Influence of Smart Shaming in The Commun

Running Head: INFLUENCE OF SMART-SHAMING IN THE COMMUNICATION PROCESS
An Analysis of the Influence of Smart-Shaming in the Communication Process of Holy
Angel University Students
An Undergraduate Research Presented to the
School of Arts and Sciences
Holy Angel University
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Arts in Communication
Mary Alyson E. Agustin
Naemi Mae C. Almachar
Ronel C. Angeles
Girlie D. David
Irish Micaela C. Nunag
Kerr S. Santos
Pamela Denise C. Trillanes
October 2016
INFLUENCE OF SMART-SHAMING IN THE COMMUNICATION PROCESS
2
Copyright by
Mary Alyson E. Agustin
Naemi Mae C. Almachar
Ronel C. Angeles
Girlie D. David
Irish Micaela C. Nunag
Kerr S. Santos
Pamela Denise C. Trillanes
2016
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract……………………………………………………………….......................... 8
Introduction………………………………………………………….............................9
Related Literature………………………………………………............................... 14
Statement of the Problem……………………………………………….………..…. 23
Paradigm of the Study…………………………………………………..……….….... 25
Methodology…………………………………………………………………..…….…. 26
Results ……………………………………………………………………………...…..30
Summary ………………………………………………………………………..….…..48
Conclusion.... ………………………………………………………………................ 50
Recommendations……………………………………………………………………...52
References…………………………………………………………………….……...... 53
Appendices……………………………………………………………………….......... 58
4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to extend our immeasurable appreciation and deepest gratitude for
the help and support of the following persons who have contributed to making this study
possible.
First and foremost, we want to thank God Almighty for the wisdom and
knowledge he bestowed upon us, the strength, hope, and good health to finish this
thesis paper.
We would like to thank our thesis adviser, Atty. Jay-r Valerio, for his support,
encouragement, advice, valuable comments, and suggestions that contributed to the
success of this study.
We extend our gratitude to Mrs. Irene Manalili and Mr. Ryan Roberto, our
panellists, for giving us their time and effort in checking our manuscript now and then
and for their contribution and assistance in making our research better.
We thank our statistician, Mr. Alain Andal who guided and provided us with our
data, Mr. Harvey Santiago, who checked and proofread our manuscript, and Mr. Ron
Juluis Espada for accepting our request to be our speaker for the seminar and imparting
his knowledge to us.
We extend our gratitude to our respondents and participants for the study,
without you, this study will not be possible.
We also want to take this opportunity to express our sincerest appreciation to Ms.
Leslie Manalo, our mother, for her words of encouragement, patience, and constant
5
guidance throughout completing our thesis. We are truly blessed and grateful for her
unending love and support.
To our family, thank you for the understanding, financial and moral support for
this work, and for the unending love you have given us. We will not succeed without
you.
And most especially to Naemi Mae Almachar, our Angel, who is already with our
Lord, for giving us the guidance and motivation to finish all of these. This is for you.
Thank you for everything and we love you so much.

6
Abstract
This research paper describes the influence of Smart-shaming in the
communication process of selected Holy Angel University students. The respondents
are from different college departments of HAU. The descriptive research method was
used. To provide and gather information, questionnaires were distributed among
students and an experiment was conducted. Furthermore, interviews with psychologists
were also conducted.
The overall results imply that the respondents seldom commit to smart-shaming.
Moreover, the qualitative results proved that several factors such as gender,
personality, and the relationship between people are determinants of smart shaming.
Both quantitative and qualitative results demonstrated that smart shaming is considered
a social norm by the respondents. However, it also contributes as an obstacle to the
communication process because it hinders the flow of communication.
It is hoped for this study to help promote awareness about smart-shaming and to
aid future researchers in further exploring the effects of smart-shaming on people and
society.
7
Through the years of human existence, communication has been a
reflection of societies’ progress. It is an aspect that made us relational beings that helps
us to express our ideals, beliefs, and aspirations. As Matsumoto & Juang (2008) defined
communication as a “complex and intricate process that involves the exchange of
messages between interactants.” This is further expounded by Harris (2009) where he
has stated that in all communication, the reciprocity of response from the audience to
the speaker is a necessity which is supported by Potter’s (2004) definition of
communication by which “it is the relational process of creating and interpreting
messages that elicit a response.” Thus, communication is not merely an exchange and
sharing of information but also of understanding meaning. As Potter (2004) states “if a
message fails to stimulate any cognitive, emotional, or behavioral reaction, it is pointless
to refer to it as communication. Consequently, it can also be considered as “a process
because it is an activity, an exchange, or set of behaviors. It is an activity in which we
participate.” (Understanding and Sharing: An Introduction to Speech Communication 5 th
Edition, Pearson & Nelson)
Hence like every process, the communication process follows a step-by-step
method wherein Matsumoto & Juang (2008) has listed and defined. The first process is
the message which is defined as “the information and meanings that are exchanged
when two or more people communicate. These may be knowledge, ideas, concepts,
thoughts, or emotions.” It is also said to be the core of communication study (Potter,
2004). As the receiver received the message, the second process will occur which is
encoding. It “refers to the process by which people select consciously or unconsciously,

8
imbed messages in signals and send those message signals to others.” This definition
is reinforced by Potter (2004) who states that “messages do not interpret themselves;
words don’t mean things, people mean things.” These signals that are “carrying
messages during the process that are encoded during the communication” is the third
process of communication. There may be observable behaviors such as verbal
language and non-verbal behaviors that unnecessarily have essential meanings.
Afterwards, the signals will be sent to the channels referred to as “specific sensory
modalities” where the messages are retrieved in continuation of the communication
process. When a person “receives signals from an encoder and translates those signals
into meaningful messages” it is called the decoding process.
On the other hand, as stated in faculty.mc3.edu (2015), several factors affect the
communication process such as the ability of the individual to send and receive
messages, perception of sender and receiver, proxemics, territoriality, roles and
relationships, time, environment, attitudes, emotion and self-esteem. More so, there are
also “obstacles to the process of communication.” (Dr. Suruj Kumar Debnath). When
communication is impended and does not reach the receiver, it affects the process. It
then becomes somewhat ineffective and such impediments are known as
communication barriers (C.B. Mamoria). These communication barriers are “the
problems that arise at every stage of the communication process and have the potential
to create misunderstanding and confusion” (Louise E. Boone)
(www.thebusinesscommunication.com/what-is-a-communication-barriers/)
Nowadays, Filipinos have been insentient in practicing a behavior wherein
intellectuals are shamed for possessing such qualities. Such as when an intelligent
9
remark is suddenly considered offensive and compromises the communication process.
A normal flow of conversation is suddenly halted because “one’s ideas are perceived as
a threat as if the person were hurling insults instead of stating facts” (Sison, 2015). This
phenomenon is coined as Smart Shaming which is defined as the way a person or a
group of people mock someone who by chance has extended familiarity with a certain
topic. The phrase “Sige, matalino ka na!” (Fine, you’re the smart one!) is often uttered in
that case. It became a practice that when we hear new and unfamiliar information we
tend to react negatively as an act of defense mechanism. As Shakira Sison mentioned
in her article it’s as if intelligence is now a liability and scratching beneath the surface is
negative invalidating ideas that go against the grain seems to be more common than
being intrigued enough to look further. Smart shaming considerably influences the way
of conversing with one person to another in a way that has slowly infiltrated Filipino
culture.
Likewise, communication itself is a broad and dynamic concept that changes
from time to time whereas people unconsciously communicate with each other thus it
evolves through the years. Smart shaming plays an important role in the communication
process for it contributes to these unconscious changes in the way people relate to one
another. To provide a better understanding of the communication process,
communication theories are developed. Harris (2009) described these theories as the
results of new discoveries in our environment. He further explained that communication
theory “is an umbrella term for all careful, systematic, and self-conscious discussion and
analysis of communication phenomena.” However, he also reiterated that a theory’s

10
purpose is not only about laying out multiple ideas “but also specifies the relationships
among them.”
As the way communication develops, different cultures arise. Culture is simply
defined as “a collective name for all behavior patterns socially acquired and socially
transmitted using symbols.” (Fairchild, 1944) Tubbs & Moss (2000) corroborated this
definition by stating “culture is a way of life developed and shared by a group of people
and down from generation to generation.” They explained how culture “consists of
patterns of and for behavior acquired and transmitted by symbols and of traditional
ideas and especially attached values” which are the essential core of culture. Smart
shaming has been practiced by many due to different influences from different
environments. From peers to well-known celebrities, Filipinos have unconsciously
digested it in their daily conversations. To the extent that “we playfully shame people
when they’re “too smart” for our common tastes.” (Sta. Romana, 2015). Sta. Romana
also mentioned that in Filipino culture, we tend to see intelligence as a negative trait,
and there is a pervasive thread that seems to celebrate ignorance. She further stated
that “it’s almost like we are afraid or ashamed to be intelligent”. With the recent trend of
criticizing the people who tells something, they don’t understand by making insulting
jokes such as “nosebleed” or “masyado ka kasing matalino” just to stop the
conversation. It is no wonder that our Filipino culture of being easily influenced by
what’s trending and what we see in our everyday life. Thus, smart shaming became
prevalent.
This study does not only desire to accentuate how Smart-Shaming affects the
communication process but also, the proponents aim to define Smart-Shaming and
11
what is its effect on the elements of the communication process. More so, assessing the
influence of Smart-Shaming on the different types of communication is found worth
noting by the proponents of the study. Moreover, to further understand the concept of
Smart Shaming, there is a need to acknowledge how it affects the daily conversations of
the chosen Holy Angel University students as well as to determine if it has any influence
on the flow of information in their conversations. Furthermore, the study aims to raise
awareness among Holy Angel University students and to create active communication
to counteract Smart-shaming’s crippling effect on the flow of conversation.

12
The new rising social problem is called smart shaming. It is the act of shaming
others for being smarter than others (Raymundo, 2015). Moreover, smart-shaming is
committed when a person mocks someone with an intelligent remark in a conversation.
Statements such as “Ikaw na ang matalino!” (“You’re the smart one!”), “Alam mo lahat!”
(“You know it all!”), and the like are being used to express the disapproval of a person in
the statement of the other when they do not understand it. Sison (2015) stated in her
article that some people are slighted when they don’t understand or are unfamiliar with
a certain topic. Furthermore, she also stated that Filipinos are proud of our difficulty in
understanding and speaking the English language while criticizing those who can speak
it properly.
Smart-Shaming occurs when people communicate with each other.
Communication is a two-way process, an interaction between two or more people. It is
about sending and receiving messages, thoughts, ideas, and information, and
responding (www.library.careerforce.org.nz). Smart Shaming then can be established
through communication when the sender and receiver face a conflict in their interaction
of thoughts and ideas. According to Sison (2015), when a person or a group of people
whose ideas were terminated during a conversation, smart shaming then becomes
significant in communication. Additionally, good conversations are often ridiculed, and
people would rather not engage in thoughtful conversation (Vergara, 2016).
People often communicate because they have the need to convey messages to
others and there are various forms of communication that people used to transfer
messages through any medium, such as interpersonal, group, and mass
communication. Interpersonal Communication is defined as communication between

