Topic 1: Principles and Functions of Nonverbal Communication

Activity 2: Reading – Introduction to Human Communication

Please read the following text which introduces you to an Introduction to Human Communication.

^{This activity contains text from 4.1: Principles and Functions of Nonverbal Communication which is shared under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Anonymous via source content that was edited to the style and standards of the LibreTexts platform. Minor changes for readability, to add Canadian context, and to add illustrations as cited from other sources.}

As defined in Unit 1, a communication channel is the sensory route on which a message travels. Verbal/oral communication relies on only one channel because spoken language is transmitted through sound and picked up by our ears. Nonverbal communication, on the other hand, can be taken in by all five of our senses. This unit focuses on visual and auditory channels because most of our communication relies on these two channels. However, we can also receive messages and generate meaning through touch, taste, and smell. Touch is an especially powerful form of nonverbal communication that we will discuss in this unit, but we will not address taste and smell because these channels have not yet received as much scholarly attention and we cannot address them with as much confidence as the other senses.

To further define nonverbal communication, we need to distinguish between vocal and verbal aspects of communication. Verbal and nonverbal communication include both vocal and nonvocal elements, and Table 4.1.1 shows the relationship among vocal, nonvocal, verbal, and nonverbal aspects of communication. A vocal element of verbal communication is spoken words—for example, “Come back here.” A vocal element of nonverbal communication is paralanguage, which is the vocalized but not verbal part of a spoken message, such as speaking rate, volume, and pitch. Nonvocal elements of verbal communication include the use of unspoken symbols to convey meaning. Writing and American Sign Language (ASL) are nonvocal examples of verbal communication and are not considered nonverbal communication. Nonvocal elements of nonverbal communication include body language such as gestures, facial expressions, and eye contact. Gestures are nonvocal and nonverbal because most of them do not refer to a specific word in the way that a written or signed symbol does.

Table 4.4.1: Verbal and Nonverbal Communication

(Hargie, 2001, p. 45)

^{Adapted by TRU from 4.1: Principles and Functions of Nonverbal Communication, Table 4.1.1, which is shared under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Anonymous via source content.}

Principles of Nonverbal Communication

Nonverbal communication has a distinct history and serves separate evolutionary functions from verbal communication. For example, nonverbal communication is primarily based on biology, while verbal communication is primarily based on culture. This difference is because some nonverbal communication has the same meaning across cultures while no verbal communication systems share that same universal recognizability (Andersen, 1999, p. 17). Nonverbal communication also evolved earlier than verbal communication and served an early and important survival function that helped humans later develop verbal communication. While some of our nonverbal communication abilities, like our sense of smell, lost strength as our verbal capacities increased, other abilities like paralanguage and movement have grown alongside verbal complexity. The fact that nonverbal communication is processed by an older part of our brain makes it more instinctual and involuntary than verbal communication.

Nonverbal Communication Conveys Important Interpersonal and Emotional Messages

You’ve probably heard that more meaning is generated from nonverbal communication than from verbal. Some studies have claimed that 90% of our meaning is derived from nonverbal signals, but more recent and reliable findings claim that it is closer to 65% (Guerrero & Floyd, 2006, p. 2). We may rely more on nonverbal signals in situations when verbal and nonverbal messages conflict and when emotional or relational communication is taking place (Hargie, 2011, p. 47). For example, when someone asks a question and we’re not sure about the “angle” they are taking, we may focus on nonverbal cues to fill in the meaning. For example, the question “What are you doing tonight?” could mean any number of things, but we could rely on posture, tone of voice, and eye contact to see if the person is just curious, suspicious, or hinting that they would like company for the evening. We also put more weight on nonverbal communication when determining a person’s credibility. For example, if a classmate delivers a speech in class and their verbal content seems well-researched and unbiased, but their nonverbal communication is poor (for example, their voice is monotone, they avoid eye contact, they fidget), they will likely be viewed as less credible. Conversely, in some situations, verbal communication might carry more meaning than nonverbal communication. In interactions in which information exchange is the focus, at a briefing at work, for example, verbal communication likely accounts for more of the meaning generated. Despite this exception, a key principle of nonverbal communication is that it often takes on more meaning in interpersonal and/or emotional exchanges.

