nonverbal communication 463 - filozofski fakultetibrdar/komunikacija/seminari/lafrance, 2000 -...

4
NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION 463 Springer-Verlag. The most comprehensive of recent sta- tistical treatments of propensity scores, sensitivityanal- yses, and other issues in nonrandomized designs. Schlesselman, J. J. (1982). Case-control studies: Design, con- duct, analysis. New ’fork Oxford University Press. An excellent introduction to the case-control method from epidemiology. William R. Shadish NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION refers to the ex- pression and perception of nonlinguistic signals be- tween people. The core assumption is that people can- not not communicate since human communication is a multichannel process that includes a good deal more than words. Early on. some proposed that most com- munication in face-to-face encounters takes place in the nonverbal realm. That idea, now generally regarded as an overstatement, nonetheless has led psychologists and other communication scholars to substantiate the idea that nonverbal communication serves numerous social-psychological functions. Nonverbal communication subsumes several cate- gories of human expressiveness such as facial displays (including eye contact and gaze behavior), gesture and body movement, posture and body orientation, touch, human spacing and territorial behavior, and vocal and paralinguistic behavior. Some explications also include physical attractiveness. babyfacedness, and other phys- ical attributes, odor, and features such as hair, clothing, and adornment. Thes.e latter aspects, however, are less frequently included under the nonverbal communica- tion rubric since they are more static than messages sent and received in ongoing interactions. Although Darwin is often seen as initiating the sci- entific study of nonvwbal behavior with The Expression of the Emotions in M m and Animals in 1872, social sci- entific work in this area began in earnest in the mid- twentieth century. Birdwhistell (1970). an anthropolo- gist, coined the term kinesics for the study of communication via body movement: Hall (1959). also an anthropologist, instigated study of interpersonal space and human territorial behavior which has be- come known as the study of proxemics: Goffman (1959), a sociologist, carved out the field of face-to-face interac- tion which describes how nonverbal behavior affects and reflects interpersonal dynamics: and &man began his studies on the psychological import of affect displags (Ekman eL Friesen. 1969). For psychologists., nonverbal communication has been used to understand processes at several levels of psychological analysis: the individual, the interper- sonal, and the structural. Individual differences in some personality traits are reflected in characteristic nonver- bal behaviors as are some psychopathological condi- tions. In fact, personality psychologists and psycho- therapists have long speculated that a person’s nonverbal behavior disclosed aspects of disposition or character that a person cannot or will not reveal in words. Early on, Allport and Vernon (1933) provided detailed descriptions of how personality is revealed in expressive style. More recently, the aim has been di- rected toward documenting relationships between in- terpersonal traits and particular patterns of nonverbal behavior. For example, extroverts tend to engage in more eye contact, to adopt smaller spacing, and to dis- play more facial expressivity than those who are less extroverted. There are also individual differences in so- cial skills associated with nonverbal behavior, such as the ability to accurately perceive and interpret the non- verbal cues of others, a trait usually referred to as non- verbal sensitivity. Nonverbal cues have also been used diagnostically to assess and differentiate psychopatho- logical conditions such as depression and schizophre- nia. Also at the individual level of analysis, a substantial body of work has focused on documenting the rela- tionship between particular emotions and particular fa- cial expressions. Several investigators, following in Dar- win’s footsteps, have proposed that there is a direct biological link between the triggering of basic emotions and the subsequent display of particular facial expres- sions (Ekman, 1972). However, controversy continues as to how universally or culturally variant these rela- tionships are (Russell, 1994). At an interpersonal level of analysis, nonverbal communication is useful for understanding various dy- adic and group processes. According to one view, non- verbal behaviors are instructive about three key dimen- sions of interpersonal relationships: immediacy (i.e., how positive or close individuals feel toward others), status (i.e., whether individuals have higher, equal, or lower standing with respect to others), and responsive- ness (i.e,, how active and focused an individual’s com- munication is: Mehrabian, 1969). With respect to immediacy, research has explored the role that nonverbal behaviors play in reflecting the quality of attachment between infants and caretakers. Developmental researchers, for example, have described the degree to which the body movements of infants are temporally synchronized with those of various caregiv- ers. Among adults, a frequently explored topic is the role that nonverbal behaviors play in communicating attraction-aversion and in creating and reflecting inter- personal rapport. There are indications, for example, that nonverbal synchrony or the degree to which par- ticipants adopt similar body movements or postures re- flects the extent to which those individuals are in ac- cord with one another (LaFrance, 1979). Evidence also shows that when people like each other, they tend to adopt smaller interpersonal spaces and more direct

