Communication is an irreplaceable part of any person’s social life. Whether one is an extrovert or an introvert, they are always in contact with people, exchanging information. In the modern world, various messengers have become one of the main channels of communication, allowing one to share important information with colleagues quickly and succinctly or simply send a video or a funny picture to a friend. However, conventional talking has not gone anywhere, and in fact, will unlikely ever be replaced by alternatives. Talking can be done by phone or live, depending on different factors. When comparing the two ways of communicating, it is interesting to analyze how they differ. Whereas both texting and talking pursue one goal of data and information exchange, the circumstances, subject of discussion, and proximity of interlocutors impact the choice of the communication method.
Indeed, people send messages or talk to each other primarily to convey a thought, even if this thought does not necessarily represent rational value. In this sense, both methods play the role of a communication channel. When talking, people can exchange opinions, joke, or discuss in detail a critical issue adhering to a specific structure. For example, friends can talk about many things simultaneously, discuss their problems and affairs, and not notice the time. On the other hand, conversations can be business-like and take place within the meeting rooms. Furthermore, the discussion may involve two or more people, depending on the circumstances. Texting also serves to exchange information and acts as a platform for connecting people and their thoughts. With messages, people can keep in touch with loved ones, talk about their impressions and news, as well as communicate with colleagues. Thus, several people can be in the same chat and be able to contribute to the conversation. As discussed, many elements of texting and conversation are similar and united by one goal, but these communication methods are not always used interchangeably.
Talking and texting have a significant difference, which is the speed of response. Interlocutors have an essential advantage when talking personally: one can count on an immediate response. At the very least, a person can promise to think about a task or question and give it at the next meeting. In general, most of the exchange of information occurs in a concentrated period. However, test messages sometimes can stay unread for several days. This happens because, psychologically, it is difficult for a person to cope with the flow of information in large quantities daily. People tend to experience stress and procrastinate, requiring more careful study and a clear, concrete answer (Darics & Gatti, 2019). Therefore, when prioritizing particular sources of communication and discussion topics, one often neglects others, leaving them unanswered for a long time and sometimes even completely forgetting about them. Thus, when texting, one cannot always count on timely response, forcing the interlocutor to call or wait for a meeting to resolve the issue quickly.
It is also worth noting that another defining feature of texting is its focus on more informal and less critical discussion topics. Although today any working group has a chat in the messenger to resolve issues, this communication channel is still rarely used for fundamental things. In personal conversations, an essential element is created that is necessary when doing business with complex and priority tasks, and this is the atmosphere. The right atmosphere disposes the interlocutors to participate and show interest in the overall result. Not for nothing do companies attach such importance to team building and meetings. On the contrary, despite its convenience, texting is deprived of the ability to create a suitable environment for ideas exchange and productive collaboration. By nature, people can perceive information better in live communication when they can read the interlocutor’s tone and manner of speech (Darics & Gatti, 2019). Sometimes, one sentence spoken aloud is enough to understand whether a person has leadership qualities and how confident they are. Therefore, even though messengers can maintain effective communication, the fundamental issues one needs to understand, including people’s moods, are best resolved through talking.
Overall, despite the difference in the speed of responses and the importance of the topics discussed, texting and speaking are practical tools for maintaining communication. Each method has its strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of information exchange method depends on various factors. If a person needs to solve a problem urgently and quickly, it would be ideal to call and find out the necessary aspects during the conversation. The messenger can also be effectively used to get a prompt response to less intensive tasks, such as clarifying. Moreover, texting is good to use when the response speed is not essential, for instance, in friendly communication. If psychological interaction between people is necessary and creating an engaging environment, it is best to give preference to live or at least online conversation. Knowing the features of both communication methods, it is not difficult to effectively use them in achieving the desired outcomes.
Reference
Darics, E., & Gatti, M. C. (2019). Talking a team into being in online workplace collaborations: The discourse of virtual work. Discourse Studies, 21(3), 237–257.