For Kapfere (1993), the difference is in the communication chain (rumors will count to not-authorized messages and of interest universa, while fofoca is spread of selective form, inside of a group specify). For Allport and Postam (1953), rumor alone proliferates the absence of doubtless tests. For Eugenio Mussak (2008) They say that fofoca for the simple reason exists to live in society. So that this is enough justification, valley to remember so that to a group of people pass to be considered a society, and necessary that such people have, interest one for the others. Of certain form, when making a commentary on somebody, we are trying to understand the essence of the proper species human being, therefore we are making a self-knowledge exercise.
That one that is not interested for nobody suffers of a sociopatia takes that it if to move away from the conviviality, what it harms ties the intrapessoal relation. Therefore, it seems that everybody makes fofoca. What it varies between the people and the amount and the nature of fofoca that they make. It has very fofoqueira people and it has the circumstantial fofoqueiros. It really has those that use fofoca as maledicncia, harming the ones that are its targets; has the ones that if amuse with fofocas innocent. But everybody makes fofoca, and of the nature human being. Mussak (2008) still says: The great evil of fofoca and the partiality of the interpretation of who make. To comment something on the life of somebody and a thing, to emit judgment of value on same and the other. In the environment of Mussak work it still follows with the reasoning placing for example a work environment; ' ' To excessively say that the head of the office this working and has presented signals of estresse is a thing; more to insinuate that it is the office because probably, this fought with the woman and still superficially deducts in the employees is another total diferente.' ' Mussak (2008) it says despite surrounding of work they are an ideal broth of culture for the growth of fofoca.