13
several people that ranges from impersonal to very personal (www.lms.oum.edu.my).
Hence, it can be explained in simplified terms as a process exchanging of messages
containing ideas and feelings (www.nja.nic.in). A form of communication that contains
three or more people, involving a facilitator and members that share a sense of
belonging, common goals, and mutual respect is group communication. It is often the
most efficient way to generate ideas, and decision-making and come up with solutions
(www.msucommunitydevelopment.org). According to Sharpe (1991), we belong to
groups to satisfy needs that we cannot meet on our own. By coming together with
others, we pool our knowledge and experience to make decisions and accomplish tasks
more efficiently than we could individually. However, when a message reaches a large
group of people, it is considered mass communication. It is a process in which a person,
group of people or an organization sends a message through a channel of
communication to a large group of anonymous and heterogeneous people and
organizations (www.study.com). It is further stated that the medium of channels used is
broadcast television, radio, social media, and print.
According to Hybels and Weaver (2004), people get involved in communication
because they have information, ideas, and feelings they want to share. Thus in
communication, people tend to rely on their skills in conversing to test their ability to be
expressive with people and encourage analytical thinking. Gamble & Gamble (2002)
mentioned that we rely on our communicative skills as we confront events that
challenge our flexibility, integrity, expressiveness, and critical thinking skills. Through
this, people stimulate themselves in relating with other people from unique
circumstances. With that said, there are people who are involved in communication. In
14
most situations, people are the sender and receiver of a message that makes up the
communication process.
According to Trask (2001), a conversation occurs when there is a connected
exchange by two or more people that signifies the process of communication.
Communication is a complex process. It requires a lot of thought and sometimes effort
to make sure that the communication interactions we have been successful
(www.library.careerforce.org.nz). The communication process consists of elements that
are essential in communication. These elements are the sender, receiver, messages,
channel, feedback, context, effect, and communication barriers.
According to Gamble & Gamble (2002), in all forms of communication, the
sender and receiver are the ones involved. Respectively, the sender and receiver, are
individuals who transmit and process the messages. The sender transmits the message
while the receiver is the one who processes the message. As stated by Weaver II
(2004), a Message is made up of ideas and feelings that the sender wants to share with
the receiver. Hanson (2005) added that the actual content being transmitted and
processed in communication is the message. Gamble & Gamble (2002) emphasized
that the verbal and nonverbal messages we send are often determined in part by the
verbal and nonverbal messages we receive. The medium then used in sending and
receiving messages is our senses. Meaning, through verbal and nonverbal channels,
messages can then be sent and received. In certain conditions, the response of the
sender-receiver to each other is feedback. It is used to determine the success of the
communication process because as supported by Weaver II (2004), feedback is vital to
communication in letting the participants see whether ideas and feelings have been
15
shared in the way they were intended. Gamble & Gamble (2002) differentiates that the
feedback encouraging being constant in their behavior is positive feedback: enhancing
the current behavior is in progress. Whilst, negative feedback exterminates a behavior,
it serves to remedy rather than support. Thus, negative feedback eliminates useless
and impractical reception. Noting that positive and negative should not be signified as
good and bad; these variables address the way feedback affects behavior in
communication. The circumstances then that always take place in a communication
process are the context, or setting. The circumstances can either be the place, the
values of the person, and appropriateness of the message, etc.
(http://www.enotes.com). Lee McGaan (2003) noted the influence of taking into
consideration the appropriateness of the message in communication and also how the
messages will be interpreted by others in various settings. It was attested by Gamble
and Gamble (2002) that whatever the sender or receiver act or says is a potential
message as long as someone interprets the behavior. Whatever your action or reaction
whether verbal or nonverbal cues, you are communicating, and your communication is
having an effect. As the sender and receiver communicate, they are changed by the
interaction, influencing them. Communication has an adverse effect and can be viewed
as an “exchange of influences”. There is an underlying effect between the sender and
receiver. It can be emotional, physical, cognitive, etc., or any of the three. Gamble &
Gamble (2002) emphasized that “Since effects are not always visible or immediately
observable, there is more to communication reaction that meets the eye, or the ear.”
16
An effective communication then is when there is a direct free flow of information
between the sender and receiver. However, there are instances that misunderstanding,
irrelevant responses, and undesirable reactions are inevitable in a communication
exercise. (www.communicationtheory.org) It is mostly caused by factors that are innate
in most communication situations. These factors are called Communication Barriers.
A barrier is defined as something that blocks and stops something from getting
through. This means that “anything that stops the development of understanding when
people interact is a barrier to communication” (www.qualifications.pearson.com),
signifying that when the communication process is hindered, it stops the progress of
interaction between the sender and receiver. Lunenberg stated that “because
communication is a complex, give-and-take process, breakdowns anywhere in the cycle
can block the transfer of understanding.” Thus, the element that keeps a message from
being misunderstood or inaccurately interpreted is Communication Barriers. According
to Pfeiffer, communication that only partially occurred or is aborted entirely was the
result of the circumstances that surround the occasion when the communication attempt
was made and these circumstances act as barriers. There are five classifications of
barriers that can occur in communication: Physical Barriers, Psychological Barriers,
Semantic Barriers, Organizational Barriers, and Interpersonal Barriers (Koneru, 2008).
However, the communication process may also fail due to the differences in interests,
perceptions, and viewpoints of those who are involved. (www.skillsyouneed.com)
Breaking it down, some propositions show how these factors work together and these
are called Communication Theories.
Theories help organize thinking about phenomena by highlighting key ideas and
17
by providing carefully crafted definitions that can be shared by all scholars as they build
knowledge about their phenomenon of interest. (Potter, 2012) Theories aid in explaining
factors that lead to an outcome, and showing also how those factors work together.
Communication theories provide a set of logically related general propositions such as
statements, ideas, and beliefs that explain and describe some outcome or
characteristics of every communication interaction and transaction.
(www.oregonstate.edu) As mentioned previously, communication may not be successful
as a result of disparities in a person’s interests and perceptions. There are
communication theories that can identify the factors that cause these dissimilarities.
There is a process whereby mass media determine what we think and worry
about. (Spring, 2002) Therefore, mass media is a factor that influences a person’s
viewpoint. According to McCombs and Shaw, “it can effect cognitive change among
individuals and to structure their thinking. Moreover, a method where the media review
first the information or news they have gathered before it gets to the public is called
Gatekeeping. With this, it has been decided whether or not the information should be
generally known. “The media uses gatekeeping to control our access to news,
information, and entertainment.” (Wilson, 2001) This has been labelled as the Agenda-
Setting theory. The perceived idea is that agenda-sets are the ability of media to shape
the unobstructed view of events in the public mind. Thus, the underlying concept of
agenda-setting in our society is for the media to curate what we see or hear. “In short,
the mass media may not be successful in telling us what to think, but they are
stunningly successful in telling us what to think about.” (McCombs and Shaw, 1977)
18
Additionally, various forms of media can play a role in molding individuals’ views
and also forming their own set of beliefs. Consumption of different media cultivates an
individual’s mindset, which in turn affects people’s real life. (Lai, Chung & Po, 2015) In
support of the previous statement, Baran and Davis stated that there exists a theory that
cultivates or creates a worldview that, although possibly inaccurate, becomes the reality
because people believe it to be the so-called Cultivation Theory. It is further suggested
that television is major responsible for “cultivating’ the viewers”. Shaping their
perception of social reality and, ultimately, instilling change into the culture of the
society. (www.jclass.umd.edu) George Gerbner, the theorist behind the cultivation
theory stated that television has come to the main source of storytelling in today’s
society. The cultivation theory is a scientific theory. Epistemologically speaking,
Gerbner believes in one truth. The theory does not believe television viewers have a
choice in whether they are affected by media violence or not. (www.uky.edu) For
instance, when television paints a society in a bad light, it then leads to people
questioning the real world. Over time, particular mediated symbols, messages, and
meanings become dominant and absorbed by the people. Cultural stereotypes, means
of understanding values, and hierarchies are established. (www.peoi.org)
Henry Muller, an editor, said that there is a culprit in this problem wherein mass
media are the ones to blame. According to Maslog, in formal education, the teacher is
the central influence on the students in the classroom. In informal education, the mass
media — the print, radio, and especially television – are the teachers of the biggest
classroom ever, the world outside school, including at home. Having said that, mass
media can set an agenda on what should people perceive. “The media then plays an
19
important role in dictating or perceptually dictating the majority opinion.”
(www.masscommtheory.com) Also, it is major responsible for infiltrating what is being
shown in the media, cultivating a person’s mindset. Therefore, mass media has an
influence on communication that creates dissimilarities between people’s interests and
perceptions that contributes to the widespread of the new rising social problem, Smart
Shaming.
“Edi wow!”, “Ikaw na!”, and “Sayo na ang korona.” These are just some of the
most common phrases Filipinos use when committing Smart Shaming. It is committed
to people for having an educated point of view, for having an extensive vocabulary, or
for knowing how to express themselves in a superior manner. (Biado, 2016) He also
stated that it signifies, that is: “You’re way too smart, and you should lower it down a
notch.”
It can be a form of personal attack, contributing to the penetration of
Anti-Intellectualism in Filipino culture. One of the best representations of this is what
people like Vice Ganda’s alleged “humor” portray in Philippine Media. According to an
article posted at getrealphilippines.com, “most of the comedy he claims to make is just
crass and offensive humor that degrades other people’s appearance or intelligence.”
And with his numerous numbers of fans and the people who watch his shows and
movies, there’s no doubt that they will be easily influenced since, like any other Filipino
movies and TV shows, it does not make people think.”
(makingitfuninthephilippines.blogspot.com)
20
Moreover, “five of the top ten highest-grossing Filipino movies of all time are
self-admitted dumb comedies that rely more on slapstick and stereotypes than witty
writing for laughs” (Sta. Romana, 2015). The Philippines seems to cultivate an Anti-
Intellectualism culture where being smart seems to be a bad thing that some Filipino
movies portray characters that show some degree of intelligence, are either smart-
shamed or portrayed as villains, and how the Filipinos use the term “pilosopo” as an
insult. As a result, those who have seen these kinds of content tend to criticize the
people who tell something they don’t understand by making insulting jokes such as
“Nosebleed!” or “Masyado ka kasing matalino!” affecting the flow of conversation. Thus,
the influence of smart shaming on the communication process is present.
Furthermore, uttering phrases that reprehend those who think critically and
intelligently can interact with the development of understanding between the sender and
receiver. “We playfully shame people when they’re “too smart” for our common tastes”
(Sta. Romana, 2015). For that reason, there are instances when the person being
scrutinized will prefer to keep quiet. This concept that refers to how people remain silent
when they feel that they are part of the minority group is called the Spiral of Silence
Theory. Also, the spiral of silence could be understood as a bandwagon effect
according to Salmon and Kline, 1985 which then clarifies that people tend to go along
with where the majority group is. Therefore, in a communication situation, when
someone preferred to keep quiet, the conversation is halted for the reason that the flow
of communication is conceded.
21
Statement of the Problem
1. How does smart-shaming influence the respondents in terms of their:
a. Perception
b. Attitude
c. Behavior
2. How can smart shaming affect the communication process in terms of:
a. Interpersonal communication
b. Group Communication
c. Mass Communication
3. How does smart shaming affect the communication process in terms of:
a. Sender
b. Message
c. Receiver
d. Feedback
22
Conceptual Framework
People who tend to mock someone with intelligent remarks in a conversation can
lead to the behavior of smart-shaming which increases rampancy in our society today.
This research study aims to analyze the influence of smart-shaming on the
communication process and also to identify its effects on the selected Holy Angel
University students.
The researchers distributed survey forms to the selected students of Holy Angel
University which were evaluated and verified by professionals. Furthermore, an
experiment was conducted to discern how smart-shaming occurs within a group
conversation wherein the proponents have coordinated with various students coming
from different courses in the university as participants.
The outcome of this research study is an advocacy campaign that promotes
awareness regarding smart shaming, and its effects on the communication process
specifically towards the sender and receiver. A seminar was administered, as a part of
the campaign, by the proponents for the students of Holy Angel University discussing
the issue. Moreover, other promotional materials were produced such as audio-visual
presentations, posters, and a Facebook page.

23
The paradigm of the Study
Input Process Output

How does smart-shaming Validation of Talk to Me When You’re
influence the respondents in questionnaires. Not Smart Anymore: An
terms of their: Advocacy Campaign
Perception Distribution of about Smart-Shaming.
Attitude questionnaires to target
Behavior respondents. - Seminar about Smart-
Shaming: It’s Rampancy and
How can smart-shaming affect Administering an Effects in the Filipino
the communication process in experiment to various Society.
terms of: students.
Interpersonal - Creation of promotional
communication Analysis and materials:
interpretation of gathered
Group Communication data. Audio-Visual
Mass Communication Presentation (AVP)
Posters
How does smart-shaming affect Facebook Page
the communication process in
terms of:
Sender
Message
Receiver
Feedback
24
Methods
Participants
The participants of the study were selected students of Holy Angel University.
For the qualitative aspect of the study, stratified sampling will be used in the study.
Precisely, the sample will be applied by (1) calculating the number of enrolled college
students in the university as of the school year 2016-2017 (2) dividing the enrolled
college students into subgroups according to what college department they are in. (e.g.
SAS, SED, CEA) (3) randomly selecting one section per department to guarantee that
the respondents will have diverse behavior and perception towards Smart-Shaming. For
the qualitative aspect, the participants in the experiment were randomly selected from
different colleges in the university. The group for the experiment comprises male and
female students who are 18 years old and above. Interviews with psychologists were
also made for the study.
Instruments
In this study, the researchers both used qualitative and quantitative research.
The respondents answered through questionnaires that were distributed to the selected
students at Holy Angel University based on their level of understanding of the topic. As
for the experiment, interviews and written documents were also used addition in to
accumulate data.
For the quantitative method, the researchers used stratified sampling wherein the
total number of students will be divided into subgroups according to their department.
25
Additionally, a Likert-type scale was used in measuring the accuracy and conciseness
of the respondents’ responses.
For the qualitative method, the researchers conducted an experiment to
determine the respondents’ behavior through one’s environment. The transcriptions of
the recorded conversation, video footage, and interviews with the participants of the
experiment were evaluated by professionals. Written documents were also included to
clarify the research study.
Procedure
The researchers went through the following processes before the completion of the
study:
• The researchers seek permission from three professionals to validate the
questionnaires.
• Letters were sent to the Dean of the School of Arts and Sciences, AB
Communication chairperson, and thesis adviser for approval to conduct the
pilot testing.
• The researchers conducted a pilot testing of survey forms for 2nd-year AB
Communication students in order to verify that the respondents will
understand the questionnaires and avoid uncertainty with the usage of words.
• The researchers used stratified sampling to determine the sample for each
college.
• The researchers used qualitative methods for the experiment.

26
• The researchers have chosen four participants from different colleges to take
part in the experiment.
• The researchers have chosen five topics that the participants in the
experiment will talk about.
• The researchers documented the whole experiment.
• The researchers coordinated with a statistician to get the result of the
encoded data that will be collected from the survey.
• The researchers used “frequency coding” in analyzing the similarities and
differences between the answers in the interview.
• The outputs were produced after the data analysis.
Research Method
The descriptive method of research was used for this study. This type of
research design was used to obtain information regarding Smart Shaming. The
descriptive method is used to have a comprehensive study aiding to explain a
phenomenon and its relation to people. The method also proves to be useful in
developing new theories regarding an unknown issue or phenomenon. The researchers
chose to apply this method in the study to obtain information regarding Smart Shaming
and its influence on the communication process. This design examines understanding a
complex issue through a detailed contextual analysis of the people and a phenomenon.
Data Analysis
After gathering the information needed, the proponents analyzed the different
responses from the participants to acquire results.

