§ 1. Question for the sake of an answer

It is clear that questions are not the end in themselves of a journalistic interview. Of course, it is for the sake of answers. However, they are not born on their own, they are called into being by a question. They say, what is the question, such is the answer. Good, complete answers depend on a good question, while bad ones, that is, not filled with content, depend on a weak and ill-conceived one.

This chapter focuses on the most important component of the interview - questions, as well as the ability to ask them. However, one cannot ignore that successful communication, as already mentioned, also includes the ability to listen, as well as to use all the possibilities of non-verbal forms of communication. Therefore, considering separately the question-answer component, one must always remember about its integration into a wider range of factors that affect the process of communication as a whole.

One more remark suggests itself in connection with the prevailing opinion, especially among non-professionals, that the conversation of a journalist with the subject of an interview is akin to an ordinary human conversation, which includes a variety of forms of speech, including questions and answers. This view is shared by some journalists.

Journalist Andrei Maksimov believes that a journalist is only better prepared factually and psychologically than an ordinary interlocutor. “One of my postulates is,” he says, “that conversations, that is, the way we talk to you, and conversations in the studio of the Night Flight program and on the radio, conversations in the company of friends - all these conversations are not different from each other!

What could be easier for a journalist than an interview, they argue: sit down and ask what you need to know. And yet, a professional interview is different from an everyday question-and-answer dialogue.

People ask each other questions in an ordinary conversation, and in response to them they receive information that later becomes processed raw materials, the already accomplished experience of the interlocutors. Naturally, in the subsequent conversation, this experience is taken into account and involuntarily processed by the speakers into some conclusions, versions, assumptions. Further questions, therefore, inevitably contain elements of an assertion. The questioning interlocutor, as it were, runs ahead in his question, thinks out the answer for his partner. The respondent confirms or refutes his thought. Such is the mechanism of everyday everyday conversation: on the one hand, it is almost always focused on the search for understanding, consent, sympathy, on the other hand, it is competitive in nature. The lion's share of human communication takes place in the unspoken struggle of "who wins".

Listen to the conversation of two neighbors discussing the theft in the apartment of their house: a short, uncomplicated dialogue is an ordinary human conversation between two quite interested persons. It has all the components of a spontaneous conversation: questions, sympathy, emotional assumptions, versions of what happened, there is even “new knowledge” about how they “climbed”. However, what is not one of the conditions professional communication journalist, - a targeted and in-depth search for information previously unknown to at least one of the parties.

Here's what a journalist should have asked at the scene of the incident from the residents of the house where the burglary occurred: “Who is the victim? When did the event take place? Where was the neighbor at the time of the theft? What did you see, what did you hear? What was taken out of the apartment? And only then ask them about the reasons for the theft.

But journalists, too, often use a “casual” approach, having a tendency to know in advance what turn of events awaits them, and long before they start their work. Many people pre-think leads to save valuable time. Most often, journalists follow this well-trodden path, asking the interlocutor a question that already has an answer option. The latter has no choice but to respond in some way to the interviewer's suggestion. And even if he begins to deny everything, the programming of the answer, his being driven into a certain framework will still be obvious. The "right" question will therefore be given the "right" answer.

The completeness and objectivity of the information received depends on several conditions and factors. First, on how the question is formulated and what the emphasis is on. It is clear that two such seemingly similar questions: “What things were stolen?” and “What items were not stolen?” - answers will be completely different in content. As well as to questions in which the word order is slightly changed: “Did you see or hear anything at the time of the theft?” and “What did you see, hear at the time of the theft?” The first, closed-ended question is likely to receive a one-word "yes" or "no" answer. On the second, open, the interlocutor, in theory, should give a detailed one. Therefore, the ability to put a question in such a way that a direct, complete and objective answer is received is the second condition of this art.

The third factor that affects the outcome of the interview, which should be remembered when asking questions, is respect for the interlocutor with all his (her) human weaknesses. What fears will he/she experience even before the interview has taken place? As practice has shown, most people are not so much afraid of the interview process as they do not want to be exposed in a stupid, unsightly light. They reproach reporters for not always being accurate and honest with the information provided to them, but in fact they are worried about what their friends will think, whether their loved ones will be ashamed of them.

Alla Pugacheva in one television program complained about the unworthy treatment of journalists with the facts of her biography, with the way her personal life is vulgarly interpreted. “I personally don’t care what they say about me,” the prima donna said with her usual directness, “but I have grandchildren…”

Journalists can also make serious miscalculations in dealing with persons who have important information. “Imagine, he (the journalist) calls me at one in the morning and asks me to comment on the President's statement yesterday! complains one "highly knowledgeable source". “Of course I hung up!” Calling out of hours - an indicator of disrespect - is sure to cause a negative reaction from the interviewee, which will either be expressed in sluggish responses, excuses, or simply lead to a refusal to speak, as happened with a "highly knowledgeable source." Another important point, which journalists often do not attach of great importance, is associated with the diversity of human individuals and their absolute uniqueness. Is it possible to find a “golden” approach acceptable to everyone? Or is human nature so diverse that there is no secret single solution? In a series of meetings with different people, journalists involuntarily build certain schematic images in their heads, classify people according to some of their characteristics, often succumbing to the stereotypes that have developed in society. At the same time, they forget that there are no people similar friend on a friend, and each person needs his own, individual approach. Without taking this factor into account, a journalist will not be ready for the most unpredictable situations and may be caught off guard by the interlocutor's violent reaction to a seemingly harmless question.

Careful, attentive attitude to each interlocutor will help journalists to cope with another professional problem. How to talk with a criminal who has caused serious damage to society, with a murderer, pimp, seducer of minors, but simply with a person who leads a lifestyle condemned by a significant part of society? There is no doubt that an unbiased attitude, calm, respectful treatment and clearly posed questions will lead to the fact that the interlocutor will not withdraw into himself, will not refuse to give an interview. And his answers, in which, perhaps, there is a place for an analysis of the causes of the tragedy, will bring greater social benefits than condemnation and exposure.

Direct and indirect question. A journalist, by the nature of his activity, must have the ability to "direct immersion" in the situation and problem. Bound by conditions teamwork(especially on radio and television), and also due to the severity of time constraints, he is forced to get down to business without delay, as they say, "take the bull by the horns." When starting an interview, he usually quickly gets to the point, asking questions directly, without bluntness:

“Mr. President, how are you planning to spend your vacation?”;

“At what time will the docking of the two spacecraft?»;

"When will the next stage of laying the pipeline begin?".

It is easy to identify the target orientation of the listed questions - they encourage the interlocutor to a direct and quite specific answer:

“I'm going to Sochi in August for a couple of weeks”;

“According to the schedule, the docking should take place at five in the morning Moscow time”;

"We plan to start work on laying the pipeline early next quarter."

A direct, that is, a clear, transparent question “on the case” is more effective than an indirect one, which gives the interlocutor the opportunity to avoid answering. However, an indirect question is sometimes useful as a substitute for a direct, hard-hitting question if you don't want to embarrass the other person. He especially helps out in a live broadcast situation. But an indirect question can also inspire the hero to frank, intimate details of his biography.

The book of the famous American TV presenter Barbara Walter describes a live interview with actress Judy Garland. Using the effect direct question, the journalist managed to "pull" her heroine into a frank story about her difficult childhood:

“I asked her to compare the conditions under which young people work in show business today with the time when she and her peers participated in vaudeville. And in response, I heard a story that still makes me shudder when I remember this interview. “We all started very early,” she said. And then with a slight smile she added: - My mother brought me to the stage, she was a real witch. When my stomach ached and I wanted to stay at home, she threatened me, saying that she would tie me with ropes to the back of the bed ... "2.

Direct questions and specific answers to them are, of course, the most effective form of question-answer communication. However, it is only possible if your character is set up for dialogue and is ready to answer questions. Otherwise, asking a direct question is not always appropriate.

It is unlikely that you will be able, for example, to get a direct answer from a politician known for his nationalist views to the question, does he consider himself a nationalist? The rules of decency and the negative attitude towards this phenomenon prevailing in the public consciousness will not allow him not only to be frank, but even to shock the public with an affirmative answer. It is quite likely that the interlocutor will refuse to continue the conversation with you instead of answering. However, by softening the directness of the question and rephrasing it in an indirect way, for example, in the following one: “How do you generally feel about nationalist ideas?” - on the one hand, you will give the interlocutor the opportunity to avoid answering a direct question, on the other hand, you may receive very frank reflections on his attitude towards nationalism.

Direct questions about money are also unlawful methods.

Journalist Olga Shablinskaya in an interview asked Andrey Karaulov how much he earns now:

How much TVC pays you?

Olya, it's indecent to ask such questions. But it pays.

You also ask such questions, - the journalist retorted.

Can you give at least one example?

Please. "Tell me, are you a thief?"

Yes... You have a good memory. Almost 10 years have passed. I asked this question in 1993 to Dima Yakubovsky. His answer was interesting. Dima thought, paused and said: "No." Understand, I had an absolute right, Dima was my student. And I, then a student, worked part-time at Bolshevo school No. 2 near Moscow. Seryozha Generalov, the future Minister of Energy, sat at the same desk with Yakubovsky ... 3.

Here's another example. Suppose a journalist is investigating mental health soldiers participating in combat operations. An interview has already been taken with a military psychologist, a civilian psychologist - an expert in crisis situations. It remains to conduct a survey of soldiers undergoing psychological rehabilitation in a military hospital. Your task is to get to the bottom of the causes that cause depression in the soldiers. According to doctors, it could be pangs of conscience for killing people. Is it possible in this situation to ask a direct question like this: "Did you have to kill people in the war?". Any sane person will tell you that it's better to use an indirect question.