About 65% of the meaning we derive during interactions comes from nonverbal communication.

Nonverbal Communication Is More Involuntary than Verbal

There are some instances in which we verbally communicate involuntarily. These types of exclamations are often verbal responses to a surprising stimulus. For example, we say “owww!” when we step on something that hurts or scream “stop!” when we see someone heading toward danger. Involuntary nonverbal signals are much more common than verbal ones. Although most nonverbal communication isn’t completely involuntary, it is more frequently below our consciousness than verbal communication is, and thus usually more difficult to control.

The involuntary nature of much nonverbal communication makes it difficult to control or “fake.” For example, although you can consciously smile a little and shake hands with someone when you first see them, it is difficult to fake that you’re “happy” to meet someone. Nonverbal communication leaks out in ways that expose our underlying thoughts or feelings.

Spokespeople, lawyers, or other public representatives who are the “face” of a politician, celebrity, corporation, or organization must learn to control their facial expressions and other nonverbal communication so they can effectively convey the message of their employer or client without exposing their personal thoughts and feelings. Poker players, therapists, police officers, doctors, teachers, and actors are also in professions that often require them to have significant awareness of and control over their nonverbal communication.

Have you ever tried to conceal your surprise, suppress your anger, or act joyful even when you weren’t? Most people whose careers don’t involve conscious manipulation of nonverbal signals find it difficult to control or suppress them. While we can consciously decide to stop sending verbal messages, our nonverbal communication always has the potential of generating meaning for another person. When someone decides to shut someone else out by not communicating with them, they still send a message with a “blank” stare (still a facial expression) and lack of movement (still a gesture). In this sense, nonverbal communication is “irrepressible” (Andersen, 1999, p. 17), or impossible to control.

Nonverbal Communication Is More Ambiguous

In Unit 3 on Verbal Communication, we learned that the symbolic and abstract nature of language can lead to misunderstandings. Nonverbal communication is even more ambiguous. As with verbal communication, most nonverbal signals can be linked to multiple meanings. But unlike words, many nonverbal signals do not have a singular meaning. If you’ve ever had someone wink at you and didn’t know why, you’ve probably experienced this uncertainty. Did they wink to express their affection for you, their pleasure with something you did, or because you share some inside knowledge or joke?

Just as we look at context clues in a sentence or paragraph to derive meaning from a particular word, we can look for context clues in various sources of information such as the physical environment, other nonverbal signals, or verbal communication to make sense of a particular nonverbal cue. Unlike verbal communication, however, nonverbal communication doesn’t have explicit rules of grammar that bring structure, order, and agreed-upon patterns of usage. Instead, we implicitly learn norms of nonverbal communication, which leads to variance in nonverbal cues. In general, we exhibit more idiosyncrasies in our usage of nonverbal communication than we do with verbal communication, which increases the ambiguity of nonverbal communication.

Nonverbal Communication Is More Credible

Although we can rely on verbal communication to fill in the blanks sometimes left by nonverbal expressions, we often put more trust into what people do over what they say. This trust in nonverbal communication is especially true in times of stress or danger when our behaviours become more instinctual and we rely on older systems of thinking and acting that evolved before our ability to speak and write (Andersen, 1999, p. 17). This innate means of communication creates intuitive feelings about the genuineness of nonverbal communication, and this genuineness relates back to our earlier discussion about the sometimes involuntary and often subconscious nature of nonverbal communication. An example of the innate nature of nonverbal signals can be found in children who have been blind since birth but still exhibit the same facial expressions as other children. In short, the involuntary or subconscious nature of nonverbal communication makes it less easy to fake, which makes it seem more honest and credible. We will learn more about the role that nonverbal communication plays in deception later in this chapter.

Functions of Nonverbal Communication

A primary function of nonverbal communication is to convey meaning by reinforcing, substituting for, or contradicting verbal communication. Nonverbal communication is also used to influence others and regulate conversational flow. Perhaps even more important are the ways in which nonverbal communication functions as a central part of relational communication and identity expression.