27
For the survey, the collected data were encoded and tabulated using a Microsoft
Excel spreadsheet to maintain organized results. The processed data will be presented
using frequencies, mean, standard deviation, and percentages for descriptive purposes
of the study.
For interviews, the proponents transcribed recorded conversation from credible
professionals that has knowledge regarding the subject to analyze the similarities and
differences of the answers known as “frequency coding”.
When the coding was completed, the researchers analyzed the frequency codes
and discussed the similarities and differences in related codes or the comparison of the
answers from the respondents.

28
Results and Discussions
This chapter covers the results of the gathered data and the interpretation of the
findings. A self-constructed questionnaire was administered to 321 college students of
Holy Angel University which aimed to determine the influence of smart-shaming in the
communication process.
Quantitative Aspect – Results of Survey among Holy Angel University
Students
Frequency Distribution of Respondents’ Profile
according to College
College Frequency Percentage (%)
SAS 28 8.72
SED 48 14.96
SBA 60 18.69
CEA 62 19.31
CNAMS 29 9.04
CICT 33 10.28
CCJEF 22 6.85
CHTM 39 12.15
TOTAL 321 100%
Table 1 shows the distribution of participants according to their college. 28 or 8.72% from
the School of Arts and Sciences, 48 or 14.96% are students from the School of Education, 60 or
29
18.69% are School of Business and Accountancy students, 62 or 19.31% from the College of
Engineering and Architecture, 29 or 9.04% are students from College of Nursing and Allied
Medical Sciences, 33 or 10.28% are College of Information and Communications Technology
students, 22 or 6.85% from College of Criminal Justice Education and Forensics while the other
remaining 12.15% or 39 participants are from College of Hospitality and Tourism Management.
A. Influence of Smart-Shaming in Elements of Communication
Table 2
Sender
FREQUENCIES
1 2 3 4 STANDARD
STATEMENTS MEAN DESCRIPTION
DEVIATION
NEVER SELDOM OFTEN ALWAYS
1. I automatically say “Ikaw na 94 149 60 18

ang magaling!” as my
response whenever my friend
SELDOM
states a smart remark in our 1.82 0.85
29.28% 46.42% 18.69% 5.61%
conversation.
2. I quickly judge a person 116 136 55 14

who is more knowledgeable
SELDOM
in a conversation. 1.91 0.82
36.14% 42.37% 17.13% 4.36%
3. I usually say "Wow! Deep!" 118 119 66 18

instead of asking its meaning
when someone use an
SELDOM
unfamiliar word, that I never 1.97 0.89
36.76% 37.08% 20.56% 5.60%
heard before.
SENDER 1.90 0.61 SELDOM
As shown in Table 2 Item 1, 46.42% of the respondents seldom use “Ikaw na magaling!” as
their automatic response whenever their friend states a smart remark (Mean = 1.82, SD = 0.85).
As stated by Sta. Romana, uttered phrases such as “Ikaw na magaling!” and “Wow!” “Deep!”
can reprehend those who think critically and intelligently can interact with the development of
30
understanding between the sender and receiver. In Item 2, 42.37% seldom judge a person
quickly who is more knowledgeable in a conversation (Mean = 1.91, SD = 0.82).
According to Espada (2016), sometimes you’re reminded of your own flaws, own
weaknesses, and insecurities. Some tend to judge because they tend to feel intimidated by their
intellectual ability. Lastly, in Item 3, 37.08% of the respondents seldom usually say “Wow!
Deep!” instead of asking about its meaning whenever they use an unfamiliar word (Mean =
1.97, SD = 0.89). Sison (2015) stated that “We playfully shame people when they’re ‘too smart’
for our common tastes” signifying that we tend to use banter and humor to judge them.
Table 3
Message
FREQUENCIES
1 2 3 4 STANDARD
DEVIATION
4. I have meaningful 20 63 118 120

conversation with my friends
when we are not smart- ALWAYS
3.05 0.89
shaming each other. 6.23% 19.63% 36.76% 37.38%
5. I consider smart-shaming 38 120 110 53

as an obstacle to the flow of OFTEN
2.55 0.90
conversation. 11.84% 37.38% 34.27% 16.51%
6. I am discouraged to say my 37 107 93 84

opinion whenever I feel that
OFTEN
no one is interested in what 2.70 0.97
11.53% 33.33% 28.97% 26.17%
I’m about to say.
MESSAGE 2.77 0.65 OFTEN
As shown in Table 3, 37.38% of the respondents always have a meaningful conversation
with their friends when they are not smart-shaming each other (Mean = 3.05, SD = 0.89). To
support the claim in Item 4, According to Hybels and Weaver (2004), people get involved in
communication because they have information, ideas, and feelings they want to share. Thus in
31
communication, people tend to rely on the skills of conversing so as to test their ability to be
expressive with people and encourage analytical thinking. With the same percentage, the
respondents in Item 5 often consider smart shaming as an obstacle to the flow of conversation
(Mean = 2.55, SD = 0.90). Moreover, “Anything that stops the development of understanding
when people interact is a barrier to communication” (www.qualifications.pearson.com). This
signifies that when the communication process is hindered, it stops the progress of interaction
between the sender and receiver. In Item 6, 33.33% of the participants are often discouraged to
say their opinion whenever they feel that no one is interested (Mean = 2.70, SD = 0.65). This
proves that Smart Shaming then can be established through communication when the sender
and receiver face a conflict in their interaction of thoughts and ideas. According to Sison (2015),
when a person or a group of people whose ideas were terminated during a conversation, smart-
shaming then becomes significant in communication. Additionally, good conversations are often
ridiculed, and people would rather not engage in a thoughtful conversation (Vergara, 2016).
Table 4
Receiver
FREQUENCIES
1 2 3 4 STANDARD
DEVIATION
7. I get offended whenever 56 109 94 62

someone makes remarks
such as “Edi wow!”, “Alam mo OFTEN
2.50 1.00
lahat!” towards me during a 17.45% 33.96% 29.28% 19.31%
conversation.
8. I do not continue to express 46 138 101 36

my thoughts and opinions
about the topic because I’m
too embarrassed whenever I SELDOM
2.38 0.87
am smart-shamed in a 14.34% 42.99% 31.46% 11.21%
conversation.
56 137 89 39 SELDOM
32
9. Smart shaming prevents 2.36 0.92

me from sharing
17.45% 42.68% 27.73% 12.14%
relevant/significant
information in a conversation.
RECEIVER 2.41 0.79 SELDOM
As shown in Table 4, 33.96% of the respondents often get offended whenever someone
makes remarks towards them during a conversation (Mean = 2.50, SD = 1.00), In Item 8,
42.99% of the respondents seldom don’t continue to express their thoughts and opinions about
a topic because they’re too embarrassed whenever they’re smart-shamed (Mean = 2.38, SD =
0.87). One of the things that we need to consider in identifying smart shaming behavior is what
other people make us feel. Sometimes, in a certain way, “hindi natin maiwasan that people
make us feel a certain way na hindi naman natin gusto” (Espada, 2016). Lastly, 42.68% of the
participants believe that smart shaming prevents them from sharing relevant/significant
information in a conversation (Mean = 2.36, SD = 0.92). This means that smart shaming
essentially makes them stop thinking. “You’re essentially making them stop wondering, hoping,
and becoming better than who they are right now because you are insecure and you don’t want
to be someone to be better than you are” (Espada, 2016).
Table 5
Interpersonal Communication
FREQUENCIES
1 2 3 4 STANDARD
DEVIATION
10. I am confident to share my 11 68 138 104

new knowledge with my SELDOM
friends. 3.00 0.85
3.43% 21.18% 42.99% 32.40%
48 154 88 31 SELDOM
33
11. I get teased by my friends 2.32 0.87

whenever I share new and 14.95% 47.98% 27.41% 9.66%
unfamiliar knowledge.
12. I hear my friends saying, 53 133 82 53

"Nosebleed!" and "Wow!
English!" whenever I use the SELDOM
2.43 0.95
English language in 16.51% 41.43% 25.55% 16.51%
conversing with them.
INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION 2.59 0.61 SELDOM
B. Influence of Smart-Shaming in the Forms of Communication
As shown in Table 5, 42.99% of the 321 respondents are only confident to share their
new knowledge with their friends (Mean = 3.00, SD = 0.85). Also, 47.98% of the
respondents seldom get teased by their friends whenever they share new and unfamiliar
knowledge (Mean = 2.32, SD = 0.87). Lastly, 41.43% of the participants seldom hear their
friends saying “Nosebleed!” and “Wow! English!!” whenever they use the English language
in conversing with other people (Mean = 2.43, SD = 0.95). Espada further explained that we
have negative attitudes that we have for people who are speaking in English
because somehow in our society and culture, we measure intelligence if someone
speaks English well.
Table 6
Group Communication
FREQUENCIES
1 2 3 4 STANDARD
DEVIATION
13. I participate in group 21 110 143 47

conversations because I
know that they will not mock OFTEN
2.67 0.80
me and my opinions. 6.54% 34.27% 44.55% 14.64%
68 172 67 14 SELDOM
34
14. My opinions about a topic 2.08 0.77

make me feel uninvolved in a 21.18% 53.58% 20.88% 4.36%
conversation.
15. I keep my ideas to myself 84 132 84 21

during group work
discussions because they SELDOM
2.13 0.88
might think that I am a "know- 26.17% 41.12% 26.17% 6.54%
it-all" person.
GROUP COMMUNICATION 2.29 0.53 SELDOM
As shown in Table 6, 34.27% of the 321 respondents often participate in a group
conversation because they know they will be mocked and their opinions (Mean = 2.67, SD =
0.80). Espada expounded that other people value themselves based on how they want to
present themselves to other people. He stated that “It’s as if your value as a person diminishes
or increases depending on how other people perceive you. That’s understandable because you
have to be part of the group.” 53.58% of the respondents seldom feel uninvolved in a
conversation because of their opinions about a topic (Mean = 2.08, SD = 0.77). Lastly, 41.12%
of the participants seldom keep their ideas to themselves during group work discussions
because others might think they’re a “know-it-all” person (Mean = 2.13, SD = 0.88).
Table 7
Mass Communication
FREQUENCIES
1 2 3 4 STANDARD
DEVIATION
16. I use and imitate Vice 124 128 47 22

Ganda’s pedantry
(pamimilosopo) jokes in a
SELDOM
conversation because I find 1.87 0.89
38.63% 39.88% 14.64% 6.85%
them funny and entertaining.
178 90 45 8 SELDOM
35
17. I respond to Facebook 1.65 0.82

posts/comments that I think
55.45% 28.04% 14.02% 2.49%
are too smart for their own
good.
18. I feel disappointed 75 97 88 61

whenever people leave
comments on Facebook
posts using smart-shaming SELDOM
2.40 1.04
remarks to contradict others’ 23.36% 30.22% 27.42% 19.00%
arguments/opinions.
19. I voice out my opinions 53 145 92 31

because I know that people
will not see/regard me as a SELDOM
2.33 0.86
“know-it-all” 16.51% 45.17% 28.66% 9.66%
(nagmamarunong)
20. I mock someone who 134 145 36 6

makes a smart opinion. SELDOM
1.72 0.71
41.74% 45.17% 11.21% 1.88%
21. I resort to statements such 103 134 75 9

as “Edi wow!” whenever I feel
SELDOM
intimidated in a conversation. 1.95 0.81
32.09% 47.74% 23.36% 2.81%
22. I participate in class 41 127 104 49

recitations because I know
my professor will not SELDOM
2.48 0.91
humiliate me in front of my 12.77% 39.56% 32.40% 15.27%
classmates.
23. I have observed that when 44 113 105 59

someone says “Edi ikaw na
matalino!” in a conversation
the person being smart- OFTEN
1.53 0.94
shamed stops sharing his/her 13.70% 35.20% 32.72% 18.38%
opinion/ideas.
MASS COMMUNICATION 2.12 0.44 SELDOM
As shown in Table 7, 39.88% of the 321 respondents seldom use and imitate Vice Ganda’s
pedantry (pamimilosopo) jokes in a conversation (Mean = 1.87, SD = 0.89). According to an
article posted at getrealphilippines.com, “most of the comedy he claims to make is just crass
and offensive humor that degrades other people’s appearance or intelligence.” And with his
numerous numbers of fans and the people who watch his shows and movies, there’s no doubt
that they will be easily influenced since like any other Filipino movies and TV shows, it doesn’t
make people think” (makingitfuninthephilippines.blogspot.com). 55.45% of the respondents