It makes sense to resort to an indirect question even in the case when it is not easy to establish contact with the interlocutor, and everything possible must be done so that the interview loses its touch of formality. For example, when asking a surgeon a question after a heart transplant operation, it is better to start not with a direct question “on the forehead” about how the operation went, but ask how he can withstand such loads: “Six hours on his feet at the operating table! How is this possible? Such an option, not even a question at all, but an emotional statement expressing admiration, seemingly not directly related to the essence of the information you are interested in, will invite the hero to a conversation, moreover, it will help expand the possible field of conversation.

A direct question is always preferable to an indirect one, but there are times when an indirect question will give a more effective result.

It is clear that it is impossible to give recommendations for each individual case that journalists encounter when going for an interview - the informational occasions are too diverse, the goals and approaches are different, the heroes are individual. However, it is useful to familiarize yourself with the main categories of issues and the features of their functioning, to study the possibilities and limitations of each, in order to then, in accordance with the circumstances, make the best decision.

§ 2. Questions open and closed

Questions are divided into two large categories: open and closed.

The first are the most general and entail answers that are not limited either by form or content. We can say that open-ended questions are more democratic. An example of such a question is a phrase that invites the interlocutor to enter into a dialogue: "Tell me something about yourself ...". This can be specified: "Tell us, please, about your passion for horseback riding ...". However, even in this version, the question will remain open, because it leaves the interlocutor the right to choose what to answer, what to place accents and add details.

Here are some more examples of open questions:

“Mr. Minister, what is your forecast regarding the state of the securities market in the current half of the year?”;

“Doctor, what do you think is the cause of the sudden outbreak of this disease?”;

"Mr. Professor, what do you see as the main result of your experiment?"

Open-ended questions have common features that define their advantages and disadvantages. Here are some benefits of an open question:

Encourages the interlocutor to answer, without limiting him in anything;

Gives the interlocutor the opportunity to voluntarily convey information, freely talk about their feelings, comment on events;

Orients a person to reflection, analysis of his actions, stimulates the birth of thoughts that earlier, perhaps, did not occur to him;

Forces the journalist to listen carefully and observe.

And these are the disadvantages of open questions:

Can provoke a long answer, therefore not always applicable in a time limit;

Able to confuse an interlocutor who is not used to answering general issues;

Can cause a confused and chaotic response, difficult to understand;

They conceal the need to ask clarifying questions, interrupting the interlocutor, which can offend him and lead to difficulties in the conversation.

Nevertheless, open-ended questions are undoubtedly the most attractive tool for obtaining free, bright and unrestricted answers that make both the interlocutor and the journalist think.

Unlike open questions, closed questions require an affirmative or negative answer. Reporters use them when they need to get a tough, direct reaction from the interlocutor, for example, to confirm or deny a fact:

“Do you think this team will reach the semi-finals?”;

"Did they really try to blackmail you?"

The beauty of closed questions is that they are easy to ask and easy to answer. The journalist is in complete control of the conversation. Closed questions have the following advantages:

Allow the reporter to specific information without waiting for the interlocutor's thoughts;

Save valuable time, as they require quick response and short answers;

They give the opportunity to “warm up” the interlocutor without requiring serious work of the mind from him.

Meanwhile, closed questions do not stimulate the development of a dialogue, since they actually inform the interlocutor that the interviewer is only interested in confirming or denying information - nothing more. Most closed questions are bipolar, that is, they involve only two predictable answers - "yes" or "no", not always implying explanations and arguments. "Do you like your job?" - "Well no)". Closed questions, therefore, often turn out to be too primitive for serious, thinking interlocutors. In addition, they do not always save time, because they entail a series of additional questions.

Which question to choose: open or closed? In the practice of interpersonal communications, there is a tendency to simplify the forms of communication. In everyday communication with relatives and friends, in business contacts, we often use closed questions. They are specific, easy to understand, do not require much thought to answer, cause an almost instantaneous reaction; Finally, they are easy to ask. Indeed, out of two possible questions: “Tell me, please, how did you feel during the thunderstorm?” and “Were you scared during the storm?” - in everyday conversation, we will undoubtedly give preference to the second.

And in an interview? Is such a simplistic communication strategy appropriate for the genre? In most cases, no. Although there are exceptions. Asking a question to his hero, a journalist, as a rule, expects him to describe situations (actions, feelings, etc.) or explain (actions, desires, assumptions, etc.). He also prefers that the subject of the interview does not mechanically "work out" the task, but engages in the process of conversation intellectually and emotionally, reflects on what was asked and gives out information in full. Is it possible to achieve such results with the help of closed questions, which, in principle, do not have either a description or an explanation, but offer a complete, unpromising answer, an affirmative answer (negation)? Will the answer to a closed question contain objective and unbiased information, even though the question already contained an answer option? I think not. Therefore, when formulating a question, try to put it in an open form.

In a journalistic interview, open-ended questions are always preferable to closed ones.

In contrast to the answer to a closed question, the answer to an open one has serious advantages in the process of producing the final information product. When preparing a material for publication, when editing it for printing or editing it for television and radio, those components of the response that arise as it develops are very valuable. thought process interlocutor.

First, in response to an open question, images and pictures may appear in the speech of the interlocutor.

From an interview with student S. with journalist Andrei Maksimov:

They say that live broadcast is extreme situation. What do you do before the broadcast? How are you setting up?

I have a few signs before the broadcast. Firstly, I always enter the studio on the right foot, I am baptized. My editor always says to me: "No fluff, no feather", and I always answer him: "To hell!". Then I certainly rub my ears ... By the way, I can recommend it to you. This is such a training from fatigue. Helps a lot. I have long hair and you can't see that my ears are red. And so that I yell at someone - there is no such thing. There are presenters who specifically yell, but I'm not like that. Of course, I could shout at my wonderful makeup artist, especially since he is lower in rank than me and will not be able to answer me. But why?1

Secondly, in response to an open question, dramatic plots, stories from the past may emerge.

From the same interview:

How did you feel during your first broadcast?

I remember very well my first broadcast, I was extremely afraid. My first broadcast was not when I was interviewing, but when I opened the program. I said: “Hello! Today in our program you will see this and that…” I was so scared that I wanted to leave. After all, I've been working on television for a little over three years, it's not that much long term. In fact, I could completely leave television and would feel great ... But my wife was so worried! She told me all the time when I had my first broadcasts, she always said: “You were just brilliant, amazing ...” And as it turned out later, she didn’t watch my first broadcasts at all ... 2.

Thirdly, it is more advantageous to quote answers to open-ended questions; it is easier to mount sound inclusions for radio and video clips for TV spots from them.

Answers to open-ended questions are more detailed, may contain an image, and are easier to quote.

However, you should also take into account the fact that an open question can sometimes put your hero in an awkward position, simply because he is not able to understand it and, therefore, answer it. For example, an open question to an athlete, “How do you feel when you approach the finish line?” - can confuse your character if he cannot describe his feelings. However, you can reformulate the question, specifying it as much as possible and using verbs in the past tense, so that the interlocutor recalls his feelings: “What did you think (what did you think about) when you ran to the finish line at the Olympiad?”

When asking an open question, consider intellectual possibilities his character, his emotional state.

Nevertheless, journalists often put questions in closed form in their interviews. And they have their reasons for this. Let's try to analyze some of these cases.

A closed question is needed to confirm (deny) the content of the question. "Are you going to participate in the elections?" "Yes" or "no" are the only possible answers. It is important to keep in mind that, depending on the situation, the interviewee will choose the most beneficial one for himself. From an interview with Vladimir Pozner and Viktor Gerashchenko:

Do you keep any savings in the bank at all?

But how.

Of course.

It should be remembered that the interlocutor can give the most beneficial or safe answer to a closed question.

It is believed that the answers to closed questions are absolutely predictable. However, there are cases when, having answered “yes” or “no”, the interlocutor embarks on reasoning. Most interviewees want to appear polite, good educated people, therefore, they try to “help” the journalist and supplement their monosyllabic answer to a closed question with further reasoning. Often these unpredictable sayings can contain very valuable information.

From a conversation between Dmitry Dibrov and film director Tigran Keosayan (Anthropology program):

Do you have a favorite movie?

No. I have a lot of them: "City Lights", for example, Chaplin. First course. VGIK. History of foreign cinema. Everyone laughs from the belly, I laugh myself. I have been silent for the last forty minutes. This is the eighty-fourth year. Dad comes from a shift, from Mosfilm. And he says: “Why are you so sad?”. I say: “You know, dad, I realized that I was going to the wrong place. Everything has already been taken. Here is Chaplin. All!". Dad says: "So what?". I say: “That's it! What will I shoot?" He burst out laughing, hugged me, kissed me and said: “Well done! I had the same reaction. Go on and study!"

The answer to a closed question may have the most unexpected continuation.

By the way, journalists often wait for such a continuation and encourage the interlocutor, pausing after an affirmative or negative answer to a closed question. This pause, as it were, makes it clear to the interlocutor: “Well, come on, continue, I'm waiting for your thoughts ...”.

However, one should not expect that all interviewees will easily respond to such a silent call to continue the conversation. For example, children rarely do this. Therefore, one must be prepared for other situations, and not rely on the "charity" of his hero.

Increasingly, journalists have to deal with interlocutors trained in special technologies for communicating with the press. Basically, these are people for whom it is important in one way or another to convey their “message” to a mass audience. This is done with different purposes: to create a positive image of a person or enterprise, to promote certain ideas, to "leak" information. For them, a closed question in an interview is a great find, because, after answering it, you can then say anything or make a pre-prepared speech: “How to say ... Actually, I would like to say this about ...”. The development of the interview according to this scenario will not be so inevitable if you ask an open question, because in this case the “leader” is the journalist, and the responder is the “follower”.

Here is how one journalist got an answer to the question posed by the Minister for Taxes and Duties Gennady Bukaev:

A lot of noise was caused by plans to create a financial police. They say her powers will be unlimited. Do you support these plans to create a financial police?