Nonverbal Communication Conveys Meaning

Nonverbal communication conveys meaning by reinforcing, substituting for, or contradicting verbal communication. As we have already learned, verbal and nonverbal communication are two parts of the same system that often work side by side, helping us to generate meaning. In terms of reinforcing verbal communication, gestures can help describe a space or shape that another person is unfamiliar with in ways that words alone cannot. Gestures also reinforce basic meaning—for example, pointing to the door when you tell someone to leave. Facial expressions reinforce the emotional states we convey through verbal communication. For example, smiling while telling a funny story can better convey your emotions. Vocal variation can help us emphasize a particular part of a message, which helps reinforce a word or sentence’s meaning. For example, saying “How was your weekend?” conveys a different meaning than “How was your weekend?”

Nonverbal communication can substitute for verbal communication in a variety of ways. Language barriers are an example of situations in which nonverbal communication can convey meaning when verbal communication isn’t effective. For example, babies who have not yet developed language skills make facial expressions, at a few months old, that are similar to those of adults and therefore can generate meaning (Oster et al., 1992, p. 1115–31). People who have developed language skills but can’t use them because they have temporarily or permanently lost them or because they are using incompatible language codes, like in some cross-cultural encounters, can still communicate nonverbally. Although it is always a good idea to learn some of the local language when travelling, gestures such as pointing or demonstrating the size or shape of something may suffice in basic interactions.

Nonverbal communication is also useful in a quiet situation when verbal communication would be disturbing. For example, you may use a gesture to signal to a friend that you’re ready to leave the library. Crowded or loud places can also impede verbal communication and lead people to rely more on nonverbal messages. Getting a server or bartender’s attention with a hand gesture is definitely more polite than yelling, “Hey!” Finally, there are simply times when we know it’s better not to say something aloud. If you want to point out a person’s unusual behaviour or signal to a friend that you think their date is a problem, you’re probably more likely to do that nonverbally.

Nonverbal communication can convey meaning by contradicting verbal communication. We often perceive nonverbal communication to be more credible than verbal communication. This is especially true when we receive mixed messages, or messages in which verbal and nonverbal signals contradict each other. For example, a person may say, “You can’t do anything right!” in a mean tone but follow that up with a wink, which could indicate the person is teasing or joking. Mixed messages lead to uncertainty and confusion on the part of receivers, which leads us to look for more information to try to determine which message is more credible. If we are unable to resolve the discrepancy, we are likely to react negatively and potentially withdraw from the interaction (Hargie, 2011, p. 47). Persistent mixed messages can lead to relational distress and might hurt a person’s credibility in professional settings.

We send mixed messages when our verbal and nonverbal communication contradict each other.

Nonverbal Communication Influences Others

Nonverbal communication can be used to influence people in a variety of ways, but the most common way is through deception. Deception is typically thought of as the intentional act of altering information to influence another person, which means that it extends beyond lying to include concealing, omitting, or exaggerating information. While verbal communication is to blame for the content of the deception, nonverbal communication partners with the language through deceptive acts to be more convincing. Because most of us intuitively believe that nonverbal communication is more credible than verbal communication, we often intentionally try to control our nonverbal communication when we are engaging in deception. Likewise, we try to evaluate other people’s nonverbal communication to determine the veracity of their messages. Students in Communication courses may be surprised that we discuss the prevalence of deception, but their surprise diminishes once they realize that deception isn’t always malevolent, mean, or hurtful. Deception has negative connotations, but people engage in deception for many reasons, including to excuse our own mistakes, to be polite to others, or to influence others’ behaviours or perceptions.

Deception served an important evolutionary purpose: species that are capable of deception have a higher survival rate. Other animals engage in nonverbal deception that helps them attract mates, hide from predators, and trap prey (Andersen, 1999, p. 17). To put it bluntly, the better at deception a creature is, the more likely it is to survive. So, over time, the humans that were better liars were the ones that got their genes passed on. But the fact that lying played a part in our survival as a species doesn’t give us a license to lie.