36
seldom respond to Facebook posts/comments that are too smart for their own good (Mean =
1.65, SD = 0.782). Also, 30.22% seldom feel disappointed whenever people leave comments on
Facebook posts using smart shaming remarks (Mean = 2.40, SD = 1.04), 45.17% of the
respondents seldom voice out their opinions because they know that people won’t regard/see
them as know it all (Mean = 2.33, SD = 0.86). More so, out of the 321 participants, In Item 20,
45.17% seldom mock someone who makes a smart opinion (Mean = 1.72. SD = 0.71),
signifying that because of a person’s past experience of being smart shamed they tend to smart
shame other people. “Because when people smart shame other people sometimes they feel as
if something is wrong with them and in order for them to compensate with those negative
feelings, what they’ll do is smart shame other people” (Espada, 2016). In Item 21, 39.56%
seldom resort to statements such as “Edi wow!” whenever they feel intimidated in a
conversation (Mean = 1.95, SD = 0.81). It’s normal and natural for humans to feel insecure and
inadequate. Inadequate is when you feel that we’re enough and thus we need to compensate
with other things. (Espada, 2016) 39.56% participate in class recitations because only seldom
believed that the professor will humiliate them in class. Lastly, 35.20% of the participants often
observed that when someone says “Edi ikaw na matalino!” in a conversation, the person being
smart-shamed stops sharing his/her ideas. (Mean = 1.53 SD = 0.94).
I. Qualitative Aspect- Results of Interviews
A. Instances when Smart-Shaming happened in the Experiment.
The purpose of conducting an experiment is to gather descriptive and in-depth
information about Smart Shaming and how it affects the communication process. There
are four (4) participants in the experiment namely Charles (Respondent B), Sarah
(Respondent A), Sheikh (Respondent D), and Lance (Respondent C). They are
students from several courses at Holy Angel University. Furthermore, a psychologist

37
was interviewed to give additional information and explanations for the data gathered.
The data gathered were integrated by the researchers.
Table 7
Instances when Smart Shaming happened in the Experiment.
1st Topic
Time Conversation
3:00 Respondent A: Ganda oh! Oh may sasabihin pa kayo? Wala na?
Respondent B: Kayo na. Marami kayong alam eh! Ako parang, sayo na! Wala
ako masyadong alam diyan.
2nd Topic
7:21 Respondent A: Tas minsan nga nagdi-discuss yung prof. Tas ini-screencap niya tapos
may pokemon. Tas andito yung pokemon. Tas parang…
Respondent B: Edi wow!
*silence*
8:33 Respondent C: Sa isang country na banned na (Pokemon Go).

Respondent B: *claps* Ay shet. Ang Dami nyang alam! *laughs*
9:18 Respondent A: Pero ang galing ng gumawa. Pero yun nga lang, di alam gamitin ng
ibang tao.
Respondent A: Proceed to the next?
Respondent B: Oo. Ang dami niyong alam!
Others: *laughs*
3rd Topic
9:35 Respondent B: Nabasa niyo na ba yan?

Respondent A: Not all.
Respondent B: Ang dami niya talagang alam no? (to Respondent C)
Others: *laughs*
38
13:00 Respondent A: Look. Tignan niyo. “Coming from a known and respective like you!
Deym!”
Respondent C: Lalo na yung tinira niya yung parenting. Yun yung pinaka-nagpainit ng
dugo nila.
Respondent A: Dapat sinabi na namu na ating process king pamag-cancellation na
ning class.
Respondent C: O kaya yung yellow rainfall, orange rainfall.
Respondent A: Wa
Respondent B: Oh ikayu nang misabi!
All: *laughs*
Respondent A: Grabi na ka naman!
16:08 Respondent C: Yung Angeles kasi mataas. Kaya di bumabaha dito.

Respondent B: *claps* Daming alam!
Respondent A: Sabi dito “Your response in this issue is way worse than any politician
I’ve known!” Parang nasaktan talaga si mommy.
19:25 Respondent A: Ay grabe educ teacher ako pero okay mu. Atin naman part kang Edu
na aintindyan ku. Some part.
Respondent C: Kayi mu talaga eh itang sinabi ku nandin, wrong choice of words.
Respondent B: *claps* ay! Dakal ya talaga balu ini ne! Galing na talaga! Keka ne
ing korona! (*claps* Ay! This one knows a lot! Truly good! The crown is yours!)
Respondent A: Kagaling ng Respondent C! Keka ne ing title! (Respondent C is
good! The title is yours!)
*silence*
Respondent A: Move on ta na din.
Respondent B: Wapin atin na rin naman klasi.
4th Topic
21:20 Respondent C: Kasi keng klasi ku, ating metung PL, atlung DL. Matalinu la talaga.
Tapus ngeni ketang subject a ita, sabi na ning prof mi, “Bat yung iba nasasagot nila?
Perfect sunod sunod ganyan. Kayo bumabagsak.”
(In my class, there’s one PL (President Lister), 3 DL (Dean’s Lister). They’re all
intelligent. And there’s this one subject where are professor said “How come the
others can answer well? Always perfect. But you are failing.”)
Respondent A: Ah co-compare da kayu? (Ah, so he’s comparing you?)
Respondent C: Wa. Sabyan mi, “Ba syempre sir matalino talaga mga yan.” De
nagrereview lang talaga sila ana kanyan. Sir kami din naman nagrereview ganyan
pero syempre alam mo naman yung matalinong in born tapos nagrereview pa sa
average student lang. (Yes. We said “Of course they are intelligent, Sir.” He said that
they just reviewed for the class. And then we said that we reviewed as well, but there
are people who are smart in nature who are reviewing compared to the average
student.)
Respondent A: Ah retang masipag. (Ah the industrious ones)

39
Respondent B: *claps* Karakal mu talaga balu ne! Ika namung keni! Balu mu la
ngan deng issue. (*claps* You really knows a lot huh! We should leave you to it! You
know all issues!)
Respondent A: Wapin! (Yeah right!)
33:20 Respondent C: Ninu waring studyanti ing bisang bumagsak ada pin. Reng prof la
talaga reng kayi mikasalanan. (No student will want to fail, as they said. Sometimes,
the professors are the one to blame.)
Respondent D: Dapat lareng prof din mag-adjust la (Professors should also adjust.)
Respondent A: Move on.
Respondent B: Pero makakayi kasi engineering la ne. At dahil diyan… (But

because they’re engineering. And so…)
Respondent A: Sa inyo na. (It’s yours)

5th Topic
33:43 Respondent A: Pusher.

Respondent C: Judicial killings.
Respondent B: Ah extra judicial killings
Respondent A: Ngeni ke pa ikit ing picture a ini. Ay I Respondent C ikit na ne ini.
(This is the first time I see this picture. Ay, for sure Respondent C already saw this.)
Respondent B: Wapin eh. Magaling ya kasi! (Right! Because he’s excellent!)

34:11 Respondent B: Sige pin nanung insights yo? (Okay what’s your insights?)
Respondent A: Yaku ne, muna na ku. Keni namu kasi ali ke gets ini. Nung mebaril ya
or. Ah diba ing sasabyan da if mag-drugs ka parang death or ano yung ano mo. Yung
kapag nalaman nila na nagd-drugs ka, ganyan. Parang papatayin or what.
(I’ll go first. This one, I don’t get it if he’s shot at or… Isn’t they say that if you do drugs,
it’s like death is the… If they discovered you’re doing drugs, they’ll kill you or
something.)
Respondent B: Kung nagddrugs kang totoo. (If you’re doing drugs for real)
Respondent A: Oo. (Yes)
Respondent B: Ay shet alam niya! (Oh shit, he knows!)

40
Respondent A: Hindi parang nasasabi lang din parang chika chika
Respondent B: Ah okay.
37:42 Respondent C: Yun jan sa extra judicial killings na yan, binibigyan naman sila ng
choice na sumuko agad. Kasi yung iba kapag naglaban, doon nila pinapatay. Yung
loophole lang sa ano na yan… (These extra-judicial killings, they’re given a choice to
surrender. Because others are fighting back, then they were killed. The loophole there
is…)
Respondent B: Ay shet!
Respondent B & Respondent A: Loophole!
Respondent B: Oh my gad! Grabe eto na talaga yun oh! Eto na oh! (Oh my god!
This is really it! This is it!)
Respondent A: Teka ire-register ko muna day! (Wait let me register it first!)
In the experiment, there were 13 times Smart-Shaming took place. Respondent
B was the planted smart-shamer in the experiment. All throughout the conversation of
the participants, whenever Respondent B makes a smart-shaming remark, Respondent
A, one of the participants, always supported his comments. Moreover, there are
instances wherein Respondent A personally initiated the smart-shaming in the
conversation. Furthermore, based on the observations of the researchers during the
experiment, it can be proven that Respondent A is the only participant in the group who
was influenced and actively participated in smart-shaming. According to Espada (2016),
it becomes a behavior that the participant mimics how the other participant behave. He
further stated that behavior is contagious, and if that happens, it means that the other
41
person is able to influence the other. Additionally, when you tolerate that kind of
behavior, you’re sending the message that that kind of behavior is acceptable. (Espada,
2016)
Moreover, given that Respondent A is the only female in the group, she is
primarily influenced by smart-shaming than the other male participants. Espada (2016)
stated that women are more prone to committing Smart-Shaming. According to him,
women are perceived to have traditional gender roles. Additionally, there are cultures in
a society where women are preferred to be submissive. If a woman is intelligent, if a
woman is empowered, she will not be submissive and she’s more likely to be smart-
shamed.
In the experiment, there was a situation wherein the conversation is halted due to
Smart-Shaming. All of the participants went silent after the planted smart-shamer
(Respondent B) made a Smart-Shaming remark. The conversation was then continued
when the planted Respondent B initiated it. During the interview with the planted
Respondent B, he somehow felt guilty when everyone stopped conversing so he
decided to initiate the conversation again. According to Espada (2016), because of our
empathy, and our capacity to put ourselves in the shoes of another person, we see that
the person was hurt. So when you were able to identify pain in other people, your
behavior is regulated. With that said, the planted Respondent B’s behavior was
regulated because he was able to feel what the others are feeling.
Table 8
Capability to share opinion

42
QUESTION: Were you able to share your full opinion during the discussion?
Respondent A Oo, hindi naman siya ganoon kabigat. It's okay to express yourself. Tapos
lalo na iyong mga kasama mo open din sila na makinig ganyan.
Respondent D Oo
(Hindi ka ba nahiya?)
Hindi, feeling ko wala nakong hiya eh. Kahit ano nalang masabi ko,
nasasabi ko nalang bigla.
(Dun sa mga topics, familiar ka naman dun?)
Oo familiar naman alam ko naman yun.
Respondent C Oo, feeling ko kasi nasabi niya [Charles] ang daming alam pero sinabi
ko lang yung thoughts ko dun sa topics na yun.
QUESTION Were you intimidated by some of the participants in the group?
How?
Respondent A Hindi naman, kasi parang kunwari may sinabi si Sheikh, may sinabi si
Lance, may sinabi si Charles parang dagdag kaalaman sa akin iyon.
Thankful pa nga ako kasi at least they get to share what they know.
Respondent D Hindi ako, kasi sanay ako makipagusap sa ibang tao kahit hindi ko
nga kilala minsan nakakausap ko siya. Kahit yung dadaan lang siya
sakin na ganyan, tatawagin ko siya... makikipagkwento ako kasi
ganun yung tinuro sakin ng daddy ko. Ganun din kasi siya.
Respondent C Hindi naman. Wala naman. Kasi sinasabi ko lang yung expression ko.
43
All of the participants were able to express their opinions during the conversation.
According to Respondent C, even if Respondent B is smart shaming him, he continued
to express his opinions about the topic and didn’t bother to be affected by Respondent
B’s remarks. This is because according to www.doctornerdlove.com, if you want people
to listen to you instead of disregarding you, the last approach you want to take is “your
opinion is stupid, and you are stupid for having it”. Like what Respondent C did, he was
not intimidated as he ignored the remarks toward him and just continued expressing his
opinions.
However, even though Smart-Shaming stopped the way the group
communicates, the participants treated Smart-Shaming as a normal thing that happens
in their daily lives. Based on the interview, all of them mentioned that Smart-Shaming
became a norm to their lives. Respondent A mentioned that she’s immune to it since it
happens to her daily. According to her, there are instances when they smart-shame her
during group works. It was further supported by Respondent C’s interview. He said that
Shaming is a normal thing that happens in Engineering Department. According to
Espada (2016), it became norm to them. As mentioned previously, he said that when
you tolerate that kind of behavior, you’re sending the message that that kind of behavior
is acceptable.
Table 9
Awareness on Smart-Shaming
QUESTION 8: Are you aware of smart-shaming?

44
Respondent A I'm aware sa term din. Kasi naririnig ko na siya pero it's not that 'oh you're
smart shaming again', 'oh parang smart shaming nanaman'. Hindi siya
nasasabi ng ibang tao.
(So hindi siya first time nangyayari sa iyo?)
Actually, everyday nangyayari sa akin yung pagsmart-shaming.
Respondent D Hindi, pero nung in-explain sakin dun ko lang nalaman.

