Misinterpretation of information is common and is brought up as a result in the break-down in communication between the sender and receiver of that message. The evidence that the information was misinterpreted will be depicted by the feedback received from the receiver. The sender will be in a position to detect whether the information has been misinterpreted because it is only him/her who knows the right interpretation of the message.
Some examples of incidences that information has been could include; being brought for a glass of mango juice when in actual sense you had asked for lemon juice, sending someone to renew some books in the library and the person ends up returning the books when in actual sense you needed the books back for use in your studies, asking an accounting question on debit balances and the person asked responds to the credit balances instead of what you had asked and another incidence of misinterpretation of information would be purchasing piriton syrup for a patient instead of piriton injection as prescribed by the physician.
In the first incidence, the misinterpretation comes because the hotel attendant did not fulfil the request placed by the client. He did not bring the particular juice he was asked which was mango juice but brought another type of juice which was lemon juice. The hotel attendant’s misunderstanding of the information is depicted through the feedback from the hotel attendant who brought the wrong commodity (Carver & White, 1994).
In the second incidence, the misinterpretation of information is shown where the person sent did not heed the instructions given to her. This is depicted through the feedback of the receiver when he returns the books instead of renewing the books for the reuse by the sender.
In the third incidence, misinterpretation is identified by the fact that the receiver did not explain what he was asked but instead went ahead to give information about credit balances. In the fourth case the misinterpretation of information is depicted again the feedback brought by the receiver. He does not follow the physician’s keenly but instead goes to purchase the drug but in syrup form.
Some of the changes one could have made to improve perception from the attached articles are: understanding of the key difference between partial and subjective perceptions as this would affect the kind of perception you have towards a certain issue, another perception change would be to avoid pre-judgement of someone’s mind before he/she has given his perception about a certain subject, and another way to improve human perception would be the comparison between one’s perception about a certain issue and what others perceive about the same issue to make a conclusive judgement with regards to a particular issue at hand.
Besides one can also improve human perception by key analyzation of information to deduce indisputable truths and distinguish them from fictions. This would lead to positive perception about the suggested subject as the evidence gathered will be substantive as it will be based on facts which are greatly discussed and well understood by the reader and thus guiding his perception about a certain issue towards the optimistic side because he/she can support his information adequately (Lombard & Ditton, 1997).
Misinterpretation of information is greatly determined according to the application of whatever instruction one had been given in the sense that if correct application is made, we will receive positive feedback which will lead to a positive change in human perception about the subject in question. If wrong application is made then negative feedback is expected and hence a change in human perception about the subject towards the negative side.
References
Carver, S., & White, T. (1994). Behavioural Inhibition and Behavioural Activation and Affecting Responses to Impending Reward and Punishment: the BIS/BAS scales. Journals of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 393-396.
Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the Heart of it All: The Concept of Presence. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(2), 1.