Aside from deception, we can use nonverbal communication to “take the edge off” a critical or unpleasant message in an attempt to influence the reaction of the other person. We can also use eye contact and proximity to get someone to move or leave an area. For example, hungry diners waiting to snag a first-come-first-serve table in a crowded restaurant send messages to the people who have already eaten and paid that it’s time to go. People on competition reality television shows like Survivor, Big Brother, and The Mole play a “social game.” This game involves the manipulation of verbal and nonverbal cues to send strategic messages about oneself in an attempt to influence others. Nonverbal cues such as length of conversational turn, volume, posture, touch, eye contact, and choices of clothing and accessories can become part of a player’s social game strategy. Although reality television isn’t necessarily a true reflection of real life, people still engage in competition and strategically change their communication to influence others, making it important to be aware of how we nonverbally influence others and how they may try to influence us.

Nonverbal Communication Regulates Conversational Flow

Conversational interaction has been likened to a dance in which each person has to make moves and take turns without stepping on the other’s toes. Nonverbal communication helps us regulate our conversations so we don’t end up constantly interrupting each other or waiting in awkward silences between speaker turns. Pitch helps us cue others into our conversational intentions: a rising pitch typically indicates a question and a falling pitch indicates the end of a thought or the end of a conversational turn. We can also use a falling pitch to indicate closure, which can be very useful at the end of a speech to signal to the audience that you are finished, which cues the applause and prevents an awkward silence that the speaker ends up filling with, “That’s it” or “Thank you.” We also signal that our turn is coming to an end by stopping hand gestures and shifting our eye contact to the person who we think will speak next (Hargie, 2011, p. 47). Conversely, we can “hold the floor” with nonverbal signals even when we’re not exactly sure what we’re going to say next. Repeating a hand gesture or using one or more verbal fillers can extend our turn even though we are not verbally communicating.

Nonverbal Communication Affects Relationships

To successfully relate to other people, we must possess some skill at encoding and decoding nonverbal communication. The nonverbal messages we send and receive influence our relationships in positive and negative ways and can work to bring people together or push them apart. Nonverbal communication in the form of tie signs, immediacy behaviours, and expressions of emotion are just three of many examples that illustrate how nonverbal communication affects our relationships.

Tie signs are nonverbal cues that communicate intimacy and signal the connection between two people. These relational indicators can be objects such as wedding rings or tattoos that are symbolic of another person or the relationship, actions such as sharing the same drinking glass, or touch behaviours such as hand-holding (Afifi & Johnson, 2005, p. 190). Touch behaviours are the most frequently studied tie signs and can communicate much about a relationship based on the area being touched, the length of time, and the intensity of the touch. Kisses and hugs, for example, are considered tie signs, but a kiss on the cheek is different from a kiss on the mouth and a full embrace is different from a half embrace. If you consider yourself a “people watcher,” take note of the various tie signs you see people use and what they might say about the relationship.

Tie signs such as wedding rings and hand-holding communicate the relationship between people.

Immediacy behaviours play a central role in bringing people together and have been identified by some scholars as the most important function of nonverbal communication (Andersen & Andersen, 2005, p. 113–26). Immediacy behaviours are verbal and nonverbal behaviours that lessen real or perceived physical and psychological distance between communicators and include things like smiling, nodding, making eye contact, and occasionally engaging in social, polite, or professional touch (Comadena et al., 2007). Immediacy behaviours are a good way of creating rapport, or a friendly and positive connection between people. Skilled nonverbal communicators are more likely to be able to create rapport with others due to attention-getting expressiveness, warm initial greetings, and an ability to get “in tune” with others, which conveys empathy (Riggio, 1992, p. 12). These skills are important to help initiate and maintain relationships.