(Is it your first time to encounter such experience like this?
Yung smart shaming in a group discussion?)
(Yung to be in the experiment na ganito yung hindi mo alam
yung purpose talaga?)
Yung smart shaming... no. Pero yung in a group discussion na
ganito, yes kasi wala naman ganito sa engineering.
Respondent C Oo naman. Everyday yun. Laging may ganun lalo na sa engineering,
puro boys, pag nagsalita ako babarahin ka nung isa tas babarahin
mo rin siya. Kaya normal lang samin yun daily.
Respondent B Hindi ko alam na smart-shaming yung term na tawag dun, pero
familiar ako dun sa action.
Based on the interviews, it has been discovered that the participants are aware
of the act of Smart-Shaming. However, some of them are aware of the act, but unaware
of the term. This is because since many of their friends and acquaintances are doing
the act, they tend to get along with it. Such act is called Bandwagon effect which is an
observed social behavior wherin people tend to go along with what others do or think
without considering their actions (wisegeek.org).
During the interview about the experiment, Respondent C mentioned that smart-
shaming affected the conversation because it created a gap in their conversation.
According to Espada (2016), smart-shaming hinders us from being serious; it hinders us
from asking fundamental question. He further stated that when you smart shame people
who are experiencing that sense of wonder, you are essentially making them feel
stupid. You are essentially making them stop thinking. Moreover, you are essentially
45
making them stop wondering; hoping and becoming better than who are they right now
because you are insecure and you don't want someone to be better than you are.
There is a psychologist by name of Carl Gustavio, stated that the things we don’t
like about others are actually reflections of things we don’t like about ourselves. Espada
(2016) supported that statement by saying, it’s because people that exhibit qualities,
often negative or positive qualities, remind us of our weaknesses, and then we feel bad.
He added that smart-shaming is a reflection of our own insecurities and that smart-
shaming is a passive-aggressive way of saying "stop". For example, if there’s a not-so-
intelligent group in this area, and it so happens that you’re unfortunate enough to be
knowledgeable in that particular area, what will happen is you’ll feel bad because you’re
reminded of your weaknesses. You are reminded of the very same thing you don’t like
about yourself. So it means it doesn’t make your feel good. Moreover, that is the very
same thing about smart shaming. When we see people rather more intelligent than we
are, they’re as if reminding us of our own weaknesses. When there are people with
qualities that tend to be better than ours, we are reminded that perhaps we are not
enough.
Sison (2015) mentioned that in the Philippines, there is a growing trend of
shaming those who take time to learn more and share their knowledge with others. It is
further supported by Espada’s statement. According to him, “there is a problem of
smart-shaming in the Philippines right now in the political and sociological level. Anti-
intellectualism is prevalent in cultures, societies, and in governments when there is an
authoritarian dictatorship. If we’re going to look back in history, during the Marcos
dictatorship, it is one of the problems that happened in communities. If you’re an

46
intellectual and if you’re someone that questions the authority of the government, you’re
labeled as someone that cannot be trusted.”
Additionally, Espada mentioned that Anti-intellectualism is prevalent in a society
that has a rising dictatorship. He added that there was this prevalent anti-intellectualism
and smart-shaming in social media during Duterte’s administration now. He further
stated, "People are ignorant that we hate the things that we don't understand. We fear
the things that we cannot understand and then fear fuels what we hate that's why we
hate things. Sinophobia is when you hate something because you don't know it, which
inherits hate.
47
Summary
The study aims to determine the influence of Smart-shaming on the
communication process of Holy Angel University students. It seeks to identify its
influence on the elements of the communication process and forms of communication.
Based on the conducted survey, 8.72% from the School of Arts and Sciences, 14.96%
are students from the School of Education, 18.69% are School of Business and
Accountancy students, 19.31% from the College of Engineering and Architecture,
9.04% are students from the College of Nursing and Allied Medical Sciences, 10.28%
are College of Information and Communications Technology students, 6.85% from
College of Criminal Justice Education and Forensics while the other remaining 12.15%
participants are from College of Hospitality and Tourism Management.
The key findings of the quantitative aspect are as follows. Under the influence of
smart shaming on the elements of the communication process; as the sender, the
majority of the students seldom use “Ikaw na magaling!” as their automatic response
whenever their friend states a smart remark. However, 37.08% of the respondents
seldom usually say “Wow! Deep!” instead of asking about its meaning whenever they
use an unfamiliar word. In terms of messages, a higher population of students have
meaningful conversations with their friends when they are not smart-shaming each
other. They also consider smart-shaming as an obstacle to the flow of conversation.
While as receivers, 42.99% of the students seldom don’t continue to express their
48
thoughts and opinions about a topic because they’re too embarrassed whenever they’re
smart-shamed. On the other hand, 33.96% often get offended whenever someone
makes remarks toward them during a conversation.
Under the influence of smart-shaming on the forms of communication, in the
terms of group communication; the higher population of the 321 respondents seldom
feel uninvolved in a conversation because of their opinions about a topic. While the less
population often participates in group conversation because they know they will be
mocked and their opinions. Furthermore, in the terms of mass communication, 55.45%,
of the respondents seldom respond to Facebook posts/comments that are too smart for
their own good and the minority of the population often observed that when someone
says “Edi ikaw na matalino!” in a conversation, the person being smart-shamed stops
sharing his/her ideas.
The results of the qualitative aspect are as follows. Four selected Holy Angel
students from several courses were observed in an experiment conducted by the
researchers and were thoroughly interviewed right after. After repetitive exposure to
smart-shaming remarks by the planted smart-shamer, a participant was influenced by
the behavior. Moreover, there were times when the participant initiated smart shaming.
It was evidently shown that Respondent A was influenced and actively participated and
contributed to smart-shaming during the experiment. The findings also showed that
Respondent A was the only female participant who was influenced compared to the
other male participants. It also exhibited that the flow of conversation was halted due to
smart-shaming. However, participants continued to express their opinions and ideas

49
despite the smart-shaming remarks directed at them. It was also discovered that
participants were aware of Smart shaming but they treated it as a norm.
Conclusions
The researchers have found that Smart-Shaming serves as a barrier in the
Communication Process. During the experiment proper, the conversation was halted
because all of the participants went silent after the planted smart-shamer made a
Smart-Shaming remark. 37.38% of the respondents from quantitative data answered
that they seldom consider Smart-Shaming as an obstacle in a conversation.
Furthermore, 42.68% of the respondents are seldom prevented by smart shaming in
sharing their opinions. That is because according to Espada (2016), (smart-shaming)
became the norm to them.
Additionally, during the pilot experiment, the researchers found out that the
relationship between the sender and receiver of smart-shaming is a factor in committing
the act. Espada stated that the closer your relationship is to another person, the more
comfortable you’ll be in smart-shaming them. Since there is familiarity between
individuals, they tend to feel that it is easier to express this kind of behavior which tends
to make the person feel bad for being intellectual. Smart shaming will more likely to take
place if there is an existing or prior relationship between the sender and receiver of it.
More so, smart-shaming is not considered acceptable in our society but more likely it
became tolerable to us. Espada explained that since smart shaming is experienced by
students on a regular basis, they have built their level of tolerance to such behavior. To
the extent that they learn the simplest coping skill which is to simply ignore it or attempt
to rationalize it in their minds that it is indeed normal in our culture. Another conclusion
50
is that smart-shaming is such an influential behavior because it is something people
might replicate/mimic. When smart shaming is tolerated by one person, it would be
sending a message to others that this kind of behavior is acceptable thus it can
influence others who are constantly exposed to such environment as Espada expanded
on its growing rampancy in society.

51
Recommendations
After conducting the study, the researchers recommend the following:
• Future researchers may use this study for future references to further explore the
effects of smart-shaming on intellectual curiosity.
• To further expand the study about the topic, future researchers may tackle the
influence of Smart-Shaming in the workplace.
• Inclusion of the topic Smart-Shaming in General Psychology and Sociology subjects
to further educate the students about the effects of smart-shaming. According to
Espada (2016), it should or could be the responsibility of the teachers to foster a
culture where it is acceptable to make mistakes, and where there is no shame in
asking questions to promote the fact that freedom of thought should be the norm.
• Intervention to address smart-shaming in the University setting before it becomes
prevalent by:
- Coordinating with the Guidance Office regarding the issue
- Creating an Action Plan to address Smart-Shaming as a form of bullying
- Proposal of an Intellectual Support Group to Smart-Shaming victims within the
university
52
- Incorporating Smart-Shaming in the Anti-Bullying Law of the Philippines as a
form of Bullying in both physical and digital form of communication.
References
Akizuki, S. (2015). The Philippines' Problem of Anti-Intellectualism Prevailing in Society!
Retrieved from http://makingitfuninthephilippines.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-
philippines-problem-of-anti.html
A Categorisation of Barriers to Communication (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.skillsyouneed.com/ips/barriers-communication.html
Baran, S. T. & Davis, D. K. (2012). Mass Communication Theory: Foundations,
Ferment, and Future
Barriers to effective communication (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://communicationtheory.org/barriers-to-effective-communication/
Biado, E. (2016, May 20). Anti- Excellence. Manila Standard Life
Communication process theory (2015). Retrieved from
http://library.careerforce.org.nz/Learning%20Assessment%20Resources/LG0969
4-3.0.pdf
53
CONTEXT IN COMMUNICATION (2010). Retrieved from
http://www.enotes.com/homework-help/define-context-its-importance-
communication-200553
Cultivation Theory (n.d.). Retrieved from www.jclass.umd.edu
Cultivation Theory- Mass Communication Context (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.uky.edu/~drlane/capstone/mass/cultivation.htm
Developing effective communication in health and social care (2010) Retrieved from
http://qualifications.pearson.com
Gamble, T.K. & Gamble, M. (2002). Communication Works 7th Edition
Grimwald, (2015). The Philippine Media and Its Broken Sense of Morals. Retrieved from
http://getrealphilippines.com/blog/2015/07/philippine-media-broken-sense-
morals/
Hanson, R. (2005). Mass Communication Living in the Media World
Hybels, S. & Weaver II, R. L. (2004). Communication Effectively 7th Edition
Interpersonal Communication (n.d.). Retrieved from http://lms.oum.edu.my/e-
content/OUMH1303KDP/content/24094922OUMH1303_OralCommunication_v1/
OUMH1303_Topic1/OUMH1303_1_3.html
54
Koneru, A. (2008). Professional Communication
Lai, W.T., Chung, C.W., & Po, N.S. (2004) How do Media Shape Perceptions of Social
Reality? A Review on Cultivation Theory Retrieved from
http://stu.hksyu.edu/~wkma/ocrc/lai_chung_po_2014_hkaect.pdf
Lunenberg, F. C. (2010). Communication: The Process, Barriers, And Improving
Effectiveness. Schooling, 1(1)
Maslog, C. C. (2015). Philippine Communication: An Introduction
Mass Communication (2014). Retrieved from http://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-
mass-communication-definition-theories-quiz.html
McCombs, M. E. & Shaw, D.L. (1977). The Emergence of American Political Issues.
McGaan, L. (2003). The Six Kind of Context. Retrieved from
http://department.monm.edu/cata/saved_files/Handouts/CONTEXTS.FSC.html
Muller, H. (2015). The power of ignorance. Retrieved from http://www.technologist.
eu/the-power-of-ignorance/
Pfeiffer, J. W. (n.d.). Conditions that hinder effective communication. Retrieved from
http://home.snu.edu/~jsmith/library/body/v06.pdf
55
Potter, W.J. (2012). Media Effects
Raymundo, K. E. (2015) Retrieved from http://smartshaming.blogspot.com/2015/08/a-
new-social-issue-in-philippines-is.html
Sharpe, D. (1991). Group Communication. Retrieved from
http://msucommunitydevelopment.org/groupcommunication.html
Sison, S. (2015) What's up with the smart-shaming? Retrieved from http://www.
rappler.com/views/imho/109333-smart-shaming
Some thoughts on communication theory and research (n.d.) Retrieved from
http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/comm321/gwalker/theory.htm
Spiral of Silence (n.d.). Retrieved from https://masscommtheory.com/theory-
overviews/spiral-of-silence/
Spring, M.S. (2002). Agenda Setting Retrieved from
http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~johnca/spch100/7-4-agenda.htm
Sta. Romana, J. J. M. (2015) Smart-shaming and our Pinoy culture of anti-
intellectualism. Retrieved from http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/

56
517026/scitech/science/smart-shaming-and-our-pinoy-culture-of-anti-
intellectualism
Suresh, K. (2003). Theories of Communication. Retrieved from
http://www.peoi.org/Courses/Coursesen/mass/mass2.html
Trask, R.L. (2001). Language The Basics
Vergara, R. Jr. (2016). Filipinos and smart-shaming. Retrieved from
http://varsitarian.net/opinion/20160130/filipinos_and_smart_shaming
WHAT IS INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.nja.nic.in/Concluded%20Programes%202015-16/P-
957%20Reading%20Material/2.%20CAN%20WE%20IMPROVE%20OUR%20C
OMMUNICATION%20SKILLS.pdf
Wilson, J.R. & Wilson, R.S. (2001). Mass Media, Mass Culture, Fifth Edition.
57
APPENDIX A
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
HOLY ANGEL UNIVERSITY
School of Arts and Sciences
Bachelor of Communication Arts
We are fourth year AB Communication students currently conducting our

research on the analysis on the influence of Smart-Shaming in the communication
process of Holy Angel University students. We intend to collect data from this
questionnaire that will help us with our study. Your full cooperation and honest answers
are highly appreciated. We ensure you that all the information that will be gathered will
be in strict confidentiality.
Smart-Shaming refers to the way a person or a group of people mock someone

who by chance has extended familiarity on a certain topic. The words such as “Sige,
Matalino kana!” “Fine you’re the smart one!” are often uttered in that case.
Name (optional): ________________________________Year & Section: _________________
Instruction: Encircle the number that corresponds to how often you

experienced the following situations.
1 – Never 2 – Seldom 3 – Often 4 – Always
a. Sender
1. I automatically say “Ikaw na ang magaling!” as my
response whenever my friend states a smart remark in
1 2 3 4
our conversation.
2. I quickly judge a person who is more knowledgeable in

1 2 3 4
a conversation.
3. I usually say "Wow! Deep!" instead of asking its
meaning when someone use an unfamiliar word, that I 1 2 3 4
never heard before.
b. Message
58
4. I have a meaningful conversation with my friends

when we are not smart-shaming each other. 1 2 3 4
5. I consider smart-shaming as an obstacle to the flow of

1 2 3 4
conversation.
6. I am discouraged to say my opinion whenever I feel
1 2 3 4
that no one is interested with what I’m about to say.
c. Receiver
7. I get offended whenever someone makes remarks
such as “Edi wow!”, “Alam mo lahat!” towards me
1 2 3 4
during a conversation.
8. I do not continue to express my thoughts and opinions

about the topic because I’m too embarrassed 1 2 3 4
whenever I am smart-shamed in a conversation.
9. Smart-shaming prevents me from sharing
1 2 3 4
relevant/significant information in a conversation.
a. Interpersonal Communication
10. I am confident to share my new knowledge with my
friends. 1 2 3 4
11. I get teased by my friends whenever I share new and

1 2 3 4
unfamiliar knowledge.
12. I often hear my friends saying, "Nosebleed!" and "Wow!