Upload: others

Post on 18-Jul-2020

1 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION 463 - Filozofski Fakultetibrdar/komunikacija/seminari/LaFrance, 2000 - Nonverb… · NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION . body orientation, engage in more eye contact,

NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION 463

Springer-Verlag. The most comprehensive of recent sta- tistical treatments of propensity scores, sensitivity anal- yses, and other issues in nonrandomized designs.

Schlesselman, J. J. (1982). Case-control studies: Design, con- duct, analysis. New ’fork Oxford University Press. An excellent introduction to the case-control method from epidemiology.

William R. Shadish

NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION refers to the ex- pression and perception of nonlinguistic signals be- tween people. The core assumption is that people can- not not communicate since human communication is a multichannel process that includes a good deal more than words. Early on. some proposed that most com- munication in face-to-face encounters takes place in the nonverbal realm. That idea, now generally regarded as an overstatement, nonetheless has led psychologists and other communication scholars to substantiate the idea that nonverbal communication serves numerous social-psychological functions.

Nonverbal communication subsumes several cate- gories of human expressiveness such as facial displays (including eye contact and gaze behavior), gesture and body movement, posture and body orientation, touch, human spacing and territorial behavior, and vocal and paralinguistic behavior. Some explications also include physical attractiveness. babyfacedness, and other phys- ical attributes, odor, and features such as hair, clothing, and adornment. Thes.e latter aspects, however, are less frequently included under the nonverbal communica- tion rubric since they are more static than messages sent and received in ongoing interactions.

Although Darwin is often seen as initiating the sci- entific study of nonvwbal behavior with The Expression of the Emotions in M m and Animals in 1872, social sci- entific work in this area began in earnest in the mid- twentieth century. Birdwhistell (1970). an anthropolo- gist, coined the term kinesics for the study of communication via body movement: Hall (1959). also an anthropologist, instigated study of interpersonal space and human territorial behavior which has be- come known as the study of proxemics: Goffman (1959), a sociologist, carved out the field of face-to-face interac- tion which describes how nonverbal behavior affects and reflects interpersonal dynamics: and &man began his studies on the psychological import of affect displags (Ekman eL Friesen. 1969).

For psychologists., nonverbal communication has been used to understand processes at several levels of psychological analysis: the individual, the interper- sonal, and the structural. Individual differences in some personality traits are reflected in characteristic nonver- bal behaviors as are some psychopathological condi-

tions. In fact, personality psychologists and psycho- therapists have long speculated that a person’s nonverbal behavior disclosed aspects of disposition or character that a person cannot or will not reveal in words. Early on, Allport and Vernon (1933) provided detailed descriptions of how personality is revealed in expressive style. More recently, the aim has been di- rected toward documenting relationships between in- terpersonal traits and particular patterns of nonverbal behavior. For example, extroverts tend to engage in more eye contact, to adopt smaller spacing, and to dis- play more facial expressivity than those who are less extroverted. There are also individual differences in so- cial skills associated with nonverbal behavior, such as the ability to accurately perceive and interpret the non- verbal cues of others, a trait usually referred to as non- verbal sensitivity. Nonverbal cues have also been used diagnostically to assess and differentiate psychopatho- logical conditions such as depression and schizophre- nia.