While verbal communication is our primary tool for solving problems and providing detailed instructions, nonverbal communication is our primary tool for communicating emotions. This makes sense when we remember that nonverbal communication emerged before verbal communication and was the channel through which we expressed anger, fear, and love for thousands of years of human history (Andersen, 1999, p. 17). Touch and facial expressions are two primary ways through which we express emotions nonverbally. Love is a primary emotion that we express nonverbally and forms the basis of our close relationships. Although no single facial expression for love has been identified, it is expressed through prolonged eye contact, close interpersonal distances, increased touch, and increased time spent together, among other things. Given many people’s limited emotional vocabulary, nonverbal expressions of emotion are central to our relationships.

“Getting Real”: Teachers and Immediacy Behaviours

A considerable amount of research has been done on teachers’ use of immediacy behaviours, which points to the importance of this communication concept in teaching professions (Richmond, Lane, & McCroskey, 2006). Immediacy behaviours are verbal and nonverbal behaviours that reduce real or perceived physical and psychological distance between communicators (Comadena, Hunt, & Simonds, 2007). Specific nonverbal behaviours have been found to increase or decrease perceived levels of immediacy, and such behaviours impact student learning, teacher’s evaluations, and the teacher-student relationship (Richmond et al., 2006, p. 168). Even those who do not plan on going into teaching as a career can benefit from learning about immediacy behaviours, as they can also be used productively in other interpersonal contexts such as between a manager and employee, a salesperson and a client, or a politician and constituent. Research consistently shows that effective use of immediacy behaviours increases learning in various contexts and at various levels. Aside from enhancing student learning, the effective use of immediacy behaviours also leads to better evaluations by students, which can have a direct impact on a teacher’s career. While student evaluations of teachers take various factors into consideration, judgments of personality may be formed after only brief initial impressions. Research shows that students make character assumptions about teachers after only brief exposure to their nonverbal behaviours. Based on nonverbal cues such as frowning, head nodding, pointing, sitting, smiling, standing, strong gestures, weak gestures, and walking, students may or may not evaluate a teacher as open, attentive, confident, dominant, honest, likable, anxious, professional, supportive, or enthusiastic.

The following are examples of immediacy behaviours that can be effectively used by teachers, and may also be valuable in business or professional settings:

• Moving around the room during class activities, lectures, and discussions (reduces physical distance)
• Keeping the line of sight open between the teacher’s body and the students by avoiding or only briefly standing behind lecterns / computer tables or sitting behind a desk while directly interacting with students (reduces physical distance)
• Being expressive and animated with facial expressions, gestures, and voice (demonstrates enthusiasm)
• Smiling (creates a positive and open climate)
• Making frequent eye contact with students (communicates attentiveness and interest)
• Calling students by name (reduces perceived psychological distance)
• Making appropriate self-disclosures to students about personal thoughts, feelings, or experiences (reduces perceived psychological distance; creates open climate)

Teachers who are judged as less immediate are more likely to sit, touch their heads, shake instead of nod their heads, use sarcasm, avoid eye contact, and use less expressive nonverbal behaviours. Finally, immediacy behaviours affect the teacher-student relationship: they help establish rapport, which increases students’ investment in the class and learning materials, increases motivation, increases communication between teacher and student, creates a sense of mutual respect, reduces challenging behaviour by students, and reduces anxiety.

Activity 3: Personal Reflection Journal – Reflection Question 2

Please answer the following reflection in any format you like (such as in writing, a video, note form, or a drawing). Save your reflection responses in one large file so you can refer to them later in the course if needed.

Activity 4: Personal Reflection Journal – Reflection Question 3

Please answer the following reflection in any format you like (such as in writing, a video, note form, or a drawing). Save your reflection responses in one large file so you can refer to them later in the course if needed.

^{This activity contains text from 4.1: Principles and Functions of Nonverbal Communication which is shared under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Anonymous via source content that was edited to the style and standards of the LibreTexts platform. Minor changes for readability, to add Canadian context, and to add illustrations as cited from other sources.}

Nonverbal Communication Expresses Our Identities

Nonverbal communication expresses who we are. Our identities (the groups to which we belong, our cultures, our hobbies and interests, etc.) are conveyed nonverbally through the way we set up our living and working spaces, the clothes we wear, the way we carry ourselves, and the accents and tones of our voices. Our physical bodies give others impressions about who we are, and some of these features are more under our control than others. Height, for example, has been shown to influence how people are treated and perceived in various contexts. Our level of attractiveness also influences our identities and how people perceive us. Although we can temporarily alter our height or looks—for example, with different shoes, hairstyle, or use of makeup—we can only permanently alter our features using more invasive and costly measures such as cosmetic surgery. We have more control over some other aspects of nonverbal communication in terms of how we communicate our identities. For example, the way we carry and present ourselves through posture, eye contact, and tone of voice can be altered to present ourselves as warm or distant depending on the context.