You know, I have my own problems - start and finish! Eighty percent of the budget is provided by our ministry! These are such numbers and so many problems! And the creation of the financial police is the problem of the state ...

But if you are still asked when the financial police will be created, will you be for or against?

In principle, I think that there will be no harm. The main thing is that this should be clearly regulated within the framework of the law…3

Be prepared for the fact that after a closed question, your interlocutor may give a pre-prepared speech.

To avoid possible negative consequences closed question, you should use a combined question - “closed + open”. This is done in this way: you ask a closed question that requires negation or affirmation, and after it, without a pause, you “open” it with one interrogative pronoun or a short interrogative sentence.

“Have you given up the post of prime minister? Why?";

“Did you witness the explosion? How did it happen?

As can be seen from the examples, after a closed question, an affirmative answer to which is predictable, an open question follows, which provokes the interlocutor to reflect, explain or describe the event, which is actually included in information tasks interview.

How to ask open questions. The technology of conducting interviews in the form of open questions is actually very simple, and is known to all journalists who are familiar with the laws of constructing event information. It stands on six "whales" - six interrogative pronouns that form interrogative sentences that encourage the interlocutor to convey certain positive information. Let's call them again: who? what? where? when? as? why? (in the domestic tradition it is often added - why?). In English-language journalism, for brevity, they are called the formula 5W + H by the first letters of the questions - who? what? where? when? how? why?

The self-sufficiency of these questions for obtaining information has long been proven, and practical journalism around the world uses the 5W + H principle to create event-oriented news messages.

True, the formula of six questions in the practice of interviews conducted by our journalists tends to expand due to the lexical and grammatical features of the Russian language, in particular, its rich synonymy. However, the semantics of the questions remain unchanged.

In a question that uses the interrogative pronoun who in its various cases (without prepositions and with prepositions), information is requested about the object of the event, its participants and actors.

"Who was present at the negotiations?";

“With whom of the participants in the negotiations did you manage to find a common language?”;

“Which member of the delegation came up with the idea of ​​signing a joint statement?”;

“Which of the delegates was not satisfied with the text of the joint communique?”.

If the message object is inanimate object, then the interrogative pronoun is applied accordingly as all its grammatical forms.

"What did you see when the solar eclipse began?";

"What did you especially lack during the flight into space?".

The question using the interrogative pronoun what, in fact, in a more common form is: what happened? - and finds out what happened to the object of the message, what actions he performed, what qualities he acquired.

"What did you do when you felt the explosion?";

What really happened to the plane at the time of the crash?

The question about a place that is unclear for the questioning circumstance is asked using the adverb where. The nuances of the circumstances of what happened in questions are clarified by adverbs where and from where.

Where did the plane crash happen?

"Where is your rescue team heading now?";

"Where did the plane with humanitarian aid come from for the victims of the earthquake?".

The question about the circumstance of time is formulated with the help of the adverb when, and about the shades of this circumstance - with the help of adverbs from when and until when.

"When did the plane crash happen?";

“Since when (since when, since when) did you stop trusting your assistants?”;

“Until when (until what time) will the commission for the restitution of cultural monuments work?”.

The question, which opens with the adverb how, should clarify the circumstances of the course of action or event, and the answer should describe how it happened.

“How did it happen that they only found out about this accident the next day?”;

"How does a solar eclipse happen?";

How did you manage to free the hostages?

What the multi-valued English question why asks is given in Russian by two different options. The question of the goals of actions - with the help of the adverb why (for what purpose); the question of the causes of what happened - through the adverb why (for what reason).

“Why did you need so many rescue teams?”;

“Why didn’t a team of doctors arrive at the scene on time?”;

"Why did you decide to run for re-election?"

I would like to elaborate on this group of open questions. Upon closer examination, it turns out that, unlike the previous five questions, aimed at clarifying the specific facts and circumstances of the case, the questions “why?” and "why?", clarifying the goals and causes, can be attributed to a more complex level that requires a thoughtful, conceptual answer. By their meaning, they are not easy to answer, as they encourage the interlocutor to think, to analyze and analyze the situation, to put forward versions of what happened.

By the way, "why?" - the favorite question of TV presenter Vladimir Pozner. Colleagues noted this and explained such attachment to the issue by the journalist’s heightened inquisitiveness:

“The President of the TV Academy, the winner of various awards and the owner of all conceivable-unthinkable television titles, communicates with politicians and ministers with the inquisitiveness of a schoolboy. Do not hesitate to ask simple questions: “Why?” He asks again when it is not clear, and does not frown meaningfully, like most of his colleagues. This captivates the audience, tired of the terms of other television observers, who are most concerned about not looking like fools in front of venerable interlocutors, leaving you and me in the end as fools.

Conceptual questions "why?" and why?" useful in a situation of a hard time limit, when it is impossible to carry out serious preparation and study the materials, because they can actually be asked, being completely unprepared, as they say, “from a blank sheet”, however, at the risk of being misinformed.

But conceptual issues also have pitfalls. They are especially dangerous when a journalist is faced with people prepared to deal with the press. For such people, the question of the goals of their enterprise has long been lost, and the answer has been rehearsed. Spectacular, winning, and seemingly quotable. However, it is unlikely that such an answer will contain reliable information. The journalist should keep this in mind and be ready to continue the conversation in search of the truth.

§ 3. Varieties of questions

However, there are also wide range of questions. additional features conditioned by the content of the conversation, situational and subjective-personal factors.

Here is a textbook example of an interview while extinguishing a house fire.

Arriving at the scene and orienting himself in the situation, the reporter takes three interviews: with the head of the fire brigade, the injured resident of the house and eyewitnesses - he interviews the residents of this and neighboring houses. What questions does he ask in each case? What are the main questions to ask the firefighter, the victim, the witnesses? And the secondary ones? Are leading questions needed? Or provocative? Would hypothetical questions be appropriate, or would the six open-ended question rule be sufficient?

It is clear that specific interview tactics vary from case to case, vary from interlocutor to interlocutor. In fact, there cannot be identical interviews: they, like life situations, a great many. Also, the question-answer component of the interview is always unique, because it consists of different combinations of functionally heterogeneous questions. According to Georgy Kuznetsov, "a good question is a one-time thing." Theoretically, we cannot calculate all combinations of questions, but we can analyze their different options, which differ in the corresponding functional characteristics. And the ability to use all these features for the effective performance of information tasks will depend on the professionalism of a journalist.

Varieties of the issues discussed below, as a rule, play a complementary role in relation to the main ones. They are sometimes called second-line questions, as they help stimulate the conversation, and the answers to them develop it in breadth and depth, fill it with auxiliary content. Questions that act as a stimulus for the development of a conversation are equivalent to such non-verbal actions as a nod of the head, informing the interlocutor: “Yes, I understand you,” or they can have a very specific, voiced modal meaning that prompts a response.

Quite often such questions follow after closed ones. As noted, closed questions are often used by inexperienced journalists. Asking them as the main ones, they stumble on secondary ones, which should contribute to the development of responses to especially stingy or taciturn characters. For example, to the question: "Have you ever seen fireball? - There should be two possible answers. In the affirmative, the reporter should be prepared to respond with second-line questions: “Tell me more about what you saw?” or “I wonder what she looks like?” And then, in the course of the development of the dialogue, questions of the third row may follow: “When was it? Where? Under what circumstances? Were there any consequences? - until the picture is completely restored.

The second row questions perform a variety of functions during the interview. For example, they provoke the interlocutor to continue the conversation. Or "deploy" the conversation in breadth. Deepen it. Clarify details. Ask for arguments. Demonstrate the leader's interest.

Depending on the functional tasks, secondary issues can be divided into the following groups.

Clarifying questions. It is advisable to ask a clarifying question after an unclear or ambiguous answer to the main one. If, after such an answer, one does not make an attempt to clarify the misunderstood, do not dot all the "i", one can fall into one of the main professional sins of a journalist - to make additional pushes, to put forward assumptions due to a lack or distortion of information.

Clarification questions can be asked at different forms.

1. Rephrase what the interlocutor said if his answer is not clear:

“Excuse me, did I understand you correctly, Mr. Governor, is your deputy accused of corruption?”;

“Do I understand you, Mr. Prosecutor, are you voluntarily resigning?”;

“It seems to me that you blame the country's leadership for what happened. Is it so?".

Paraphrasing the previous statement of your hero in this way, you are conducting a kind of test for understanding what was said. Confirming or refuting your doubts, the interlocutor will confirm or refute what was said earlier, perhaps even develop the thought somewhat. Thus, he will repeat what interests the journalist. Therefore, of all clarifying questions, this one is the most reliable.

The manner of asking the hero again, as if doubting, is characteristic of the TV journalist Lev Novozhenov. In order to look more knowledgeable in the eyes of the viewer, he repeats what the interlocutor said, clarifies names, surnames, literary or musical works for the guest: “Then you just entered this theater, right?”; “The filming went on for two years, didn’t it?”1

Request an example to illustrate or clarify what has been said: “Please give an example of how your service works…”; “Something I do not quite understand you. Explain again, please…”

An example or illustration is very effective tool clarification of ambiguities. Even in a hypothetical form, they contribute to the development of the conversation. If the interlocutor is not able to give an example from his practice, try to come to his aid and offer your own.

Request Additional information or data:

“You claim that the economic recession has subsided. Could you give specific figures?

"Mr. Mayor, you say that demographic situation the city is improving… Do you have any statistics on this?”.

A clarifying question is necessary when an unclear or ambiguous answer is given to the previous one.

developmental questions. As a rule, people are not ready to give exhaustive answers to all questions of interest to a journalist. From embarrassment or fear of seeming stupid, they shrink, stutter, lose the power of speech. And, of course, in such cases one needs help, sometimes even encouragement, in order to continue and develop the answer. In his practice, a journalist may encounter a situation where simple words turn out to be a lifesaver: “Please continue, this is very interesting…”. But more often it happens that the answers to the main, especially closed, questions turn out to be too short, not widespread, requiring further development, study, and then it is necessary to include developmental questions in the conversation. Here are some ways to use them.