Also at the individual level of analysis, a substantial body of work has focused on documenting the rela- tionship between particular emotions and particular fa- cial expressions. Several investigators, following in Dar- win’s footsteps, have proposed that there is a direct biological link between the triggering of basic emotions and the subsequent display of particular facial expres- sions (Ekman, 1972). However, controversy continues as to how universally or culturally variant these rela- tionships are (Russell, 1994).

At an interpersonal level of analysis, nonverbal communication is useful for understanding various dy- adic and group processes. According to one view, non- verbal behaviors are instructive about three key dimen- sions of interpersonal relationships: immediacy (i.e., how positive or close individuals feel toward others), status (i.e., whether individuals have higher, equal, or lower standing with respect to others), and responsive- ness (i.e,, how active and focused an individual’s com- munication is: Mehrabian, 1969).

With respect to immediacy, research has explored the role that nonverbal behaviors play in reflecting the quality of attachment between infants and caretakers. Developmental researchers, for example, have described the degree to which the body movements of infants are temporally synchronized with those of various caregiv- ers. Among adults, a frequently explored topic is the role that nonverbal behaviors play in communicating attraction-aversion and in creating and reflecting inter- personal rapport. There are indications, for example, that nonverbal synchrony or the degree to which par- ticipants adopt similar body movements or postures re- flects the extent to which those individuals are in ac- cord with one another (LaFrance, 1979). Evidence also shows that when people like each other, they tend to adopt smaller interpersonal spaces and more direct

Administrator
By LaFrance, Marianne In Kazdin, Alan E. (Ed). (2000). Encyclopedia of psychology, Vol. 5. (pp. 463-466). American Psychological Association. 508 pp.
Page 2: NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION 463 - Filozofski Fakultetibrdar/komunikacija/seminari/LaFrance, 2000 - Nonverb… · NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION . body orientation, engage in more eye contact,

464 NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION

body orientation, engage in more eye contact, show more positive facial expressions, and use more gestures.

As to status, nonverbal behaviors have been found to reflect differences in social power. For instance, Dov- idio and his colleagues have shown that people with higher power are more likely to show visual dominance (Dovidio, Ellyson, Keating, Heltman, & Brown, 1988). Specifically, visual dominance describes the ratio of how much a person looks at the other while speaking compared to how much he or she looks while listening. People higher in power or dominance look about the same whether they are listening or speaking, while those lower in power or dominance look more while listening than while speaking.

There are other nonverbal indicators of status dif- ferences between people. Specifically, it appears that those with higher status or power have more options than lower power people with respect to the nonverbal behaviors they display. For example, a person with higher power may look or not at a lower status person, may approach very closely or maintain some consid- erable distance, may smile or not depending on how positive he or she feels, or may adopt a very relaxed or decorous posture with respect to a lower power other. In contrast, lower power people in the company of their superiors appear to adopt a more predictable and nar- rower range of nonverbal behavior.

Finally, the responsiveness dimension of interper- sonal relationships appears to be cued by nonverbal be- haviors. Specifically, people are more nonverbally ex- pressive when they are in the company of other people and especially when they are attempting to influence others. There are also indications that some nonverbal behaviors such as gaze direction are useful in the com- munication of a particular kind of responsiveness, namely sexual interest or flirtatiousness.

Nonverbal behaviors have also been implicated in those interpersonal encounters when people engaged in deception or when perceivers believe that they are be- ing deceived, although the jury is still out as to whether there are any cues that reliably indicate when someone is lying. Freud, for example, argued that were one to pay close attention to nonverbal behavior, one would be convinced that nobody can keep a secret. Indeed, a substantial line of research within nonverbal commu- nication has focused on the processes involved in de- ception; asking, for example, whether people who lie reveal that they are doing so via changes in facial dis- play, vocal intonation, gaze aversion, and gesture (DePaulo & Friedman, 1998). A related question is whether perceivers are able to detect deception in oth- ers when they have visual and/or vocal access to per- sons who are actually being deceptive or who are be- lieved to be engaged in deception. As to the former question, the conclusion is that changes in facial ex- pressions do not reliably denote the presence of deceit.

