Behavior as Communication
Because of my upbringing, I was taught to think a certain way about behavior. In short, behavior was seen as either good or bad, right or wrong, accepted or not accepted in our environment. We were sometimes rewarded or even ignored when we behaved properly. It was just expected! When our behaviors differed from what was expected, we were punished, shamed, and even shunned, especially if our actions embarrassed those in charge. We assumed that kids and adults were rebellious if their behavior didn’t match our expectations, and especially if we tried to reconcile once or twice.
It was very confusing because our holy book contained violence, retribution, and even genocide, but we weren’t allowed to hit our sister when she stole our Hot Wheels. I saw adults breaking the law and cheating on their taxes, not to mention I saw what they did when no one was looking, but I got a beating at school for stealing a cassette tape (unsuccessfully). The reason the efforts of parents, teachers, and youth workers didn’t hit the mark with me is that they didn’t understand why I was “misbehaving.”
Their narratives and assumptions were misguided and labeled my behavior as sinful or rebellious. They believed I didn’t want to behave, but they had no idea how the brain functions, especially when it perceives danger. When adults use punishment, intimidation, and yelling to control short-term outcomes, they arguably cause more harm than good. They didn’t realize that I wasn’t able to regulate my behavior as I wanted to because of trauma, dysregulation, and bad examples.
They would have been better to understand that behavior is most often an effort to communicate my needs and what I want to get from them. When they understood this, the communication was better, and the attachment from the caregiver made all the difference.
The Axioms
The idea of “behavior as communication” likely stems from the work of Paul Watzlawick, along with Janet Beavin Bavelas and Don D. Jackson. Their research on communication theory didn’t use that exact phrase, but they certainly helped develop this popular concept in trauma-informed understanding. They showed that all behavior, even nonverbal actions, has communicative value and conveys messages. They highlighted that communication is unavoidable once two or more people interact.
We understand this to be true when observing infants learning to navigate the world. Initially, they use crying, facial expressions, body movements, and vocalizations like cooing and babbling to communicate their needs. They also employ engagement and disengagement cues to interact with caregivers. These behaviors help them express needs, preferences, and emotions, and enable them to start and maintain social interactions. When it functions properly, there is attachment.
Watzlawick, Bavelas, and Jackson, in their work on communication theory, emphasized that communication is unavoidable and proposed the following ideas.[1]
Most modern trauma-informed resources for teachers and parents reference this idea.
- One cannot not communicate. In a social setting, even silence or inaction is interpreted as communication. Essentially, we are always sending a message, whether intentional or not.
- Every communication has both a content and a relationship aspect. Beyond the literal meaning of words (the content), communication also conveys information about how the communicators perceive their relationship (the relationship aspect, also called metacommunication).
- The nature of a relationship is defined by how communication is punctuated. How people interpret the sequence of their interactions (punctuation) influences their understanding of the relationship. For example, one person’s silence might be seen as disinterest, while another might view it as a sign of deep thought.
- Communication involves both digital and analogic modalities. Digital refers to the verbal or symbolic parts of communication, while analogic pertains to nonverbal cues like body language, tone of voice, and facial expressions. Both types help convey the overall message.
- Inter-human communication is either symmetrical or complementary. Relationships can be based on equality (symmetrical), where communication is often competitive or focused on mirroring, or on differences (complementary), where communication involves dominance and submission or other hierarchical roles. I don’t like the term complementary because of its association with abuse of women in specific religious contexts. Still, it’s pretty accurate, since domination and submission are also not in any way the most effective communication, and often promote abuse.
A Better Way Forward
So, what do we do with this information? Maybe it’s a wake-up call for us to reconsider how we raise children and how we were raised ourselves, and to accept these insights as new. We shouldn’t punish or beat ourselves up for not knowing what we didn’t know. Now that we can scan the brain and brain sciences are advancing rapidly, it’s in our best interest to find ways to incorporate these understandings into our future interactions with our children, grandchildren, and other adults.
When children express themselves outside of our expectations, it doesn’t mean that they are inherently evil or that they don’t want to follow the rules. They may very well want to contribute to homeostasis in the classroom, at home, and in their world. As I discussed before, behaviorism might work for most people in the short term, but it fails to produce long-term positive results because we keep passing on trauma to our children. Then that trauma gets passed down in the next generation, and so on.
What if, the next time the 10-year-old was aggressive on the playground and disruptive in class, we viewed his actions as a form of communication and responded in a trauma-informed manner? The question isn’t, “What is wrong with you?” but rather, “What are you trying to tell me?” or “What is that action about?” or “What is behind the emotions you are feeling?” With regulating and restorative practices, we might discover that the boy who arrived at school already dysregulated from his home life was trying to stand up for his friend who was being bullied. He may not have experienced anyone modeling proper responses to strong feelings, and he is still developing his brain to handle what he experiences more tactfully.
It may seem like we spend most of our time dealing with difficult students or the problem child at home, leading us to resent them for taking up so much of our time. At first, it may seem counterproductive to spend even more time trying to understand that child or the person who works with us. However, even if we label them as disobedient or bad seed (you choose the label), the problem won’t improve just by dismissing them and ignoring the subtle messages they send.
By taking the time to help them regulate and teaching them to explore their feelings instead of dismissing them, we can move in the right direction and find more of the peace we seek. As always, it’s essential that we understand and practice what we are trying to teach them. I also appreciate that neurodivergent children automatically have challenges that are pre-existing, which makes it even tougher. I’m not an expert in those areas, but I assume that we will all benefit from good communication, especially with those diagnosed this way. Ignoring communication, giving up, and dismissing people or groups only further complicates everything.
Bonus: Tip for changing beliefs: Ask, “If that were not true, what would be a better way to think about that (or what would be more true)?” (Courtesy of Rebecca Lewis-Pankratz)
Be where you are, Be who you are, Be at peace!
Karl Forehand
[1] https://www.inloox.com/company/blog/articles/the-5-axioms-by-watzlawick-how-to-communicate-in-a-project-team/
Learn to be Where You Are (Presence)
Learn to be Who You Are (Authenticity)
Finding Regulating and Somatic Healing
Are you genuinely committed to deconstruction and seeking more profound answers?
If that’s the case, this book was created for you. As a former pastor, I made the mistake of deconstructing a bit and then trying to start something new, as I was trained to do. The problem with that approach is that I wasn’t ready to begin something new.
I hadn’t delved deeply enough or asked enough questions. The first stage of deconstruction typically includes assessing our beliefs regarding hell and the afterlife, supporting queer individuals and women in their fight for equality, and achieving a better understanding of racism and privilege.
Our tendency to punish our former organizations sometimes overlooks the challenging process of healing and growth. It is the same trap we fell into in our former associations.
Order Now – Study Questions in each chapter!
This book is named Campfires in the Desert as it stems from nearly 400 discussions we held with individuals on our podcast, The Desert Sanctuary, and our aspiration to improve.
Available now!
Thanks for considering us, autographed copies are $20
Karl Forehand Campfires in the Desert – A Soft Book Release. Karl Forehand is a former pastor, podcaster, and award-winning author. His books include Out into the Desert, Leaning Forward, Apparent Faith: What Fatherhood Taught Me About the Father’s Heart, The Tea Shop, and Being: A Journey Toward Presence and Authenticity. He is the creator of The Desert Sanctuary podcast and community. He has been married to his wife Laura for 35 years and has one dog named Winston. His three children are grown and are beginning to multiply! You can read more about the author here.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In