Aside from our physical body, artifacts — the objects and possessions that surround us — also communicate our identities. Examples of artifacts include our clothes, jewelry, and decor. In all the previous examples, implicit norms or explicit rules can affect how we present ourselves nonverbally. For example, in a particular workplace it may be a norm (implicit) for people in management positions to dress casually, or it may be a rule (explicit) that different levels of employees wear different uniforms or follow particular dress codes. We can also use nonverbal communication to express identity characteristics that do not match up with who we actually think we are. Through changes to nonverbal signals, a capable person can try to appear helpless, a guilty person can try to appear innocent, or an uninformed person can try to appear credible.

Media Attributions

Crazy Cake. (2021, March 10). Person with drawing of winking face obscuring their actual face [Photograph]. Unsplash. https://unsplash.com/photos/woman-holding-white-printer-paper-08vpbfpq_II

Dumlao, N. (2018, May 29). Two people one with a wedding ring holding hands [Photograph]. Unsplash. https://unsplash.com/photos/man-and-woman-holding-each-others-hands-_-prYEEf0v4

Ferrer, C. (2018, February 4). Person with hands over their mouth [Photograph]. Unsplash. https://unsplash.com/photos/woman-in-black-hooded-jacket-by-brown-plant-4JpyAldl-KI

Proxyclick Visitor Management System. (2019, May 29). Open workspace with employees casually dressed [Photograph]. Unsplash. https://unsplash.com/photos/man-standing-beside-another-sitting-man-using-computer-l90zRbWvCoE

References

Afifi, W. A., & Johnson, M. L. (2005). The nature and function of tie-signs. In V. Manusov (Ed.), The sourcebook of nonverbal measures: Going beyond words. Lawrence Erlbaum, 2005.

Andersen, P. A. (1999). Nonverbal communication: Forms and functions. Mayfield.

Andersen, P. A., & Andersen, J. F. (2005). Measures of perceived nonverbal immediacy. In V. Manusov (Ed.), The sourcebook of nonverbal measures: Going beyond words. Lawrence Erlbaum.

Anonymous. (n.d.). Section 4.1: Principles and functions of nonverbal communication. In Communication in the real world: An introduction to communication studies. LibreTexts. https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Communication/Introduction_to_Communication/Communication_in_the_Real_World_-_An_Introduction_to_Communication_Studies/04%3A_Nonverbal_Communication/4.01%3A_Principles_and_Functions_of_Nonverbal_Communication

Comadena, M. E., Hunt, S. K., & Simonds, C. J. (2007). The effects of teacher clarity, nonverbal immediacy, and caring on student motivation, affective and cognitive learning. Communication Research Reports, 24(3), 241.

Hargie, O. (2011). Skilled interpersonal interaction: Research, theory, and practice (5th ed.). Routledge.

Guerrero, L. K., & Floyd, K. (2006). Nonverbal communication in close relationships. Lawrence Erlbaum.

Oster, H., Hegley, D., & Nagel, L. (1992). Adult judgments and fine-grained analysis of infant facial expressions: Testing the validity of a priori coding formulas. Developmental Psychology, 28(6), 1115–31.

Richmond, V. P., Lane, D. R., & McCroskey, J. C. (2006). Teacher immediacy and the teacher-student relationship. In T. P. Mottet, V. P. Richmond, & J. C. McCroskey (Eds.), Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives. Pearson.

Riggio, R. E. (1992). Social interaction skills and nonverbal behavior. In R. S. Feldman (Ed.), Applications of nonverbal behavior theories and research. Lawrence Erlbaum.