Nor can perceivers rely on particular cues to consis- tently signal that a person is lying (DePaulo & Fried- man, 1998).

Interpersonal interactions also involve a significant component of self-presentation which is typically ac- complished through the deliberate use of nonverbal be- haviors. There are occasions, for instance, where people aim to have others see them in particular ways, such as being credible or modest or competent, even though it appears that perceivers are inclined to take these presentations at face value. According to DePaulo (1992). success at regulating nonverbal behaviors to promote particular self-portrayals depends on knowl- edge, skill, practice, experience, confidence, and moti- vation.

At a more structural level, nonverbal communica- tion has proved useful in understanding how occasions of social interaction are organized. The idea here is that participants draw on known repertoires of verbal and nonverbal behaviors in order to be able successfully to carry out a host of interpersonal transactions such as greetings and farewells, signaling listening or manag- ing speaker-listener conversational turn taking, and conveying and accepting apologies, compliments, and the like. Social rituals such as these appear to be au- tomatic as does much of nonverbal behavior. They also occur mostly out of awareness, but close study of how people negotiate the myriad and mundane interper- sonal encounters of everyday life suggest that people are exquisitely knowledgeable about and sensitive to the placement of the right nonverbal cues in the right place.

Questions of how various groups differ nonverbally speaking are also structural in the sense that gender, ethnic, cultural, class, and age groups are thought to display characteristic patterns of nonverbal behavior. Such inquiries have inspired debate about the degree to which nonverbal behaviors are influenced by innate versus cultural factors.

Gender has proven to be a fertile ground for the in- vestigation of group differences in nonverbal behaviors. The evidence indicates that women are more facially and vocally expressive than men, that they signal more social engagement with others via such behaviors as smiling and gazing, and that they are more sensitive to the nonverbal cues of others than are men (Deaux & LaFrance. 1998). Nonetheless, the reasons for these dif- ferences are in dispute. Evolutionary psychologists tend to argue that the observed differences are due to genetic differences between the sexes: that is, women are more nonverbally expressive because it behooves the female to be especially demonstrative given her role as primary caregiver. Developmental psychologists, on the other hand, are more likely to point to evidence that suggests that females and males learn how to display gender- appropriate nonverbal behavior. Social psychologists

Page 3: NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION 463 - Filozofski Fakultetibrdar/komunikacija/seminari/LaFrance, 2000 - Nonverb… · NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION . body orientation, engage in more eye contact,

NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION 465

point to differences in social roles, social expectations, and social status to explain why the nonverbal behavior of men differs from that of women.

Cultural variations have been described for many types of nonverbal behavior. For example, researchers have distinguished between “contact” and “noncon- tact” groups with the former showing smaller interper- sonal distances, more direct body orientation, and more touching and eye conlact. More generally, it appears that there are characteristic expressive and gestural patterns associated with speaking different verbal lan- guages, so that, for example, speakers of French or Ital- ian or Japanese have distinctive ways of moving their hands and faces while engaged in conversation.

Nonverbal communcation researchers have, to date, given a great deal of attention to facial expressions, seeing in them a singular locus for the communication of emotion. For those who display them, facial expres- sions have been shown to contribute to the activation and regulation of emotion experiences as well as elic- iting emotional states in expressors themselves, a phe- nomenon known as the facial feedback hypothesis. The facial feedback hypothesis maintains that facial expres- sions such as smiling or grimacing are not merely read- outs of underlying affect but can themselves bring about or at least modify experienced emotion by those who show them. In fact, Darwin suggested that facial feedback (sensations created by the movements of ex- pressive behavior) activate or contribute to the activa- tion of emotion feelings. A number of experiments have provided substantial evidence that intentional manage- ment of facial expression contributes to the regulation (and perhaps activation) of emotion experiences. Most evidence is related not to specific emotional feelings but to the broad classes of positive and negative states of emotion. Studies of motivated, self-initiated expressive behaviors have shown that, if people can control their facial expression during moments of pain, there will be less arousal of the autonomic nervous system and dim- inution of the pain experience.

