …show more content…
Of the seven presuppositions mentioned in Steinbach’s article, the third, fourth and sixth are relevant to (mis)anchoring:
3. The meaning of every communication is the response that it elicits, regardless of the communicator’s intent. Both verbal and nonverbal communication elicit a response in another person, which is frequently one that was not intended. It is important to be able to notice his responseand then alter your communication, if you are to communicate effectively. [When misachoring occurs a communicator should be smart enough to get the listener’s attention directed to his real intention]. 4. People are capable of one trial learning. A therapist can teach a patient the association between one response and another, or between an external stimulus and an internal response in one trial. This is called ‘anchoring’. [Accidental anchoring depends on the situation, not on a trial]. … 6. Each person has all the resources he needs in his personal history to achieve his desired outcome [Brackets mine]