In the question, as an echo, the previous statement of the hero is used. "Why are you so sure of the positive results of the vote?"; “You said that it makes no sense to stand as a candidate. Why?".

This type of question will help develop any particular aspect of the previous answer.

The question expresses interest in the feelings of the hero, his purely human experiences: “Mr. Mayor, what did you feel when the voting results were announced?”; How did you feel when you saw your children after years separation?"

TV presenter Andrey Norkin, in an interview with Boris Berezovsky, asked about the feelings of the media mogul after the interrogation. And I got, I must say, an honest answer:

Immediately after the interrogation, you said that everything went smoothly, that the investigator behaved correctly. Were there any discomfort?

cannot arise discomfort when you go to Prosecutor General's Office. The sensations were not only unpleasant, but vile. Especially since it's been going on for two years now...

However, the question is, "What did you feel?" - should be used carefully in situations of coverage of tragic cases, catastrophes, natural disasters, especially when talking with the victims, as well as their relatives, so as not to injure, not to cause a second shock.

To develop the conversation, the interlocutor is invited to expand the topic or include it in an unexpected, even unfamiliar context. References to different, preferably reliable sources can also be used in the question.

“You give concerts for the Russian public, but you live in Italy. How do you manage to combine it? “Mr. Minister, you claim that there was no way to save the submarine. But, as reported by news agencies, foreign rescuers were ready to start the rescue literally the next day ... ".

Developing questions are designed to help expand the field of conversation in the direction of clarifying the details, emotional experiences of the hero, including it in a wider context.

Test questions. A journalist can ask them in a situation where he does not have objective evidence of what was said by the interlocutor. At the same time, he does not have the opportunity to double-check the reported information by resorting to objective sources.

An experienced journalist Leonid Pleshakov advises, in order not to fall into an invisible trap, to ask a control question: “When my interlocutor talked about the exploits he had accomplished, but could not confirm this with anything other than his own words, I tried to ask control questions that would remove my doubts . Inserted "by the way", they help to cut off possible lies at any sense of danger.

Incriminating questions. Being a kind of control question, a question of an incriminating nature is used in case of obvious contradictions in the answers, and also if the interlocutor was inconsistent in the description, unsure of the argument.

“You just said, Mr. Mayor, that the demographic situation in the city has improved. But the statistics say otherwise: the death rate still exceeds the birth rate. Are you sure you are right?"

Incriminating questions often clash between the interests of a journalist and his hero, especially when there is a fact of hiding information. In this case, the correspondent will have a natural desire to object sharply, to bring the interlocutor to clean water.

Vladimir Pozner cannot hide his irritation when the interlocutor tries to justify the behavior of military officials after the sinking of the Kursk submarine: “Do you think that all the reproaches are completely unfair? That there was no game on this mountain? Was there no pressure, no clarified circumstances hidden from us?

And yet, even in this situation, one must refrain from harsh statements: “You are wrong”; “I don’t believe you” - and try to ask diplomatically: “Are you sure this is true?”; "Are you sure you're right?"

But even if the journalist was impeccably polite to his hero, he should be prepared for anyone that an incriminating question could impede the course of the conversation or, in the worst case, stop it. Therefore, it is better to leave this question for the end of the conversation or wait for the moment when it no longer complicates the conversation.

The incriminating question asked by the experienced "conversator" Urmas Ott to Maris Liepa almost ruined the interview:

A. You have already talked a little about the fact that your children, son Andris and daughter Ilze, are also soloists of the Bolshoi Theater. Tell me, did they themselves wish such a fate for themselves, or is it, if I may say so, the shadow of their father?

I formulate the question awkwardly. Liepa misunderstands me and is probably offended. This is evidenced by the intonation with which he pronounces next phrase. He speaks softly through his teeth. Thank God, the transfer is almost done, I have time to think. There are ten minutes left until the end. It’s good that I didn’t manage to ask a question like that earlier - the whole conversation could go down the drain. So, one of the most dramatic moments, when I can only blame myself, is behind me. But nothing can be fixed.

L. They did not become a shadow and never will. A revealing question is necessary when the interlocutor distorts or hides information, when there is a contradiction between his words and the facts you have previously established. It must be used with caution, preferably not in a direct form and towards the end of the conversation, so as not to interrupt its course.

quantitative questions. Questions from quantitative pronoun how many serve to clarify quantitative characteristics object or event of interest: “How many people were born during the year in our country?”; "By what percentage has the population of the globe increased in one month?"; How many drug addicts are registered in our country?

Answering quantitative questions brings clarity and precision to the conversation. They differ from vague, indefinite reasoning in that they always sharpen, and, if used well, even dramatize the plot.

Quantitative questions dominate sports reports, business news interviews, and economic reports. They are always present in conversations with experts who use statistical methods for their work.

However, it must be borne in mind that quantitative information has limits of perception. Firstly, texts, especially television and radio broadcasts, cannot be overloaded with digital data; their overabundance does not concretize the plot, but only confuses the reader (viewer, listener). Secondly, statistical data are perceived only in comparative or percentage terms. Therefore, when requesting statistics on a question of interest, one should prepare another, additional, question - about the dynamics of indicators (“Compare with last year’s data”; “How much more (less) is this than last quarter?” Etc.) . B. How much forest fires recorded this year? A. More than five hundred cases. Q. And compared to last year?

A. Compared to last year's data, this is one and a half times more. Q. What is the reason? ..

A quantitative question specifies the subject of the conversation and allows you to see the situation in dynamics.

hypothetical questions. This is a special question form when the questioner wants to get an answer to the question of what will happen if the implied is (is being or has already been) accomplished. Hypothetical questions encourage the interlocutor to make predictions, fantasize about the prospects of the object of the conversation or the possible consequences of his actions:

“Mr. Director, try to imagine the future of your plant if the government allocates money for its reconstruction?”;

“Do you think such a critical situation would have developed if help had arrived in the disaster area on time?”

Such questions have a tinge of conventional meaning and suggest the same kind of answer-guess. Therefore, many journalists refuse to use them in interviews, rightly believing that there is no room for speculation in journalism. By the way, politicians and decision-makers often refuse to answer such questions, because they risk answering in a way that is unfavorable for themselves.

Does this mean that hypothetical questions should be avoided altogether? Not at all. However, keep in mind that you may get a null result in response. Nevertheless, we must also take into account that there are people, especially creative natures, who have a positive attitude towards hypothetical questions.

In addition, there are scientists, experts involved in economic, political, social forecasts, who, by the nature of their activities, can answer such a question professionally: “Mr. Professor, what will happen if the ozone hole increases even more?”; "Could you describe the effects of the global economic crisis?" By asking a hypothetical question to an unprepared interlocutor, you run the risk of getting an unreasonable, incompetent answer or not getting one at all. Hypothetical questions are best asked by futurists or forecasters in their field.

project questions. Projective questions also deserve attention, which will help to study the character of your interlocutor more deeply, to determine the potential of his inner world: “If you received a million, what would you do?”; "What would you do in this situation if you were the president of the country?" transition questions. They are also called "bridge questions" or "switch questions". They serve to smoothly change the direction of the conversation, to transfer the conversation to a new or casually mentioned topic:

“Mr. director, at the beginning of the conversation you mentioned how difficult it was to find funds for the filming of this film. Let's talk about the economic part of producing a picture. How much did she cost?

A professionally asked transitional question should not interrupt the interlocutor. You should not suddenly switch the conversation to a new topic for which the interlocutor is not yet ready. However, if you see that the conversation has reached a dead end, you can try an abrupt plot change:

“Okay, let's not talk about your troubles at work and talk about your family. How long have you been married?"

If the interlocutor is persistent in conveying his (often pre-prepared) "message", a transitional question may not work. Here is an example:

“Mr. Governor, I heard that your position on the issues of land privatization sharply diverges from the position of the president. Can you comment on the President's position? “I don’t know what the president thinks about this, but my point of view is this…”. Transitional questions are needed to change the direction of the conversation. They are very helpful when the conversation gets stuck. However, they should be so interesting that the interlocutor wants to switch.

In the already mentioned interview with Maris Liepa, Urmas Ott also successfully applied the technique of a transitional question to relieve tension, complete one topic and proceed to the next:

A. Tell me, what did the period of study at the Moscow Choreographic School give you as a ballet actor, and how did you get there?

L. This is again Lucky case. Future teachers Elena Nikolaevna Sergievskaya and Professor Nikolai Ivanovich Tarasov were resting in Riga at that time ... There was such a case. Elena Nikolaevna asked: “Maris, guess how many matches are in this matchbox"? I named a number. A second passed, two, three, she says: "You guessed right." I said a word that I will never repeat in Russian. I said: "You're lying ...". She repeats: "You guessed right." She put me on my knees, she says, excuse me, it’s impossible to speak Russian like that, especially for a woman. I ask: "How should I speak"? "Just in case, remember to say at least 'you're not telling the truth'," she replies. I remember this for the rest of my life. She said, “Do you know what I thought? I wondered: will you study in Moscow or will you not study in Moscow? And indeed, a month has passed, I arrived in Moscow, in the class of Nikolai Ivanovich Tarasov.

Oh. By the way, how many matches were in the box?

L. I don't want to lie. I don't remember.4

Passive and mimic questions. In fact, these are not even questions, but a verbal or non-verbal urge of the interlocutor to continue the conversation. Passive questions are set in the form of short expressions that send a signal about the interlocutor's involvement in the conversation ("I understand ..."; "Yes, yes, of course ..."; "Really?"). These are signals that encourage the interlocutor to continue the dialogue, and since they are not evaluative, this technique is especially effective when the interlocutor's views are in opposition to yours. This is facilitated by facial expressions - facial expressions, gestures, body movements. However, during on-air interviews, passive and facial questions should be used sparingly. Passive and facial questions stimulate the continuation of the conversation. However, they should be avoided during on-air interviews.