Facial expressions of emotion communicate some- thing about internal states to others as well as activat- ing emotions in others, a process that can help account for empathy and sensitivity. There has been the sug- gestion, for example, that perceivers of facial expres- sions sometimes eng,ige in “facial mimicry” which is associated with feeling what the expressor is feeling. The social communication function of emotion expres- sions is most evident in infancy. Long before infants have command of language, they can send a wide va- riety of messages through their facial expressions. Vir- tually all the muscles necessary for facial expression of basic emotions are present at birth. Through the use of an objective. anatomically based system for coding the separate facial muscle movements, it has been found that neonates have the ability to smile and to

facially express pain, interest, and disgust. Babies as young as 3 to 4 weeks can display a social smile: other emotions come somewhat later. Sadness and anger are shown usually by about 2 months: and fear by 6 or 7 months. Informal observations suggest that expressions indicative of shyness appear by about 4 months and expressions of guilt by about 2 years.

It is also apparent that very young children are re- sponsive to the facial expressions of others. Research has shown that, when mothers display sadness expres- sions, their infants also demonstrate more sadness ex- pressions and decrease their exploratory play. Infants under 2 years of age respond to their mother’s real or simulated expressions of sadness or distress by making efforts to show sympathy and provide help. And re- search has shown that infants will cross a modified ’*vi- sual cliff” (an apparatus consisting of a glass floor that gives the illusion of a drop-off) if their mother stands on the opposite side and smiles, but none cross if she expresses fear. In addition. infants cry in response to other infants’ cries but not to a computer-generated sound that simulates crying.

Microanalysis of facial movements from video rec- ords have shown that small changes in particular con- stellations of facial muscles reveal important psycho- logical processes. For example, facial expressions can differentiate between distressed and nondistressed cou- ples, reveal the extent to which people really find sexist humor amusing, distinguish embarrassment from shame, and reflect different reactions to female than to male leaders among other processes.

Gaze behavior has been studied for several reasons. First, eye behavior is often one part of a whole facial display, such as the downward gaze that accompanies feelings of embarrassment. People also look more at those with whom they seek contact or engagement, and eye contact or mutual gaze is thought to say some- thing about the degree to which people are actually involved with one another, either positively or nega- tively. As noted above, the timing of looking relative to talking has also been found to be important. In addi- tion, studies indicate that eye behavior plays an impor- tant role in regulating various aspects of conversation, such as monitoring attention or seeking responses or negotiating the exchange of speaker and listener roles.

Body movements and gestures can also be commu- nicative. First, there are speech-independent gestures known as emblems which can be translated into a few words quite easily and are often used as a substitute for words. For example, in North America, the joining of the thumb and index finger on one hand with the other fingers upright means that things are “OK.” Typically, the meaning of emblems are culturally specific. Next, there are speech-related gestures, often referred to as illustrators which accompany the verbal stream. Illus- trators can anticipate, supplement, or complete verbal

Page 4: NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION 463 - Filozofski Fakultetibrdar/komunikacija/seminari/LaFrance, 2000 - Nonverb… · NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION . body orientation, engage in more eye contact,

466 NON-WESTERN THERAPIES

description by depicting metaphorical as well as literal relationships: they can accent and emphasize verbal points; and they can deliberately or inadvertently con- tradict verbal statements. The latter have sometimes been termed leakage cues or clues to deception. Other il- lustrators, sometimes referred to as interaction gestures, assist in directing the flow of conversation and effecting processes of inclusion or exclusion. And the presence of gestures by speakers tend to have the effect of fore- stalling verbal intrusion by listeners.