English!" whenever I use the English language in 1 2 3 4
conversing with them.
b. Group Communication
13. I participate in a group conversation because I know
that they will not mock me and my opinions. 1 2 3 4
14. My opinions about a topic make me feel uninvolved

1 2 3 4
in a conversation.
15. I keep my ideas to myself during group work
discussions because they might think that I am a 1 2 3 4
"know-it-all" person.
59
c. Mass Communication
16. I use and imitate Vice Ganda’s pedantry
(pamimilosopo) jokes in a conversation because I find
1 2 3 4
them funny and entertaining.
17. I respond to Facebook posts/comments that I think are

1 2 3 4
too smart for their own good.
18. I feel disappointed whenever people leave comments
on Facebook posts using smart-shaming remarks to 1 2 3 4
contradict others’ arguments/opinions.
19. I voice out my opinions because I know that people

will not see/regard me as a “know-it-all”
1 2 3 4
(nagmamarunong)
20. I mock someone who makes a smart opinion. 1 2 3 4

21. I resort to statements such as “Edi wow!” whenever I
1 2 3 4
feel intimidated in a conversation.
22. I participate in class recitations because I know my
professor will not humiliate me in front of my 1 2 3 4
classmates.
23. I have observed that when someone says “Edi ikaw na
matalino!” in a conversation, the person being smart-
shamed stops sharing his/her opinion/ideas. 1 2 3 4
60
APPENDIX B
Interview Guide Questions
For Psychologist
1. What is Smart-shaming?
2. What do you think are the effects of smart-shaming to people?
3. Why is it that the millennial generation are the ones who are primarily influenced by
smart-shaming?
4. In what way does smart-shaming affect one’s behavior?
5. What do you think is the cause of smart-shaming?
6. What is the long-term effect of smart-shaming on our culture?
7. What do you think triggers the instinct of mocking someone smarter than us?
For the participants in the experiment
1. What have you observed among the other participants?
2. Were you able to share your full opinion during th conversation?
3. Were you intimidatd by some participants in the group? How?
4. Do you feel that someone from the group intentionally saying remarks to stop you
from talking?
5. Is it the first time you’ve been smart-shamed?
6. Are you aware of Smart-Shaming?
7. Did your actions of “smart-shaming” made you feel confident?
8. How did you feel when you smart-shamed a person in the group?
61
62
APPENDIX C
TRANSCRIPTS OF INTERVIEW
QUESTION 1: What have you observed among the other participants?

Respondent A Si Charles. Napansin ko yun [na laging] may ‘edi wow'. Para lagi
siyang may nasasabi na 'o sayo na iyong korona ganyan'. Si Lance
parang nagkwekwentuhan lang kami. Parang ang dami niyang
ideas about sa mga topics and then si Sheik meron din siyang
more on experience [stories]. Nagmeet naman iyong mga
kaalaman namin kasi naging comfortable with each other.
(Sino kilala mo doon sa tatlo?)
Kilala ko silang lahat.
(Kaclose mo silang lahat?)
Except kay Lance
Respondent B Yung super gaan naman yung loob mo sakanila

(Kahit na hindi mo sila kakilala?)
Oo, kahit hindi mo sila kakilala parang kilala mo na nga sila ng
matagal. Parang ganon.
Respondent C May differences tsaka... sa topics may differences sa bawat isa,
meron din namang pagkakapareho. Tapos yun nga yung kay
Charles kanina na yung sasabihan niya na 'ikaw na', 'edi wow'
parang pag wala nang masabi yung isa - 'sige, ikaw nang matalino'
QUESTION 2: Were you able to share your full opinion during the
discussion?
Respondent A Oo, hindi naman siya ganoon kabigat. It's okay to express yourself.
Tapos lalo na iyong mga kasama mo open din sila na makinig
ganyan.
Respondent B Oo
(Hindi ka ba nahiya?)
Hindi, feeling ko wala nakong hiya eh. Kahit ano nalang masabi ko,
nasasabi ko nalang bigla.
(Dun sa mga topics, familiar ka naman dun?)
Oo familiar naman alam ko naman yun.
Respondent C Oo, feeling ko kasi nasabi niya [Charles] ang daming alam pero
sinabi ko lang yung thoughts ko dun sa topics na yun.
QUESTION 3: Were you able to understand what is being said by your fellow
members in the discussion?
63
Respondent A Oo, kasi nga parepareho kami ng ideas tapos alam din namin kung
ano iyong 'trend' ganyan. '[Yung] ganito pala iyan, oo diba ganyan
iyan.' Parang nag-aagree sila sa sinasabi ko at nag-aagree din ako
sa sinasabi nila.
Respondent B Oo kasi pare-pareho yung mga opinion din namin sa some parts.
Kumbaga nalalabas talaga namin kung ano yung kahulugan nung
picture.
Lance Oo [pero] nung sa last. Yun lang yung naiba eh kasi lumayo sa
topic. Pero lahat... overall na-tackle yung topics.
QUESTION 4: Were you intimidated by some of the participants in the

group? How?
Respondent A Hindi naman, kasi parang kunwari may sinabi si Sheikh, may
sinabi si Lance, may sinabi si Charles parang dagdag kaalaman sa
akin iyon. Thankful pa nga ako kasi at least they get to share what
they know.
Respondent B Hindi ako, kasi sanay ako makipagusap sa ibang tao kahit hindi ko
nga kilala minsan nakakausap ko siya. Kahit yung dadaan lang
siya sakin na ganyan, tatawagin ko siya... makikipagkwento ako
kasi ganun yung tinuro sakin ng daddy ko. Ganun din kasi siya.
Respondent C Hindi naman. Wala naman. Kasi sinasabi ko lang yung expression
ko.
QUESTION 5: How did you feel when someone reacted to your opinion
during the talk?
Respondent A Iyong expression ko lang ay natatawa ako [parang] 'ay nako'. Alam
naman natin ngayon uso na iyong mga ganyang 'edi wow'. Minsan
babarahan ka nila. So parang immune na ako sa mga ganon na
bagay or words.
(So aware ka?)
Aware ako na may mga tao parang sanay na sila. Minsan ako din,
just to make fun of my classmates. 'O, tapos', 'Edi, wow', 'Edi
Shing'.
Respondent B Feeling ko kadagdagan na understanding dun sa isang particular

subject.
Respondent C Nung nagsasalita ako ng ganyan tas lahat sila nagreact. Syempre
mapapatigil ka.
64
QUESTION 6: Did you feel that the person is intentionally trying to say 'edi
wow', ' edi ikaw na matalino!' or some remarks to stop form
talking?
Respondent A Parang normal conversation lang iyong nangyayari. Sanay na ako
na nagkakaganyanan kami pero nagegets ko na kasi lagi siyang
[Charles] sumisingit per topic na ' Osha! iyo na ang korona'
Respondent B Okay lang naman pero napansin ko siya [Charles] nalang yung
laging nagaganon. So parang sabi ko 'nanung atin keni?' [Anong
meron dito?]
Respondent C Para sakin, okay lang... normal lang ganun. Kasi sa mga friends ko
ganun din kami yung parang 'sige, balu mu ngan' [sige, alam mo
na lahat] pero okay lang sakin. Saka sabi din naman sa topic na
express mo lang sarili mo kaya ginawa ko lang. Tuloy tuloy lang
ako kahit anong sabihin si Charles.
QUESTION 7: How did you feel after that? Why?
Respondent A Iyon nga again, parang naimmune na ako. Parang wala na sa akin
iyon. Parang daily na iyon sa mga students sa mga taong kausap
ko.
(May instance ba na seryoso ka sa usapan tapos biglang may
magsasabing 'edi wow', tapos parang nafeel mo na 'ay sige na
nga wag ko na lang ishare')
Oo meron na din, babarahin kanila. Like [sa] group works, and
then [sasabihin nila na] 'edi shing' parang ganon. Tapos [reaction
ko], 'like duh, this is a important matter and then you're still acting
like that.' Parang dahil alam mo na nakasanayan na nila iyon, you
will accept it nalang [and] you'll understand.
(So kapag sa ibang tao parang, medyo okay pa? Kunwari si
Lance kanina hindi mo siya kaclose tapos siya iyong
nagsmart shame sa iyo. Would you feel offended?)
Hindi naman. Kasi hindi ganon ka serious. [Even] though seryoso
naman yung mga ibang topic. Kung siya [Lance] that time, its okay
kasi sanay nga din ako. [Kung] Yung ibang tao, mag-gaganon sila
[smart-shaming] parang wala lang [rin] sa akin. You see [kasi] yun
ang nauuso ngayon. You try to adapt them para you'll fit in, para
maka-jive in ka.
65
Respondent B Hindi, minsan sa ibang tao wala naman siyang ginagawa pero
kinakainisan mo siya, yung parang ganon. Pero minsan kahit
nananahimik ka na nag-oobserve ka parin ng tao. Tapos kung
hiyang mo siya [na] ganyan, edi parang wala nalang.
(So parang normal nalang yung smart shaming sayo?)
Oo kasi kung magrreact pa ako, edi nagkasala pa ako.
(Hindi mo ba na-fefeel na minsan natatanggal yung respeto
sayo?)
In comes to family, Oo.
(Pero kapag sa friends?)
Sa kaibigan wala naman kasing ano [malice], kaya yung mga bad
jokes okay lang din minsan. Pero kung family kasi medyo mabigat
na yung ano... yung mga nasasabi.
Respondent C Wala. Kasi diba nagdoddota kami [friends] eh dun sanay yung
nag-tatrash talk so wala man sakin yung ganun.
QUESTION 8: Are you aware of smart-shaming?
Respondent A I'm aware sa term din. Kasi naririnig ko na siya pero it's not that 'oh
you're smart shaming again', 'oh parang smart shaming nanaman'.
Hindi siya nasasabi ng ibang tao.
(So hindi siya first time nangyayari sa iyo?)
Actually, everyday nangyayari sa akin yung pagsmart-shaming.
Respondent B Hindi, pero nung in-explain sakin dun ko lang nalaman.
(Is it your first time to encounter such experience like this?
Yung smart shaming in a group discussion?)
(Yung to be in the experiment na ganito yung hindi mo alam
yung purpose talaga?)
Yung smart shaming... no. Pero yung in a group discussion na
ganito, yes kasi wala naman ganito sa engineering.
Respondent C Oo naman. Everyday yun. Laging may ganun lalo na sa
engineering, puro boys, pag nagsalita ako babarahin ka nung isa
tas babarahin mo rin siya. Kaya normal lang samin yun daily.
QUESTION 9: Was there an instance that smart shaming has been the norm
in your daily life?
66
Respondent A Kinda like that, kasi ‘yon nga nagiging expression mo na siya.
Kunwari dati 'ohemgee' ngayon 'edi wow' parang iyon nga. Sabi ko
kanina parang daily routine. Hindi naman daily routine parang
expression mo na siya.
(Nagagawa mo rin sa ibang tao?)
Oo, aminado naman ako doon.
(Buti?)
Parang its 'you make the conversation light'. Though minsan
parang nakaka-annoying sa iba iyong pagganyan kasi they're
serious and then 'edi wow' tapos 'duh im serious'… gaganon sila.
Nasa iyo na lang iyon kung kailan mo siya sasabihin, if through
serious time or pagjojoke, parang nag-iinisan kayo basta alam mo
lang.
Respondent B Wala naman, sakin kasi minsan parang pag nag ‘edi wow’ ka,
tatawa yung mga kaklase mo parang ikaw nasa tamang… ano ka
naman, nasa tama yung mga sinasabi mo. Parang ano bang
ikakasakit mo ng loob? At least you've said something na fact siya.
Hind siya yung gawa gawa lang kaya nag ‘edi wow’ siya ganyan.
Parang minsan hindi na ako naaffect dun sa mga ‘edi wow’, ‘edi
ikaw na magaling’. Parang… okay. Napapa-okay nalang ako
parang ganun but I don't use yung smart shaming.
(Sa tingin mo yung smart shaming good thing ba siya?)
Sa iba kasi medyo OA na.. kasi kung yung sa parents. Dahil dun
sa mga ibang bata napapanood nila kaya nag-eedi wow sila sa
mga magulang nila yun, yung disadvantage niya. Eh kung satin-
satin lang na college students, okay lang. Pero kung mga bata na
yung magsasabi, kunwari kapatid mo may sinasabi ka, may inutos
ka [tapos] ‘edi wow’ magaganun siya… dun ka maaano kasi yung
respeto natatanggal.
(Though yung sinabi mo yung smart shaming normal nalang
sayo, sa tingin mo ba postive thing parin siya o sa tingin mo
dapat parin ba siyang gawing na parang tool siya for
entertainment ganon?)
Depede kung saan siya gagamitin. Kung entertainment, it's fine.
Yun nga sinabi ko kung respeto about sa magkakapatid [at] sa
pamilya, ganyan, dun siya mag-fofoul. Kung sa friends lang, okay
lang [kasi] wala naman big deal.
67
Respondent C Oo naman. Everyday yun. Laging may ganun lalo na sa