Close in meaning are the so-called silent or "mute" questions that stimulate dialogue without words, only with the help of a pause. Novice reporters are terrified of the voids formed during the conversation. Their embarrassment also affects the interlocutor. They are, of course, right, but only partly. Silence is scary only when there is nothing to ask, but contrary to prevailing prejudices, it can be used wisely.

First, a pause during the interview will give the interlocutor a break and time to think. As a result, you can get a deeper answer.

Secondly, a pause with the help of additional non-verbal means, facial expressions, body language and gestures informs the interlocutor that the dialogue is ongoing and the journalist is waiting for new details.

In addition, the interlocutor can intentionally or intuitively send signals to the journalist to take a break, to think about the answer. For example, when, having leaned back in his chair, he looks at the ceiling or when he says “uh”, “hmmm”, choosing the words necessary for the answer, formulating thoughts. At this moment, you should not rush the interlocutor, and making a pause here is a win-win move. A “silent” question gives the interlocutor time to think, while not interrupting the conversation.

Follow the interlocutor: he will send you a signal to pause.

§ 4. Questions to avoid

Not all forms of questions used in everyday life should be used by journalists in their practice. For example, they are too long, cumbersome, by which it is difficult to determine what, in fact, information is requested. Or those in which, in essence, there is no desire to ask, but only a statement or assumption of a journalist. Inexperienced reporters, trying to put in their part of the dialogue " deep meaning”, they ask two or more questions at once, which is also undesirable, as this disorients the interlocutor in the order of answers. Quite often, journalists are also let down by “duty” questions, which are reserved in case there is nothing more to ask.

Here is how one well-known journalist reacted to the question of a student:

Do you remember any funny episode from your practice?

I don’t answer questions like that,” he said.

Why? Why is this question bad? - the student asked in bewilderment.

These are questionnaire questions, people most of all do not like to answer them. The most interesting questions are the ones that make you think.1

There are other variants of the inept approach to the selection of questions that you should be aware of in order not to complicate the already difficult technology of conducting a conversation.

In this section, the most typical cases of unsuccessful questions will be considered, the functional and structural component of errors that affect the interview process will be analyzed. The substantive aspect of questions is not touched upon here because of their infinite variety and dependence on specific situations.

Rhetorical questions. Highlighted by grammar in separate group interrogative sentences, they do not contain a question as such, but a hidden statement that does not require an answer. At the same time, a rhetorical question has all the components of an interrogative sentence that distinguish it from a narrative one - a specific intonation, a special word order, the presence of interrogative particles, which, of course, cannot but confuse an inexperienced interviewer. Another “attractive” moment of a rhetorical question is emotional expressiveness, that is, the ability to convey through it additional information about the shades of one’s emotions:

“How can young ladies who utter such monologues be seriously blamed for anything?” (N. Dobrolyubov. Dark kingdom);

“Is it possible to do this?”;

Isn't this the solution to all problems?

In rhetorical questions, the required two-way question-answer interaction between the journalist and his hero does not occur. The active side is the journalist. He makes the verdict, and he, and not his interlocutor, puts an end to it.

In this case, the correspondent violates two rules of the interview at once: obtaining new information in general and obtaining new information from the side being asked. In addition, a rhetorical question, in essence, interrupts the course of the conversation, and the interlocutor has no choice but to shrug and silently retreat. No wonder rhetorical questions are close in their meaning to statements containing a hidden affirmation or negation.

In a TV interview with Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, the topical problem of the current tension that has arisen in relations between Russia and Georgia was discussed. The speech, in particular, turned to the introduction by Russia on the border with Georgia visa regime. The minister argues for such a decision by the authorities, and the journalist tries to find out whether everything has been done to solve the problem with milder measures, and exclaims in vehemence: “In general, can you imagine that people loved by everyone, such as Kikabidze, Bregvadze, become real foreigners in Russia!” The minister has been looking for a suitable answer to this rhetorical question for a long time.

Rhetorical questions do not contain the necessary interrogative component and thus cause a passive reaction in the interlocutor.

Prompting (proactive) questions. Questions of this type already contain the expected answer. In most cases, they should be avoided because they have at least two harmful effects. Firstly, they push the interlocutor to an inferior answer - the journalist suggested him a possible option; secondly, the interlocutor may perceive them as a manipulative technique (“He is responsible for me!”):

“Mr. Prosecutor, did you assume in advance that this criminal case would not be solved?”;

“What do you think about the terrible speech of the MP from the opposition?”;

What do you think of this wonderful film?

Proactive questions can come in a variety of forms:

Include redundant words. For example, in the question "Please tell us everything about the man in the dark coat you saw on the day of the robbery", the detail "black coat" comes not from the interlocutor, but from the journalist;

Turn off the evaluative component, as in the case of "terrible performance of the deputy" or "great film".

In both cases, the journalist himself gave a negative assessment of the actions of the deputy and a positive evaluation film. In such a situation, two possible answers can be expected. First: the interlocutor will agree that the performance was terrible (and the film was excellent), and will respond in this pre-proposed construction. Second, he will not answer the question, but will ask the journalist: "Why do you think that his performance is terrible (that the film is wonderful)?". And both options will equally have an unsuccessful result: either an untruthful answer will follow, or the interlocutor will take the initiative into his own hands.

A proactive question can only be justified if there is a need to overcome the interlocutor's embarrassment in a conversation on painful or embarrassing topics. For example, in a conversation with a rape victim, you can ask the victim such a proactive question: “You then, probably, often recalled this nightmare?” With the word “nightmare”, the journalist gives an assessment of the tragedy and morally supports the interlocutor in a conversation on such a difficult topic for her.

Proactive questions have at least two consequences: they can cause a manipulative effect or lead to a formal answer.

Flattering questions. Flattering, apologetic questions, as practice shows, only harm. Young and inexperienced journalists resort to them to compensate for embarrassment and a sense of admiration for their hero.

“Mr. musician, you are the greatest performer of classical music, you are the winner of all possible awards, your work is admired by people of all ages and nations, etc., etc., how do you manage to maintain such a good creative shape?”

What reaction will this question cause in the interlocutor?

“What are you, I’m not so great, let it be to you! Yes, I am a normal person! I feel a bit embarrassed…” He will certainly make an attempt to balance the flattery with words that belittle his dignity. And then there are two ways to develop this dialogue: at best, the “great musician” will continue the answer, and at worst, he will lead the conversation in another direction, talking about how “modest and simple” he is.

Here is an example of an exaggerated complimentary question asked on television by a young journalistic ballerina Maya Plisetskaya: “Maya Mikhailovna, your fame is not global, but already planetary. You once said that you have no time to be a living legend. No time, because you work all the time, or no time, because you have such a life? Plisetskaya, who cannot be denied her vanity, naturally began to smooth out excessive flattery: “Come on, what a legend I am!”, And there was no answer to the question.

The same reaction is in a person who has committed an extraordinary act, for example, saving a child during a fire. It will be difficult to get from him full information and a detailed description of the case if the reporter addresses with such words: “You are a real hero, you have committed such an act that is worthy of the most high awards... ". The entire vocabulary, all the energy of this person will be spent on overcoming embarrassment, a modest babble that he is not a hero at all, but an ordinary person, that everyone in his place would have done the same.

A scientist, and a writer, and a rock singer will find themselves in a similar position - in a word, any person whose virtues or actions are exaggerated by a journalist. And each time in the response "move" the interlocutor will strive to balance the flattery, which will take precious time, and new information will not be added.

A flattering question, in which the dignity or actions of the interlocutor are exaggerated, is an ineffective means of developing a conversation.

Flattering questions should not be confused with compliments, which journalists use to “build bridges”, to form a positive atmosphere of conversation. Compliments, according to psychologists in the theory of "stroking", are necessary for showing approval, encouraging the interlocutor. Without flattery, "toadying" they only stimulate the conversation, give confidence to the interlocutor.

provocative questions. They are asked with the aim of angering the interlocutor, arousing passions, in order to receive an open, impulsive answer in the wake of an outburst of emotions. In fact, the journalist expects that the interlocutor will lose control over himself and lay out everything as “in spirit”. It's also a manipulative technique. How does it work and what are the consequences?

You can provoke with the help of individual keywords on which the hero will “bite”, or the content of the whole question.

Here is an example from Dmitry Dibrov's interview with film director Tigran Keosayan: D. Before the intro sounded, I asked Tigran: “What is the name of your film?” And it turned out that he had a stupid name - "Silver Lily of the Valley."

K. Awesome name!

D. And why do you like this petty-bourgeois name so much?

Journalists who use the technique of provocation - very popular, by the way, in the yellow tabloid press, as well as in the entertainment television and radio broadcasts - believe in its effectiveness, that such a question can “reveal” a person, give vent to his emotions. According to many “provocateur” journalists, such questions “do not work” with people who are prepared to communicate with the press, but they are very effective in a conversation with those who have not had this experience before, and therefore do not expect a catch from journalists. At the same time, they also believe that the risks associated with such communication are worth all possible consequences.

