Exploring Nonverbal Communication (long)

Post Reply New Topic

Reading through my psych text books I found some interesting information about body language and gaze and I wanted to share it with the rest of the WP community. These excerpts come from chapter three of the book cited below the post.

Considering that most of us have issues with non-verbal communication, I thought this information would be interesting food for thought.
--------------------------
Nonverbal behavior consists of all features of an interaction that are not words. Nonverbal literally means “not words” (DePaulo & Friedman, 1998, p. 3): “the dynamic, mostly face-to-face exchange of information through cues other than words” (p. 4). In a play, nonverbal behaviors are everything supplied by actors when they are given a script, which contains basically only the words. Nonverbal behavior serves both as an independent variable (presented in photographs, audio records, visual records, and actual interactions) and as a dependent variable (measures of facial expressions, vocal cues, and body movement) (Gray & Ambady, 2006).

Special features characterize perceiving nonverbal behaviors. In comparison with other kinds of cues in ordinary personology, nonverbal cues stand out in a number of ways (Schneider, Hastorf, & Ellsworth, 1979, pp. 122–136). Nonverbal behavior deals in affect more than verbal cues do. Because nonverbal behavior is fleeting and changeable, it is especially suited to communicating emotions and approach-avoidance responses to others. For example, according to meta-analyses, people like other people who make eye contact, smile, and lean forward (Tickle-Degnen & Rosenthal, 1990), all positive approach behaviors.

Moreover, most people believe nonverbal behavior to be unintentional and uncontrollable, so they trust it as a genuine representation of other people’s feelings, more than, say, the words spoken. In contrast, social psychologists show that people constantly regulate their nonverbal behavior, that “people’s nonverbal behaviors are exquisitely responsive to self-presentational contingencies” (DePaulo & Friedman, 1998, p. 15).

Nonverbal behavior is also special in that it precedes verbal behavior in human development. Babies cry, frown, and smile long before they can express their feelings in words. Because nonverbal expressions start early, involve feelings, and are relatively unconscious (if not uncontrollable), they undergird perceptions of other people.
Finally, nonverbal behavior is special in being relatively ambiguous, more so than verbal behavior. Its meaning depends on context. For example, staring can be interpreted as a sign of attraction or aggression, but who is staring at whom and in what context can make the meaning utterly clear. Both the facial expression and the circumstances combine to signal emotions (Carroll & Russell, 1996). Being heavily influenced by context makes nonverbal behavior a good topic for social psychologists, who focus on the effects of the social situation.

Gaze, Attention, and Intention
Nonverbal coordination is not the only way to communicate attraction. A direct gaze, at a minimum, communicates attention (Frischen, Bayliss, & Tipper, 2007) and perhaps intention toward its target. Under some circumstances, gaze communicates a benign intent but under others a malign intent. For example, an approaching, direct-gaze, angry face signals danger, so people readily detect it (Adams, Ambady, Macrae, & Kleck, 2006). In smiling or more neutral faces, direct gaze is attractive and likeable (Jones, DeBruine, Little, Conway, & Feinberg, 2006; Mason, Tatkov, & Macrae, 2005); this fits findings on the typical positivity of eye contact (Tickle-Degnen & Rosenthal, 1990). Direct gaze tends to fit approach emotions, whereas averted gaze tends to reflect avoidance emotions such as fear (Adams & Kleck, 2005). In any case, a direct-gaze face is memorable (Mason, Hood, & Macrae, 2004), even for children (Hood, Macrae, Cole-Davies, & Dias, 2003).

Indirect gaze is also informative. When gaze is averted, people efficiently orient in that direction (Quadflieg, Mason, & Macrae, 2004). Gaze-detecting behavior occurs as early as newborns (Frischen et al., 2007). People rapidly infer that a face consistently looking away from a task-target is untrustworthy (Bayliss & Tipper, 2006). The importance of detecting gaze—and by extension, the target’s intention—appears in the gaze-related activity of the superior temporal sulcus (STS) area of the brain (Haxby, Hoffman, & Gobbini, 2002), a region that matters to inferences of intent more generally, as we will soon see.

Summary of Nonverbal Behavior

Even in situations less dramatic than observing one person threaten another with a shotgun, as in the Ronald Opus story that opened this chapter, nonverbal behavior serves perceivers’ core social motives to understand other people, to control or at least influence their responses, and to present self effectively. Nonverbal behavior supplies an emotional understanding of other people, in a medium that people believe to be genuine, even if research indicates that people do lie but are not especially good at nonverbally detecting deception. Sometimes people avoid detecting face-saving fibs that grease the social wheels. Following predictable but unwritten rules, people communicate effectively in nonverbal exchanges by coordinating interaction to indicate attraction and by following another’s gaze to infer attentional focus. Nonverbal behavior facilitates the motive to understand others’ feelings in ordinary personology.


Reference:
Fiske, S. T. (2010). Social beings Core motives in social psychology (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

I am surprised no one was interested in this. Perhaps it was not seen so consider this a bump!

It goes to show that as aspies. We are actors in a live stage performance performing before a very unforgiving audience.

Funny. I always relied on the spoken word, until someone gives me the reason to no longer trust their spoken word (essentially, when the actions no longer matched the words).

I pretty much ignore the nonverbal, unless it is obvious. As I find it difficult to guess the cues. And, still, when it is considered obvious (say someone crying), I often have doubts if it is real or contrived.

I suppose that is one of the reasons we are different. I rather take words over actions into account unless they are very obvious. If someone is yelling it more than likely means the message is supposed to be unpleasant.

Keep in mind the information was designed as a model to explain typical behavior. And this is actually material from a master's program of psychology.

I probably should have been more precise in my language. When I said, “when the actions no longer matched the words”, the actions I was referring to was not what I consider to be nonverbal communication. It was actions taken minutes, hours, days or possibly weeks after the fact.

Some examples:

Boss: "Project A is the most important project for the company. You need to continue working hard to get this done. Make it happen."
Then, later in week, Boss pulls most resources from Project A

OR

Person: "I am going to stop smoking cigarettes."
Then, later in afternoon, person is outside, smoking a cigarette.

To me, the actions are not congruent with the words. Eventually, I learn to question the spoken words that the person says (as they cannot be trusted).

I am guessing that neurotypicals pick up on the nonverbals (so, they don’t necessarily believe what was actually said).

I can understand now what you are saying and yes. It takes I think for us in the spectrum a lot more demonstrative action for us to realize Okay hold on . . .! That is not right than merely while having an exchange with someone. Which can be perilous, because we may not realize danger until we are in the middle of it.