engineering, puro boys, pag nagsalita ako babarahin ka nung isa
tas babarahin mo rin siya. Kaya normal lang samin yun daily.
(Do you think communication process is affected by smart
shaming?)
Oo kasi merong one time na may smart sight tapos sumabat si
Charles tas biglang nanahimik lahat. Kaya yun.
(Dahil ba nasmart shame yung isang tao?)
Oo dahil dun tas magkakaroon ng awkward silence.
(Overall, what is your reaction or feeling towards smart
shaming?)
Kung di ka sanay dun, sasakit loob mo. Lalo na pag nasanay ka sa
lugar na nirerespeto opinyon mo o kaya parang walang sinasabi na
[smart-shaming]. Parang kasi kung first time mong sinabihan na
'edi Ikea na' baka yung iba maiinis kasi... 'edi ako na' ganyan kasi
mas matalino naman ako. Baka yung iba matake nila yun as
panlalait sa kanila.
68
INTERVIEWEE: MR. RON JULIUS ESPADA
A DOH psychologist in Mariveles Mental Hospital and now, Jose B. Lingad
Memorial Regional Hospital & Mental Health Consultant in Balanga City
Irish Nunag Kasi dun po sa data na na-gather namin yung results po 'don, most of
the respondents 'don sa quantitative they say na normal nalang po
yung smart-shaming sa kanila.
Sir Ron It's something they experience no?
Julius
Espada
Irish Yes po, kasi we also made a case study consisting of 4 persons in the
group and when we did the interview they have said na talaga na
normal na naririnig nila. So parang pag sinabihan sila ng 'edi wow'
Sir Ron Baka naman kasi yung ininterview niyo, di naman sila yung na-sasmart
shame?
Irish Pero na-sasmart shame naman po sila pero yung perception po nila sa
smart shaming is not a big deal sa kanila.
Sir Ron Nakakapag-cope na sila in a way. Kasi its something you experience
on a regular basis. Nakakabuild ka na ng tolerance para di ka na
maapektuhan, di ka ma-depress, di ka magdevelop ng mga problema.
Eventually you'll learn coping skills, sometimes, yung simpleng coping
skill is to simply ignore. Kaya di ko masisisi kung yung reaction nila is
'hayaan na lang'.
Irish Dahil 'don, dahil sa sinasabi nila na normal nalang nakikita pero nung
tinanong namin sila if they... if while they're conversing naaapektuhan
ba yung conversation nila. Tapos 'yun sinasabi naman nila na 'yes'...
na 'yun nga na-hahalt yung conversation. So bakit po ganun na
acceptable na siya kanila.
69
Sir Ron I dont think it’s acceptable... it’s not something they accept in my
opinion. I think it’s something that they're able to tolerate kasi yung
tolerating and accepting it. Accepting is tinanggap mo na while
tolerating is hinahayaan mo na... sinusubukan mo nang i-cope.
Sometimes people are able to cope with it. Yung coping nila could be
intellectual by rationalizing and saying 'ay, ganun talaga'. Ni-
rarationalize nila na its normal na or possible din na nakakapagcope
sila by simply ignoring it - denial. So 'yon yung isa sa mga nakikita
kong reason kung why I think they're able to cope. I wouldn't say na
accept siguro pero naaapektuhan pa rin sila. Yung fact na
naaapektuhan yung communication process nila mean na
naaapektuhan sila. Na-shushut up nga sila.
Irish 'Don po sa case study namin, nagkaroon kami ng pilot experiment

before yung final tapos pilot palang meron na kaming finding... na-
discover na in some cases relationship influences smart-shaming.
Sir Ron What do you mean relationship influence smart-shaming?
Irish Yung relationship mo sa isang tao...
Sir Ron Oo, kapag mas closer ka sa kanya... [the more na ma-smart shame
ka]. Actually komportable yung isang tao na i-smart shame ka pag
close kayo in my opinion. I could be wrong. Kasi there’s familiarity
when you’re more familiar with the person you tend to feel its easier to
express those kind of behavior that might make the person feel bad.
May mga taong insensitive talaga kaya ganun pero kung mapapansin
niyo kaya siguro mas komportable sila kasi kilala nila and they think
the person will be able to tolerate that kind of behavior. Dahil close
tayo, okay lang na ganunin mo ko. Sometimes it’s a reflection of their
closeness. Kaya siguro hindi rin sineseryoso nung victim… victim ba
ang tamang word ‘don? – receiver. Kung bakit siguro hindi rin
sineseryoso or tinatanggap ng receiver kasi kilala niya at alam niya na
wala naman intention yung tao na yun na saktan siya or i-offend siya
dahil magkakilala sila. Perhaps, naging way na nila of pakikipag-
communicate yun. Naging way na ng sender na sabihin indirectly ‘don
sa tao na komportable siya na ‘uy, di ko kayang sabayan yung
conversation na yan. Pero di ko kayang aminin na hindi ko kaya, kaya
idadaan ko nalang sa biro at idadaan ko nalang sa passive-
agressiveness na [nagiging] pag-sasmart shame. I think smart-
shaming is more valid kapag its between people na di naman
necessarily close.
70
Naemi For example po like employee and boss?
Almachar
Irish Acquaintances?
Sir Ron Oo, pwede din yun.
Irish Tapos meron din pong nagsasabi na hindi ka naman mag-sasmart

shame kung di mo naman ka-close yung tao kasi you’ll be careful with
the words [you’ll say] or kung pano mo siya kausapin.
Sir Ron [Oo] Yun yung sinasabi ko na… pero kung may mga tao na kayang
gawin yun kahit di pa sila close,
talagang masiri. Napapansin mo?
Irish Tapos Sir, nasabi niyo kanina na smart-shaming is a form of

insecurity…
Sir Ron It’s a reflection.
Naemi Of our own [insecurity]?
Sir Ron It could be our own reflection.
Irish How can you say po na, yun nga, it’s a reflection of individual’s
insecurity?
71
Sir Ron Kasi what I think… this is what I think ah? When people smart-shame
that’s their way of trying to end a conversation. Why would one want to
end a conversation? Posibleng di niya kaya, posibleng di niya lang
talaga gusto yung conversation, posibleng di niya alam yung isasagot
niya, posibleng wala siyang lakas ng loob na sumagot. Smart-shaming
has a context of hostility kasi eh. Making the person feel bad so that he
would stop imbes na pwedeng mong sabihin na ‘ay, di ko man kayang
pag-usapan yan. Di ko kayang intindihin yan’. Idinadaan mo by making
the person feel bad that he/she is smart. Meron siyang aspect na in
order for you to stop, I would make you feel bad kaya negative siya.
Why is it a form of insecurity in my opinion? Kasi you have feelings of
inadequacy na di mo kayang sabayan at di mo kayang tanggapin na di
mo kayang sabayan. Natatakot ka na by saying na ‘I don’t know’, you’ll
feel even worse about yourself; the insecurity. You would resort to a
behavior that will make the person will feel bad about themselves. ‘Pag
naibaba mo na siya, magkapantay na kayo. I don’t want you speaking
as if you’re better than me, I don’t like you speaking as if you’re
speaking you’re higher than me, I don’t like you speaking as if you’re
more intelligent than me. So what I would do in order to mitigate, in
order to cope with that feelings of insecurity [and] feelings of
inadequacy; I will exhibit a behavior that would make you feel na
pareho lang tayo. By making you feel bad for exhibiting that kind of
quality [smart]. That’s what I think.
Irish ‘Don po sa case study naming, meron po kaming planted na smart-

shamer.
Sir Ron Experimental pala siya
Irish Opo, experimental.
Sir Ron Pano kayo nakakuha ng consent?
Irish Kinausap po namin sila, Sir.
Sir Ron Alam nila na…

72
Irish Alam nila na ano siya, research siya about sa thesis naming regarding
communication but we did not say na its about smart shaming kasi pag
sinabi naming yung thought thesis naming; ma-iinfluence po yung
approach nila.
Sir Ron And then, go on.
Irish Nagbigay kami ng topics sa kanila to talk about and then yung smart-
shamer dun nag-bubutt in siya every now and then na nag-sasmart
shame siya. Meron dun yung isang participant sa experiment na
impluwensiyahan siya ng planted to the point na kahit na di na nag-
sasmart shame yung planted, siya na mismo yung nag-iinitiate ng
smart-shaming.
Sir Ron Anong nag-iinitiate?
Kasi Sir yung planted automatic na mag-sasmart shame siya pero may
mga times na kahit na yung smart-shamer di na niya napapansin na
dapat pala siyang mag-smart shame. Yung mismong participant, siya
na yung [mag-sasabi na] ‘edi,ikaw na’ tapos susuportahan nalang
nung nag-sasmart shame.
Sir Ron Kasi it becomes a behavior na nag-mimimic na sila, nagayaya na nila.

Behaviors kasi can be contagious. If that happens, it means that the
other person is able to influence the other person. Its becoming
something that’s acceptable so how do we stop that? We stop that by
making it clear, actually that is something I would do, na negative pala
‘pag meron akong alam. So that they would realize that what they’re
doing is not something that is acceptable. Kasi when you tolerate those
kind of behavior you’re sending the message that, that kind of behavior
is acceptable. Walang punishment eh, walang nag-cocontrol. You’re
letting it pass at yung disturbing if na-iinfluence, if nalilipat siya to other
people. Kunwari sabi sa engineering may culture sila na ganun kasi
nahahawa in a way.
Naemi In terms of age, more likely ano pong age bracket na more prone to
smart shaming?
Irish Yung lumilitaw po kasi ngayon millennials are more prone to pinaka
na-iinfluence ng smart-shaming. Why is it millennials?
73
Sir Ron I don’t think… mahirap magsabi eh. Wala tayong data for that. I could
only guess; your guess is as good as mine. Pero the thing is, I think it’s
not necessarily a more of a challenge between age. Di naman age
yung nakikita kong malaking factor but culture… more on their
background. Tinitignan ko pa nga is socio-economic status. Isa yun sa
mga hina-hypothesize ko is that individuals who are more educated,
perhaps, are prone to being smart-shamed and individuals who are
less educated di naman sila siguro masyado na-sasmart shame. Kasi
di naman sila masyadong intellectual, they don’t exhibit the qualities
associated with intellectualism. In terms of age, kung tinatanong niyo
kung sino yung mas prone, mas prone talaga definitely yung mga
intellectual people na nakapagtapos. It’s either people na opinionated,
these are the people who are inherently curious,yung may sense of
wonder. In terms of age, mahirap masabi eh because this is something
I think that is happening for a long time na. Mas prevalent nga lang
siya based sa data, at least based sa history, sa mga societies na may
totalitarian dictatorship. That’s interesting kasi with the current
administration parang ganun yung nangyayari.
Naemi Can gender be a factor?
Sir Ron Yes, I think mas lalo siguro sa west. Mas prone sa smart shaming I
think is women, that’s my opinion ah? I could be wrong with that one
but I think women are more prone to smart shaming kasi in Asian
societies na meron malaking paring gap between men and women.
Women are perceived to have traditional gender roles – sa bahay,
mag-aalaga ng anak. So if a woman is opinionated, a woman is smart-
shamed. Parang meron pa nga akong nabasa dati na if a woman is
straight forward, masyadong madaldal, masyadong matapang,
masaydong matalino parang di siya ideal na babae. Kasi hindi siya
susunod. Hindi siya masunurin. There are cultures in society where
women are preferred to be submissive. If a woman is intelligent, if a
woman is empowered, hindi siya magiging submissive. That’s my
opinion. I think women are more prone to being smart-shamed kasi
may expectation sa mga lalaki na magiging provider sila, na sila yung
magiging ilaw ng tahanan [women], sila yung magiging haligi ng
tahanan [men], to be able to actually provide for the family and if a man
is intelligent… bonus yun. Nakakabuild siya sa provider image. Does
that make sense?
Irish Do you consider smart shaming kumbaga has a positive… kasi more
on negative siya pero does it have a positive benefit sa society?
74
Sir Ron Honestly right now, wala akong maisip kasi it hinders society from
progress. Siguro yung nakikita kong benefit niya is yung immediate
satisfaction nung smart shamer na ma-relieve yung feelings of
inadequacy niya and insecurity niya ‘don sa moment na ‘yon. Benefit
sa taong nag-sasmart shame kasi gumagaan loob niya. Nagawa
niyang ipahiya yung isang tao making himself feel better pero
pansamantala lang yun. In the long run, it prevents the person to
actually becoming better.
Irish What would you recommend to raise awareness? To prevent this issue
from spreading?
Sir Ron I think it should be a topic sa philosophy or sa mga classes. I think it