The well-known radio and TV presenter Matvey Ganapolsky admitted that an on-air conversation for him is just a game, and his provocative manner is a convention that he deliberately resorts to to aggravate the conversation: “Recently, Alexandra Pakhmutova, in a conversation with me, stated that Nikolai Dobronravov - the best songwriter in the world. I retorted: they say, he is the best for her, because he is her husband ... That's where it started! Thank God that by the middle of the conversation I still managed to exchange jokes with Alexandra Nikolaevna, we laughed and agreed that poetry is a complicated thing, and Dobronravov is the best in the sense that only he is suitable for creating texts for Pakhmutova's music ... ".3

However, novice journalists should be wary of the provocative interview technique, because it can lead to both predictable and unexpected consequences. For example, the interlocutor may interrupt the interview, while humiliating you and escorting you out of the room with a scandal. After a provocation, not only your interlocutors, but also their colleagues, your potential sources will not shake hands with you, you will develop a reputation as a scandalous reporter, etc. Before using a provocative question, calculate all the risks associated with it.

Overloaded questions. In a question, each word plays its own unique role. In addition to the fact that the word carries certain meaning and forms the content of the question, with the help of many additional factors, it can be filled with additional shades of an emotional and modal nature: surprise, doubt, bewilderment, distrust, confidence or uncertainty, etc. additional factors we will attribute intonation, logical stress, special positioning of the highlighted word, as well as special grammatical means expressions that include interrogative particles. Interrogative particles really, really, unless (except for the particle whether, which has a neutral interrogative meaning) express, together with the question, various modal shades, mainly doubts, uncertainty or distrust.

Consider three questions that differ only in interrogative particles:

"Was everything possible done to save the crew?";

“Has everything possible been done to save the crew?”;

"Was everything possible done to save the crew?"

The first question is formulated with the particle whether and has no additional modal meaning - it simply encourages the interlocutor to give an answer. The second, which includes the particle really, in addition to the question posed, includes a shade of doubt, and the third - with a particle perhaps - mistrust. What is the preferred question? Of course, the first one, because it is monofunctional, that is, it contains the only motivation for the interlocutor to act - to answer the question. The other two are polyfunctional: in the second case, in addition to answering the question about using all the possibilities to save the crew, the interlocutor should try to dispel the journalist's doubts; and answering the third, laying the foundation of trust. The first question is rational, the second and third, which contain evaluation components, are emotionally oversaturated and require the interlocutor to solve two problems at once.

Many examples can be cited with questions containing unnecessary, redundant words expressing a certain attitude of a journalist. At first glance, harmless, but these words make it difficult for the interlocutor to respond.

Compare a couple more questions:

“Mr. Minister, why did 70 percent of deputies vote for this law?” and “Mr. Minister, why did only 70 percent of deputies vote for this law?”;

“Mr. Prosecutor, do you think that society will not recognize the names of terrorists?” and “Mr. Prosecutor, do you think that society will never know the names of terrorists?”

The words only and never significantly change the meaning of the questions, overloading them with redundant information about the journalist's attitude to the subject of conversation.

Two questions in one. Not less than typical mistake journalists is also overloaded when several questions are asked instead of one:

“Mr. Professor, please tell us about the results of your experiment. How much money did it take?

“Did you see the plane explode? At what time did this happen?

“Mr. Prosecutor, when will you tell about the results of the investigation? Why hasn't society been informed yet?"

All of the above questions suffer from perhaps the most common interview mistake - the disease of question overload, the "packing" of two questions in one. This happens for a number of reasons: from the desire of the reporter to “learn everything at once”, and from haste, and from an ill-conceived sequence of questions.

What happens as a result of "two questions in one"? According to the laws of perception, the last saying is best remembered. Therefore, most likely of the two questions, your hero will answer the last one. As practice has shown, this is what happens most often.

Journalist: Russian poetry has traditionally gravitated towards French poetry - from Guys to Mallarme. You seem to have neglected this tradition and in your work, especially early ones, turned to Polish and English poetry. What draws you to these literatures? What is the meaning of Russian classics for you? What poets are close to you now?

Brodsky: I'll start from the end - I suppose you're asking about the Russian classics. First of all, Baratynsky and Vyazemsky. Strange as it may seem, for some reason there is always only one great poet in every era...4

However, when your character shows a clear interest and is in good control of himself, he will certainly choose the question of the two asked, which is more profitable for him to answer.

Even an experienced interviewer can make this mistake. In a conversation with Rodion Shchedrin, Urmas Ott receives an appropriate answer to an overloaded double question.

A. But before the Moscow Conservatory, you were still studying at the choir school. I remember your biography correctly, right? It was a rather difficult period in our country - the end of the forties - the beginning of the fifties. Then, I know, the attitude towards Shostakovich and Prokofiev was also ambiguous.

I am actually asking two questions here, of which Shchedrin is answering one. That was the time when, under the new conditions of glasnost, much was said about the horrors and sufferings of the Stalinist period, and to some extent the topic became opportunistic. Although now I would gladly give up the second half question asked, at that time I nevertheless asked him to introduce into the conversation the topic of Shostakovich and Prokofiev, about whom a lot was said in the context of Stalinism, their names were even exploited. For some reason, Shchedrin leaves this question unattended, but continues the biographical theme...

Shch. Indeed, before the Moscow Conservatory, I studied at the Moscow Choir School, it was the Sveshnikov School - Sveshnikov was the founder and organizer of the school ... You can’t overload questions with redundant information or unnecessary emotional or modal content. This makes it difficult for the respondent. And two questions in one is one of the worst journalistic mistakes.

"Silly questions. By them is meant inappropriate, inappropriate, irrelevant questions. Unfortunately, in journalistic practice they cannot be avoided. Always along with thoughtful, meaningful, encouraging certain positive information, such questions are inevitable, from which your hero will only wince or smile condescendingly. It is good if the interview takes place without witnesses, but if it is public, then the journalist cannot avoid criticism. He will get it in full from his colleagues, especially if it is a press conference or a collective interview in which several journalists participate at once.

How stupid questions are perceived in the following typical situations.

When inexperienced reporters find out platitudes like this: "Do you love your children?".

When a clarifying question is asked, it is completely inappropriate in this situation. Why, for example, ask Nikita Mikhalkov if he has a lot of directing experience. Everyone already knows that it is huge.

There are inappropriate and transitional questions that interrupt the interlocutor's thought in the very interesting place and early divert the conversation in the other direction.

Sometimes young journalists, trying to show off in front of the public and shock it, ask such an abstruse question that the hero cannot understand him, and then he has to ask an oncoming one: “Excuse me, I didn’t understand you, what did you mean?” It is good if the journalist finds the right words to explain, but when the question is not completely clear to him, he will have to apologize.

As a rule, repeated questions are unnecessary. A question uttered twice, as if for fidelity, persuasiveness (what if he doesn’t understand, doesn’t hear?) - not so bad. It is worse when the question begins to be clarified, not simplifying, but more and more complicating. “Mr. editor, tell me, have you ever experienced pressure from the owner of a newspaper? I mean, have you ever, on his orders, resorted to misrepresenting facts or printing hard-hitting information about his enemies?” The second part of the question is absolutely inappropriate here, because the interlocutor knows what he is talking about.

It is also stupid to moralize in questions simply because it is not part of the tasks of a journalist; in addition, it can annoy the interlocutor. “Mr. editor, how could you allow such a dirty gossip to be published about a respected person, is it ethical?”

It sounds trite, but it's better not to ask "stupid" questions.

Journalists sometimes get snide remarks from their interlocutors about stupid questions, and you need to be prepared for this. By the way, after such a caustic remark, you can follow up with something interesting as a kind of “compensation for the damage caused”.

Journalist: What has America become for you after all these years?

Brodsky: Great! Where did you learn to ask such questions? What it was - just an extension of space.5

There are rare cases when a "stupid" question will suddenly provoke an unexpectedly interesting or witty answer. This will enliven the conversation, give it a new impetus.

Journalist Anatoly Rubinov once wrote about the lockers at the Kazan railway station.

What do you have interesting? - he asked.

“The conversation stalled from the very beginning,” he recalls. - But I was saved by one circumstance and my own feigned stupidity.

A friend of hers entered the manager's office. This brought some relief, and I began to turn to both. I asked an idiotic question: “Do they find corpses in your place?” As a result, I heard an exciting story about a gypsy woman who left a child in a storage room. The baby fell asleep and started screaming. A fuss began: people came running, the police came. They tried to open the door - the alarm went off. The station flared up with interest and hatred for this woman. In the end, they got the child - and then the mother came running ... Thus, starting the conversation with the stupidest question, I learned a lot of new things. It turned out that all people are equally cunning - rarely anyone does not use the year of their birth in the code.

The questions that a person asks show the level of understanding of the problem and the ability of the asker to make assumptions. The ability to ask questions helps in solving problems, improves mutual understanding between people.
An important part of communication is the ability to ask questions.
Questions are a way of obtaining information and at the same time a way of switching the thoughts of the person with whom you are talking in the right direction (who asks questions controls the conversation).

By asking questions, we build a bridge into the unknown and the uncertain. And since uncertainty and uncertainty is feature In today's rapidly changing world, the development of the ability to ask questions is very relevant.

The right question, allowing you to find out the intentions of the partner, helps to avoid misunderstandings and conflicts. After all, sometimes, neglecting the opportunity to ask a question, or not asking it in right time, we open the way to conjectures and conjectures, various speculative constructions, create a wrong impression of others, attributing to them non-existent qualities, advantages and disadvantages, which often leads to misunderstandings and conflicts.

Whoever you are, in any sphere of life you will need the ability to ask the right questions. In any conversation, whether business or personal, the right questions help:

• Show interest in the personality of the partner and interlocutor;
• Ensure “interpenetration”, that is, make your system of values ​​understandable to the interlocutor, while clarifying his system;
• Obtain information, express doubts, manifest own position, show trust, be interested in what has been said, show indulgence and show that you are ready to devote the necessary time to the conversation;
• To intercept and keep the initiative in communication;
• Transfer the conversation to another topic;
• Move from the interlocutor's monologue to a dialogue with him.

How to ask the right questions
To learn how to ask questions correctly, you need to pay attention to the correct construction of the internal dialogue and study the main types of questions in the external dialogue.