There are also body movements that are directed toward oneself. These gestures, sometimes referred to as self-adapters, include self-touching behaviors like stroking oneself or twirling one’s hair. Researchers have hypothesized that self-touching behaviors occur in situations in which people are experiencing psycholog- ical discomfort.

The literal distances that people adopt vis-a-vis each other, sometimes known as territoriality, appear to change depending on individual proclivities, interper- sonal context, and cultural differences. Although peo- ple tend to move closer to those with whom they want more involvement, the behavior can sometimes trigger feelings of being invaded. Many studies have shown that too close approach by strangers is often met with withdrawal either by moving away or by other nonver- bal signs of rejection, such as hostile glances and turn- ing or leaning away. These observations led to the more general idea that depending upon the nature of the interpersonal relationship at hand, there is an appro- priate level of nonverbal immediacy. According to the intimacy-equilibrium hypothesis, too close or too dis- tant interactions will be met with a corresponding cor- rection in nonverbal behavior. So if one person is per- ceived to be looking too much or standing too close, the target can respond by orienting their eyes or their bodies away from the intrusive other.

Lastly, vocal cues like loudness, pitch, and tempo, and voice characteristics like breathiness, nasality, and raspiness lead perceivers, not always wisely, to assume that they are indicators of personality. Although some personality characteristics may be associated with par- ticular vocal attributes, the research tends for the most part to show that there is greater agreement among perceivers as to what vocal characteristics go with what traits than there is actual accuracy. However, evidence does suggest that various emotional states are associ- ated with distinctive vocal patterns. For instance, ela- tion is associated with higher average frequency, greater frequency range and variability, higher loud- ness, and faster rate.

In sum, nonverbal communication subsumes many different channels and is used in the service of many psychological and social functions. It is also highly var- iable across place and group with the consequence that there is no one-to-one correspondence between any

nonverbal cue and any specific psychological disposi- tion or state. Nonetheless, human beings use a sub- stantial array of nonverbal behaviors for communicat- ing intended and unintended messages.

[See also Sign Languages.]

Bibliography

Allport, G. W.. & Vernon, P. E. (1933). Studies in expressive movement. New York: Macmillan.

Birdwhistell, R. L. (1970). Kinesics and context: Essays on body motion communication. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Darwin, C. (1872). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. London: John Murray.

Deaux, K.. & LaFrance, M. (1998). Gender. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G . Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. I. pp. 788-827). New York: McGraw-Hill.

DePaulo, B. M., & Friedman. H. S. (1998). Nonverbal com- munication. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, 8.1 G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2,

pp. 3-40), New York: McGraw-Hill. Dovidio, J. F., Ellyson, S. L.. Keating, C. F., Heltman. K.. &

Brown, C. E. (1988). The relationship of social power to visual displays of dominance between men and women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54?

Ekman, P. (1972). Universals and cultural differences in facial expressions of emotion. In J. K. Cole (Ed.), Ne- braska symposium on motivation, 1971 (pp. 207-283). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Ekman. P., & Friesen, W. V. (1969). The repertoire of non- verbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage and coding. Semiotica, I, 49-98.

Freud, S. (1959). CoZlected papers. New York: Basic Books. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life.

Garden City, NY Doubleday Anchor. LaFrance, M. (1979). Nonverbal synchrony and rapport:

Analysis by the cross lag panel technique. Social Psy- chology Quarterly, 42, 66-71.

Mehrabian. A. (1969). Significance of posture and position in the communication of attitude and status relation- ships. Psychological Bulletin, 71. 359-372.

Russell, J. A. (1994). Is there universal recognition of emo- tion from facial expression? A review of the cross- cultural studies. PsychoZogicaZ Bulletin, 115, 102-141.

233-242.

Marianne LaPrance

NON-WESTERN THERAPIES. Non-Western alterna- tives to talk therapy include many different means of restoring a client’s healthy balance. The label Western reflects more of a political than geographic reality in the counseling literature, with many Westernized influ- ences in non-Western geographic areas and vice versa. It is an oversimplification to polarize Western and non-