should be a responsibility – it COULD be a responsibility of the
teachers to foster a culture where it is acceptable to make mistakes,
where there is no shame in asking questions to promote the fact that
freedom of thought should be the norm. Kumbaga the norm should be
everyone should not be submissive but rather everyone has the
freedom to think. Sa university level, yun siguro yung ma-
rerecommend [at] ma-propromote natin yung idea nay un. By making
the teachers realize that it is a problem. Siguro you could communicate
that sa kanila or pwede na through an advocacy like this, through
social media. Actually Rappler, GMA 7, ABS-CBN, a kot of news
organization are doing articles about smart-shaming because we want
to awareness about dito. Siguro what would speak a lot, what would
speak more to people if it would be a video or if it’s a commercial or
something. Kumbaga full-blown campaign siya. It could be a program
ng isang university kasi universities are promoting intellectual growth.
Depende siguro.
Irish Part of the advocacy campaign po kasi naming is yun to create

awareness talaga about the issue and we’re planning to create videos
and AVPS discussing the issue nga po. Kasi lumabas po sa results
naming na people commit to the act but they don’t know na may tawag
pala ‘don and meron negative [effect] yun.
Sir Ron It’s sad kasi sa university meron palang isang buong department na
ganun.
75
Irish Yes, sir kasi po meron po kaming participants for the experiment [na]
engineering po tapos nugn in-interview po naming sila if do they feel
offended when they were smart shamed parang sabi nila hindi na sila
na-offend kasi normal nalang sa department nila – sa mga CEA, ganun
daw po.
Sir Ron It is something that become a norm sa kanila.
Irish Parang all of them are influenced by it.
Sir Ron Baka naman kasi yung context sa kanila is not as serious sa ibang
department. Posible na sa kanila it’s something humorous, something
that is comedic or something they don’t really take seriously anymore.
Depende sa person kasi iba-iba yun. Sa department its not something
they take seriously.
Irish Lahat ng nag-smart shame ngayon parang sinsabi nila na pa-joke [or]
in a sarcastic way na kumbaga bebenta sa mga makakarinig. Bakit
ganun yung approach ng mga tao?
Sir Ron Parang joke?
Irish Opo
Sir Ron Kasi yung pagiging matalino kasi ginagawang nilang katawa-tawa at
ang mahirap people find it funny. They find it funny because na-
sasatisfy din yung insecurity nila. Nababawasan yung nararamdaman
nilang insecurity kasi napapahiya yung tao na kina-iinsecuran nila.
Does that make sense? Dinadaan mo sa humor kasi in a way its less
hostile, less aggressive than directly expressing that or doing that
being physically aggressive. Mas nagiging acceptable siya in a social
sense because the way its delivered [and] the way its packaged is
acceptable pero yung content niya is really terrible. Yung nagiging
effect niya hindi maganda.
Naemi Kanina po you mentioned si Vice Ganda, aside from Vice, were there
any other public figures?
76
Sir Ron Kasi before Vice, meron na talagang ganun sa comedy. Si Vice naging
popular lang naman siya kasi yun yung bentahe niya. I’m not saying na
that’s the worst thing in the world, although, ang mahirap kasi it
promotes anti-intellectualism. It promotes that idea that if you’re
intelligent… kabahan ka dahil ipapahiya ka. Siguro, wala akong naiisip
na iba right now. Siya kasi yung tumatatak sa pagiging rude. Parang
you say something… sige, explain ko siya ng ganito. Si Vice trabaho
niya yun, ‘don siya kumikita kasi yun yung bentahe niya bilang
komedyante. Pero kung halimbawa ginagawa ito ng isang
professional, let’s say, a college professor – someone who is
intelligent, someone who should be fostering intellectual growth [tapos]
siya yung nag-sasmart shame. That’s bad. Kunwari graduate student
nag-sasmart shame ng kapwa niyang graduate student, that’s bad kasi
taliwas siya ‘don sa kung sino ka. Si Vice, I’m not saying that it’s
acceptable, pero its more tolerable sa kanya kasi yun yung trabaho
niya, yun yung bentahe niya. Ang mahirap lang ‘don dahil doon umiikot
yung comedy niya minsan nakaka-influence. Meron siyang capacity na
mag-influence though media na that kind of behavior is acceptable and
its normal to make fun of people who are actually thinking outside the
box.
Kerr Santos We’re trying to relate smart-shaming with media. We’re trying to
sabihin na yung media factor siya kung bakit may smart-shaming.
Nasabi niyo nga po na Vice Ganda is using the media to influence. Is it
safe to say na media is really a factor sa growth ng smart shaming?
Sir Ron Yes and No. Yes because of certain individuals who exhibit that
behavior and make the public feel that it is acceptable and it is a
behavior na normal sa culture natin. No kasi may mga media outlets
naman na tina-try na i-correct that. Its more complicated than that in a
way.
Naemi I think in media, it’s not just public figures. I think sometime sa mga
telenovelas, movies, parang may mga subtleties na pag smart ka
Sir Ron Oo, tama yun. For example, yung sa portrayal ng tao na matalino. How
does media portray someone who is intellectual?
Naemi and Kontrabida.
Irish
77
Sir Ron Meron tayong narrative na yung bida kawawa siya at madalas yung
bida kinakawawa kasi meron siyang mga flaws, meron siyang mga
imperfections – galling siya sa mahirap, yung nanay niya iniwanan
siya. That narrative speaks to a lot of people who are poor and
uneducated. Do you think na if yung bida matalno, mayaman… is it
something the poor can relate to? Not as much sa character na
makakarelate sila. Ngayon if media is able to portray an intellectual in
a way that the intellectual is flawed, in a way that the intellectual is
imperfect, in a way that the intellectual is vulnerable as well. Perhaps,
people can relate to the intellectual to a certain degree pero kung yung
tao hindi naman niya naiintindihan yung pinagsasabi ng character sa
TV… hindi niya papanoorin. Hindi siya magsusubscribe. Hindi siya
nakakarelate. Ngayon, may mga tao na nag-aaspire, na nagugustuhan
yung mga ganung characters kasi they want to aspire to become
someone like that. Pero sa culture natin, natatakot pa tayo parin kasi
yung portrayal ng someone matalino paano? For example, the Gifted.
Tignan mo nalang yung portrayal ng someone matalino – pareho
silang bitchy…
Naemi They do everything to pull others down so that they can be on the top.
Sir Ron That’s a terrible portrayal of an [intellect]. Although, may mga ganun.
At least most of the intellectuals I know are actually humble people. So
it’s more of a representation of what an intellectual is through media.
So paano sila nai-rerepresent? Panno sila na-dedepict? Na-vivillainfy
yung mga tao na nag-iisip outside the box. People who are capable of
rational thought are villainify kasi they’re not relatable at the same time
hindi sila ‘masa’. May konsepto kasi na ‘masa’, halimbawa between
Nora Aunor… you know what I mean, hindi siya ‘masa’.
Kerr Hindi ba sa movies, yung isang matalino pino-portray siya as villain,

kalaban, crazy scientist na naghahangad ng end of the world. So
parang considered po ba siya na smart-shaming sa pag-portray sa
mga smart [people] na ganun?
78
Sir Ron I don’t think smart-shaming siya, per se. It’s more of negative portrayal
of intelligence, that’s what I think. Ang pangit no? Sabagay may nakita
ka na bang villain na bobo? Meron silang element of being cunning.
Yung sa movie nalang na The Gifted, yung portrayal ng isang tao na
matalino is very negative. Yung in order for them to be accepted, in
order for them to be loved they need to be beautiful. That’s so terrible.
Pero what it is interesting in that movie kasi is even though they are
already beautiful and they are intelligent… they are flawed in terms of
their character. Na-gegets niyo ba yung aspect na yun? Because
minsan being a victim of smart-shaming shapes your character,
shapes your perspective of the world. Sometimes it makes you
question your value a lot. I feel good when people appreciate my level
of intelligence pero ayoko naman na ‘don lang umikot yung buhay ko.
Ayoko naman na yun lang ang magiging definition ng kung sino ako.
Recommendation: [inaudible]
Smart-shaming in the workplace.
Intervention to address smart-shaming in the university before it
becomes prevalent.
Proposal of an Intellectual support group (Na-smart shame Ka Ba
Support Group)
Raise the issue to the guidance
Add intellectual curiosity in the paper – more insightful.
“The future researchers could further explore the effects of smart-
shaming to the intellectual curiosity based on our findings indicating
that… “
Action Plan
Sir Ron SR: In a university setting, if you want a good university where nag-
eexcel yung mga students you have to take care of the nerds. So that
they will take care of the under performance. Kailangan mo silang
alagaan kasi sila yung nagiging top notchers , sila yung mga nagiging
famous eventually, yung mga nagbibigay pangalan sa university. In a
way, marketing din siya if you’re able to take care of the nerds pero
kung sa culture na wherein the nerds are being shamed for being
intelligent. That’s bad not only for the students but also for the
university. Pwede niyong isama sa rationale niyo. Sa discussion niyo.
Pwede rin sa recommendation niyo.
Kung mapapansin niyo yung pag-sasmart shame nag-uunder siya sa

bullying pero wala silang…
“Na-bully po ako kasi masyado po akong matalino”
79
APPENDIX D
PHOTO DOCUMENTATION OF THE SURVEY

80
APPENDIX E
OUTPUTS
Advocacy Campaign
• Photo Documentation of Seminar entitled Smart Shaming: Talk to Me When
You’re Not Smart Anymore

81
• Photo Documentation of “Smart Shaming” Display
82
▪ Social Media Utilization
Promotional Materials
83
84
85
86
87
APPENDIX F
COMMUNICATION PLAN
88
89
90

Influence of Smart Shaming in The Commun

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Influence of Smart Shaming in The Commun

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running Head: INFLUENCE OF SMART-SHAMING IN THE COMMUNICATION PROCESS

An Analysis of the Influence of Smart-Shaming in the Communication Process of Holy

Angel University Students

An Undergraduate Research Presented to the

School of Arts and Sciences

Holy Angel University

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Bachelor of Arts in Communication

Mary Alyson E. Agustin

Naemi Mae C. Almachar

Irish Micaela C. Nunag

Pamela Denise C. Trillanes

Mary Alyson E. Agustin

Naemi Mae C. Almachar

Irish Micaela C. Nunag

Pamela Denise C. Trillanes

Statement of the Problem……………………………………………….………..…. 23

Paradigm of the Study…………………………………………………..……….….... 25

encouragement, advice, valuable comments, and suggestions that contributed to the

success of this study.

his knowledge to us.

without you, this study will not be possible.

unending love and support.

Thank you for everything and we love you so much.

This research paper describes the influence of Smart-shaming in the

communication process of selected Holy Angel University students. The respondents

used. To provide and gather information, questionnaires were distributed among

students and an experiment was conducted. Furthermore, interviews with psychologists

were also conducted.

a social norm by the respondents. However, it also contributes as an obstacle to the

communication process because it hinders the flow of communication.

Through the years of human existence, communication has been a

communication as a “complex and intricate process that involves the exchange of

messages between interactants.” This is further expounded by Harris (2009) where he

the speaker is a necessity which is supported by Potter’s (2004) definition of

communication by which “it is the relational process of creating and interpreting

message fails to stimulate any cognitive, emotional, or behavioral reaction, it is pointless

to refer to it as communication. Consequently, it can also be considered as “a process

because it is an activity, an exchange, or set of behaviors. It is an activity in which we

participate.” (Understanding and Sharing: An Introduction to Speech Communication 5 th

Edition, Pearson & Nelson)

Hence like every process, the communication process follows a step-by-step

thoughts, or emotions.” It is also said to be the core of communication study (Potter,

encoding. It “refers to the process by which people select consciously or unconsciously,

process of communication. There may be observable behaviors such as verbal

language and non-verbal behaviors that unnecessarily have essential meanings.

modalities” where the messages are retrieved in continuation of the communication

into meaningful messages” it is called the decoding process.

messages, perception of sender and receiver, proxemics, territoriality, roles and

then becomes somewhat ineffective and such impediments are known as

communication barriers (C.B. Mamoria). These communication barriers are “the

to create misunderstanding and confusion” (Louise E. Boone)

Nowadays, Filipinos have been insentient in practicing a behavior wherein

phenomenon is coined as Smart Shaming which is defined as the way a person or a

tend to react negatively as an act of defense mechanism. As Shakira Sison mentioned

Likewise, communication itself is a broad and dynamic concept that changes

another. To provide a better understanding of the communication process,

results of new discoveries in our environment. He further explained that communication

analysis of communication phenomena.” However, he also reiterated that a theory’s

As the way communication develops, different cultures arise. Culture is simply

environments. From peers to well-known celebrities, Filipinos have unconsciously

jokes such as “nosebleed” or “masyado ka kasing matalino” just to stop the

conversation. It is no wonder that our Filipino culture of being easily influenced by