INTERNAL DIALOGUE (questions to self) organizes our own thinking and helps us formulate thoughts. The relevance and quality, the accuracy and the consistency of the questions that arise in our minds, to a large extent affect the effectiveness of most of the actions we take.
In order to organize an internal dialogue, one must understand that its purpose is to analyze any of the problems. A set of relevant questions will help to comprehensively analyze any problem (situation). There are two options for questions.

First option, these are the seven classic questions:

What? Where? When? Who? How? Why? By what means?

These seven questions allow you to cover the entire problem situation and make its verbal-logical analysis.

Second option situation analysis is a set of six questions:

• Facts - What are the facts and events relevant to the situation in question?
• Feelings - How do I generally feel about this situation? How are others supposed to feel?
• Desires - What do I really want? What do others want?
• Obstacles - What's stopping me? What hinders others?
• Time - What and when to do?
• Tools - What tools do I have to solve this problem? What resources do others have?

Use either of the two options when organizing an internal dialogue. When a problem arises, analyze the situation with the help of questions to yourself, bring your thoughts to clarity, and only then begin to act.

Importance and significance EXTERNAL DIALOGUE , lies in the right questions, which are much better than a monotonous monologue. After all, the one who asks is the leader in the conversation. Also, with the help of questions, we show the interlocutor our interest in the conversation and in its deepening. By asking, we express to the person the desire to establish a good relationship with him. But all this happens when the conversation does not resemble and does not look like an interrogation.

Therefore, before starting a conversation or a business conversation, prepare a series of questions for the interlocutor, and ask them as soon as you move on to the business part of the conversation (in a normal conversation, as soon as you touch on the topic you need). So, you will provide yourself with a psychological advantage.

External dialogue questions can be posed in specific forms and can be of the following types:

Closed questions. The purpose of closed questions is to obtain an unequivocal answer (consent or refusal of the interlocutor), “yes” or “no”. Such questions are good only when it is necessary to clearly and clearly identify the presence of something in the present, past, and sometimes in the future (“Do you use this?”, “Did you use this?”, “Would you like to try?”), or attitude to something (“Did you like it?”, “Does it suit you?”), To understand how to proceed further. Closed questions (and yes or no answers to them) shift our efforts in a certain direction.
You should not immediately push a person by asking such questions to the final decision. Remember that it is easier to convince than to convince.
Another thing is when you deliberately ask a closed question, which is difficult to answer with a negative. For example, referring to generally recognized values ​​(Socrates often used a similar method): “Agree, life does not stand still?”, “Tell me, is quality and guarantees important to you?”. Why this is done: the more often a person agrees with us, the wider the zone of mutual understanding (this is one of the methods of manipulation). And vice versa, if you can't find the right question, and often hear "no" in response to leading questions, the likelihood of rejecting your proposal as a whole increases. Therefore, achieve agreement in small things, do not start a conversation with contradictions, then it will be easier to achieve the desired result.

Open questions . They do not imply an unequivocal answer, they make a person think, they better reveal his attitude to your proposal. Open questions are a good way to get new, detailed information that is very difficult to get with closed questions. Therefore, in a conversation it is necessary to use open-ended questions more often, in their various variations.
Ask for facts that will help you understand the situation: “What is there?”, “How much?”, “How is it solved?”, “Who?” etc.
Find out the interests of your interlocutor and the conditions for their satisfaction.
Find out the attitude of your interlocutor to the situation under discussion: “What do you think about this?”, “How do you feel about this?”.
Suggest in the form of questions, a different (your) solution to the problem: “Can we do this ..?”, “Why don’t we pay attention to such and such an option ..?”, while arguing your proposal. This is much better than openly saying: "I suggest ...", "Let's do it this way ...", "I think ...".
Be interested in what the statement of your interlocutor is based on: “What do you proceed from?”, “Why exactly?”, “What is the reason for this?”.
Clarify everything that is unclear to you: “What (how) exactly?”, “What exactly ..?”, “Because of what?”.
Find out the unaccounted for points, both personal and business: “What did we forget?”, “What issue did we not discuss?”, “What is missing?”,
If there are doubts, specify their reasons: “What is stopping you?”, “What worries you (does not suit you)?”, “What is the reason for the doubts?”, “Why is this unrealistic?”.
Characteristic features of open questions:

• Activation of the interlocutor, such questions make him think about the answers and express them;
• The partner, at his own discretion, chooses what information and arguments to present to us;
• With an open question, we bring the interlocutor out of the state of restraint and isolation and eliminate possible barriers in communication;
• The partner becomes a source of information, ideas and suggestions.

Since, when answering open questions, the interlocutor has the opportunity to avoid a specific answer, divert the conversation or share only information that is beneficial to him, it is recommended to ask basic and secondary, clarifying and leading questions.

Main questions - are planned in advance, can be both open and closed.

Secondary or follow-up questions - spontaneous or planned, they are set to clarify the answers to the main questions that have already been given.

Clarifying questions require short and concise answers. They are asked in case of doubt to clarify the nuances. People are almost always willing to delve into the details and nuances of their affairs, so there is no problem here. Unless we ourselves often neglect to ask clarifying questions, while our interlocutors only expect this from us in order to make sure that we understand everything correctly. Don't be shy and don't forget to ask clarifying questions!

Suggestive questions these are questions that make a certain answer obvious in terms of content, i.e. formulated in such a way as to tell the person what he should say. It is recommended to ask leading questions when you are dealing with timid and indecisive people, to summarize the conversation, or if the interlocutor started talking and you need to return the conversation to the right (business) track, or if you need to confirm the correctness of your judgment (belief in the profitability of your offer) .
Leading questions sound extremely intrusive. They almost force the interlocutor to recognize the correctness of your judgments and agree with you. Therefore, they must be used with extreme caution.

In order to know how to ask questions correctly, you need to have an idea about the various types of these questions. The use of questions of all kinds in business and personal conversations allows you to achieve various goals. Let's look at the main types of questions:

Rhetorical questions are set in order to evoke the desired reaction in people (enlist support, focus attention, point out unresolved problems) and do not require a direct answer. Such questions also enhance the character and feelings in the speaker's sentence, making the text richer and more emotional. Example: “When, finally, will people learn to understand each other?”, “Is it possible to consider what happened as a normal phenomenon?”.
Rhetorical questions it is necessary to formulate them in such a way that they sound short and concise, are relevant and understandable. Approval and understanding here is silence in response.

provocative questions are set in order to cause a storm of emotions in the interlocutor (opponent), so that a person, in a fit of passion, gives out hidden information, blurts out something superfluous. provocative questions are pure water manipulative influence, but it is sometimes necessary for the good of the cause. Just do not forget, before asking such a question, calculate all the risks associated with it. After all, by asking provocative questions you are somewhat challenging.

Confusing Questions transfer attention to the area of ​​​​interest of the questioner, which lies away from the main direction of the conversation. Similar questions are set either unintentionally (if you are interested in the topic of conversation, you should not ask about things that have nothing to do with it) or deliberately because of the desire to solve some of your own problems, direct the conversation in the direction you need. If, to your confusing question, the interlocutor suggests that you not be distracted from the topic under discussion, do so, but at the same time note that you want to consider and discuss the topic you have stated at another time.
Also, confusing questions are asked to simply get away from the topic of conversation, either because it is not interesting (if you value communication with this person, you should not do this), or it is inconvenient.

relay questions - are aimed at being ahead of the curve and require the ability to grasp the partner’s remarks on the fly and provoke him to further reveal his position. For example: “Do you mean by this what? ..”.

Questions to demonstrate your knowledge . Their goal is to show off their own erudition and competence in front of other participants in the conversation, to earn the respect of a partner. This is some form of self-affirmation. When asking such questions, one must be really, and not superficially competent. Because you yourself may be asked to give a detailed answer to your own question.

mirror question contains part of the statement uttered by the interlocutor. It is set so that a person sees his statement from the other side, this helps to optimize the dialogue, give it genuine meaning and openness. For example, to the phrase “Never entrust me with this again!”, The question follows - “Do not instruct you? Is there anyone else who could handle it just as well?”
The question "Why?" used in this case would cause a defensive reaction, in the form of excuses, excuses and the search for imaginary reasons, and could even end in accusations and lead to conflict. The mirror question gives a much better result.

Alternative question Asked in the form of an open question, but contains several answers. For example: “Why did you choose the profession of an engineer: did you consciously follow in the footsteps of your parents or decided to enter the campaign, together with a friend, or maybe you yourself don’t know why?”. Alternative questions are asked to activate a taciturn interlocutor.

The question that fills the silence . A good right question can fill the awkward pause that sometimes arises in a conversation.

soothing questions have a noticeable calming effect on difficult situations. You should be familiar with them if you have small children. If they are upset about something, you can distract and calm them down by asking a few questions. This technique works immediately, because you have to answer questions, thereby being distracted. In the same way, you can calm an adult.

The ability to ask questions correctly requires compliance with the following rules:
Brevity is the soul of wit. The question should be short, clear and to the point. This increases the likelihood of a response. When you start complex, lengthy discussions, go far from the topic, you can generally forget what exactly you wanted to ask. And your interlocutor, while you state your question for five minutes, puzzles over what exactly you want to ask him. And it may happen that the question remains unheard or misunderstood. If you really want to go from afar, let the explanation (prehistory) sound first, and then a clear and short question.

So that the interlocutor, after your questions, does not have the feeling that he is under interrogation, soften them by intonation. The tone of your question should not show that you are demanding an answer (of course, if this is not a situation where you have no other choice), it should sound casual. Sometimes it will be right to ask the person you are talking to, to ask permission - "Can I ask you a few questions to clarify?"

The ability to ask questions is inextricably linked with the ability to listen to the interlocutor. People are very responsive to those who listen to them carefully. And they will treat your question with the same degree of care. It is also important not only to show your culture and interest, but also not to miss information that may serve as a pretext for clarifying questions or for correcting what has already been prepared.

Most people on different reasons not ready to answer direct questions (someone has difficulty in presenting, and someone is afraid to convey incorrect information, some do not know the subject well enough, others are limited by personal or corporate ethics, the reason may be restraint or shyness, etc.). In order for a person to give you an answer no matter what, you need to interest him, explain to him that answering your questions is in his interests.

Do not ask a question that begins with the words: “How could you…?” or “Why don’t you…?”. The right question is a request for information, but not as a hidden charge. When the situation requires expressing dissatisfaction with the actions of a partner, it is better to firmly but tactfully tell him about it in an affirmative form, and not in the form of a question.

So, having learned how to ask questions correctly, you can get the (professional) information you need from the interlocutor, understand and get to know him better, find out his position and motives for actions, make relations with him more sincere and trusting (friendly), activate for further cooperation, and also discover weak sides and give him the opportunity to figure out what he is mistaken about. It is understandable why psychologists often talk about art, and not about the ability to ask questions.

Proactive thinking is a new type of thinking that helps you get the most out of the resources you have and become a true leader. To develop proactive thinking, the unsurpassed QBQ method, which John Miller writes about in his book The Five Principles of Proactive Thinking, helps to develop proactive thinking.

QBQ is about asking the right questions. It is based on five principles.

So, what does the right questions mean in the QBQ method? This means:

1. questions that always contain the personal pronoun "I". We accept 100% responsibility for everything that happens in our lives and full responsibility for our work.
2. the QBQ method considers, first of all, the actions of people.
3. QBQ questions don't start with "why", "when", or "who"? After all, if the question begins with "why", then it removes personal responsibility from people and includes the state of the victim. For example, “Why did this happen to me?”. And questions that begin with “Who” shift the blame onto other people. For example, “Who is to blame for the fact that our profits fell by 300 percent this quarter?”.

Let's compare:

HB ( wrong question): Why are my employees so uninitiative? QBQ question: How can I increase employee motivation? NV: When can we get out of this black hole? QBQ: How can I increase my company's sales?

Five Principles of the Method

This method, as we have already said, is based on five principles. If you ask yourself the right questions in these five areas, you can achieve tremendous results.

Education

Very often, when we try to learn something new, we fall into the Experience Trap. For example, the manager copies the style of behavior previous guide and he fails to reach his goals.

QBQ questions that help us learn are:

• How can I become a more effective leader?
• How can I perform my duties better than the previous leadership?
• How can I apply the knowledge that I have received to the maximum?

A responsibility

Talk about the power of responsibility extra words no need. We very often remove it from ourselves if we ask the wrong questions. For example, “Who will tell me what to do?”, “Who is to blame?”, “Why is it getting worse and worse every day?”.

In order to take back personal responsibility, questions should be asked like this:

• What can I personally do to find a solution to this problem?
• How can I do my job more efficiently?
• How can I get out of the Victim state?

Creativity

The QBQ method also allows you to develop creativity. What questions should be asked to develop this quality?

• How can I get more with limited resources and opportunities?
• How to get the necessary information?
• How else can you use this tool?

Creativity is a huge advantage.

Service

At all times, the greatest successes have been achieved by leaders who have engaged in service. There is even the concept of leadership-service.

What questions would be wrong in this case?

• Why should I help other people?
• When will our visitors become more grateful?
• Why should I give more?

Correct QBQ questions are:

• What can I do to better understand what the other person wants?
• How can you give customers even more value?
• How can I become better myself?

When we give, we receive more. By doing generous things, we get even more reasons to be generous.

Confidence

The fundamental quality of any wise leader is trust.

If you want to ask yourself useless and destructive questions, then they are:

• Why are my employees so suspicious?
• When will I know the truth about my team?

And here are some good questions:

• How can I influence the situation to improve it?
• What can be done to give positive emotions to employees?
• How can I improve in terms of human qualities to trust me?

Ask the right questions and you will get everything you want.

Inspired by John Miller's The Five Principles of Proactive Thinking

If you find an error, please highlight a piece of text and click Ctrl+Enter.

6 How to ask the right questions

Most conversations can be difficult to start and continue not because of the topic raised, but because the interlocutors ask the wrong questions.

Here are two types of questions used in everyday life.

1. Closed questions

Closed questions imply an unambiguous and short answer, after which the conversation ends.

For example:

Question: When did you start working as an accountant?

Answer: Eight years ago.

Question: Did you like the movie?

Answer: Yes.

Q: Who do you think will win the election?

Answer: Liberals.

Closed questions turn the conversation into an interrogation.

2. Open questions

Open questions require explanations, statements of one's own point of view. They help to establish rapport with the interlocutor, as they show your interest in receiving a detailed answer. People who ask open-ended questions are considered interesting and sincere, dynamic and attentive.

The four best open-ended questions start with:

How…?

Tell me about...

What do you think about…?

Why…?

Here are the same questions, but asked in an open form:

Q: How did you get started as an accountant?

Answer: At school, I was always interested in mathematics. I loved…

Question: Tell us which episode of the movie you liked the most.

Answer: I liked the scene where Dracula comes in and asks...

Question: What do you think about the chances of the liberal candidate?

Try to ask only open-ended questions. If you accidentally slipped a closed question, immediately complete it with an open one.

For example:

Q: When did you move to Chesterville? (closed)

Answer: About 10 years ago.

Question: What attracted you to this city? (open)

Answer: When we first moved here, the town was small and quiet, but I immediately realized its potential. And indeed, five years ago, it began here ...

From the book Gifted Child [Illusions and Reality] author Yurkevich Victoria Solomonovna

1. Should children be taught to ask questions? Remember the famous and sad: Why do mothers so want their children to be talented? It would be better if they wanted them to be happy ... And yet, the cherished dream of many parents is to have a gifted, talented child. They are proud of a gifted child:

From the book Transformative Dialogues by Flemming Funch

How to ask questions One of your main actions with a client is to ask him questions. If you break down everything the facilitator does into its component parts, you get something like:¤ Notice what the client is saying¤ Notice what the client is doing¤ Make decisions

From book good power[Self Hypnosis] by LeCron Leslie M.

How to ask questions Formulation of a question in the art of internal dialogue plays huge role: to achieve perfection in this, you will need certain knowledge and, of course, experience. Recordings of ideomotor "conversations" with which many chapters are provided will also help. Questions

From the book How to get married. How to beat an opponent author Kent Margaret

How to ask questions You will find it much easier to get the information you need if you know how and what to ask. Your questions should often begin with the word "why." It's best to ask questions using the most neutral terms so that the man doesn't know your point of view. Realizing

From the book Self-Teacher of Wisdom, or a Textbook for those who like to learn, but do not like being taught author Kazakevich Alexander

What questions to ask him When asking him questions, be sure to formulate them in such a way that the answers have a mostly positive connotation, but not always. Read the suggested list of 50 questions and make sure they are generally positive. These are just some of

From the book How to Maintain Success. The art of communication. Technology, illusions, possibilities author Tsvetkova Evgenia Gennadievna

How to Ask and Answer Questions Be wise as serpents and simple as doves. Matthew 10:16 What is the difference between intelligence and wisdom? What do you need to know and be able to become smarter? The Swiss writer Johann Lavater, who lived in the second half of the 18th century, answered this question

From the book How to communicate usefully and enjoy it author Gummesson Elizabeth

Three reasons to start asking questions The sixties of the last century. Soviet Union. Highway. An old “Cossack” does not drive along it, but almost flies. The traffic cop stops him. Approaches the driver's window and says: - Lieutenant Sidorov. Your documents.- Please! -

From the book Language and the Human Mind author Leontiev Alexey Alekseevich

Learning to ask questions We all ask questions from childhood. This is the simplest element of communication that we usually reproduce spontaneously. However, in the right mouth, a question is a powerful tool that opens up great possibilities. The art of asking questions will help you find

From the book Hidden Mechanisms of Influencing Others by Winthrop Simon

Do I need to ask direct questions? Some prefer to get around in conversation sharp corners for fear of possible consequences. Others ask about everything they are interested in. Like children. I prefer the latter. Once I heard a little girl in the Stockholm metro

From the book A completely different conversation! How to turn any discussion into a constructive channel by Benjamin Ben

Who will ask the questions We are left with three functions of the language that should be discussed in particular. Let's start with the functions of assimilation of human experience and self-regulation. Can they be modeled? Well, of course not. After all, they just provide what is happening to each of us in

From the book The Golden Book of the Leader. 101 ways and techniques to manage in any situation author Litagent "5 edition"

What questions should be asked? Of course, the questions that will appear in your dialogue will initially depend on the subject and topic of the conversation. But David Straker, a former consultant for Hewlett Packard and author of Changing Mind: in Detail, suggested

From book beautiful question author Berger Warren

Exercise 4. Ability to ask open-ended questions? Goal: Develop the skill of asking open-ended questions to gather useful information about plans or proposals you don't like. Estimated time: 15-30 minutes. Start by recalling the proposal.

From the book Your Personal Psychologist. 44 practical advice for all occasions author Shabshin Ilya

From the book I always know what to say! How to develop self-confidence and become a master of communication author Boisvert Jean-marie

Why don't you want to ask questions? Among the reasons why people avoid asking fundamental questions about much of what they do in their lives (including very important things) are the following: Asking is considered counterproductive.

From the author's book

Listening – and Asking Questions Sometimes questions play an important role in a conversation. The so-called closed questions have only two possible answers: "yes" or "no". "Are you angry because I'm late?" Alternative questions offer a choice. "We will go to

From the author's book

Ask open-ended questions Open-ended questions are those that lead to more common answers than yes or no. These are questions that begin with “why”, “what is”, “how”, etc. For example, if you ask someone: “What did you do today?”, the answer,