Preview

NONNEREML COMMUNIOmON
NONNERBA COMMUNICATION
ALBERT MEHMBMN
Ö Routledge
Taylor & Francis Group
LONDON AND NEW YORK
First published 1972 by Transaction Publishers
Published 2017 by Routledge

2 Park Square, M i l t o n Park, Abingdon, O x o n O X 1 4 4 R N
711 T h i r d Avenue, N e w Y o r k , N Y 10017, U S A
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
Copyright © 1972 by A l b e r t Mehrabian.
A l l rights reserved. N o part o f this book may be reprinted or reproduced or

utilised i n any f o r m or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
k n o w n or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or i n
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission i n w r i t i n g
f r o m the publishers.
Notice:
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and
are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Library o f Congress Catalog Number: 2006052288
Library o f Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Mehrabian, Albert.
Noneverbal communication / A l b e r t Mehrabian.
p. cm.
Inlcudes bibliographical references and index.
I S B N 978-0-202-30966-8 (alk. paper)
1. B o d y language. I . Title.
BF637.C45M43 2007
153.6 9--dc22
2006052288
I S B N 13: 978-0-202-30966-8 (pbk)

To
M y D e a r F r i e n d a n d Colleague
MORTON WIENER
Preface
T h i s v o l u m e deals w i t h n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n and, m o r e specifically,

w i t h t h e subtle ways i n w h i c h people convey t h e i r feelings. People are
discouraged, generally, f r o m an overt ( l i n g u i s t i c ) expression of t h e i r
feelings, so t h e y convey t h e m i n less consensual a n d less easily recog
n i z a b l e forms. Examples are subtle variations i n speech, such as t h e speech
errors n o t e d b y F r e u d , v o c a l qualities of speech, such as sarcasm, a n d
various postures, movements, a n d gestures.
I n contrast to t h e w e l l - d e f i n e d codes t h a t are available for languages,
the codes for these m o r e subtle c o m m u n i c a t i o n s r e m a i n i m p l i c i t . Never
theless, e x p e r i m e n t a l findings show some consensus i n the e n c o d i n g as
w e l l as t h e d e c o d i n g of n o n v e r b a l signals. I n e x a m i n i n g t h e basis of this
c o m m o n , t h o u g h u n v e r b a l i z e d , consensus, our approach w i l l emphasize
feelings, attitudes, a n d evaluations as the basic referents of n o n v e r b a l
behavior. T h e thesis is that, as is the case w h e n e x a m i n i n g v e r b a l con
cepts, m o r e t h a n h a l f the variance i n t h e significance of n o n v e r b a l signals
can be described i n terms of a t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l f r a m e w o r k : positiveness,
p o t e n c y or status, a n d responsiveness. I t is also r e c o g n i z e d t h a t the unac
c o u n t e d variance bears o n other facets of n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , such
as its r e g u l a t i v e f u n c t i o n i n social i n t e r a c t i o n .
O n e i m p o r t a n t w a y i n w h i c h this a p p r o a c h differs f r o m t h a t e m p l o y e d
i n most available studies i n t h e n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e is
n o t e w o r t h y here. A n y a t t e m p t at a comprehensive d e s c r i p t i o n of findings
i n t h e s t u d y of n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n has to i n c l u d e t h e large n u m b e r s
of b e h a v i o r a l cues t h a t are s t u d i e d ( e.g., eye contact, distance, l e g a n d
foot movements, facial expressions, voice qualities ) . F u r t h e r , the descrip
t i o n s h o u l d also account for ( 1) the relationships a m o n g these cues, ( 2 )
the relationships b e t w e e n these cues a n d t h e feelings, attitudes, a n d per
sonalities of the c o m m u n i c a t o r s , a n d ( 3 ) the qualities of the situations
i n w h i c h t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n s occur. D e s c r i b i n g a l l of these relationships
vii
viii Preface
for each b e h a v i o r a l cue w o u l d y i e l d an enormous c o m p e n d i u m of facts,

w i t h l i t t l e p o s s i b i l i t y for i n t e g r a t i o n . Such a c o l l e c t i o n of facts w o u l d be
come a l l t h e m o r e confusing because of inconsistencies i n results f r o m
different studies t h a t c o u l d be due t o differences i n subject p o p u l a t i o n s
a n d e x p e r i m e n t a l methods. A catalogue of findings, t h e n , w o u l d f a i l t o
p r o v i d e the c o n c e p t u a l economy o f a scientific enterprise.
T o arrive at a parsimonious d e s c r i p t i o n of the large numbers of facts,
our a p p r o a c h uses a t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l f r a m e w o r k t h a t allows a succinct
c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of t h e referents of n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , a n d p r o
vides a basis for t h e consistent f o r m u l a t i o n a n d study of the diverse phe
n o m e n a i n this area. T h u s , the presentation of t h e various studies a n d
results is m o r e i n terms of the proposed three-dimensional f r a m e w o r k
(positiveness, p o t e n c y or status, a n d responsiveness) t h a n i n terms of
specific cues, a l t h o u g h e x p e r i m e n t a l results are of course always based
on t h e o b s e r v a t i o n of specific cues.
T h e g e n e r a l i t y of t h e proposed f r a m e w o r k is e v i d e n t f r o m t h e fact
t h a t i n d i v i d u a l differences i n n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n can be specifically
described i n terms of a characteristic a b i l i t y a n d preference for c o m m u n i
c a t i n g a c e r t a i n level of positiveness, potency, a n d responsiveness t o
others. Also, c o m m u n i c a t i o n behaviors can be g r o u p e d i n terms of t h e
referents t h a t t h e y most effectively convey. F i n a l l y , inconsistent c o m
m u n i c a t i o n s can be defined a n d measured i n terms of t h e degree of dis
crepancy t h a t is i m p l i e d b y different behaviors simultaneously p r o d u c e d
b y a speaker. T h u s , t o t a l inconsistency for any t w o channels can be
measured i n terms of t h e distance i n t h e t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l space b e t w e e n
the referent of one c h a n n e l a n d t h a t of t h e other.
I hope t h a t sufficient data is p r o v i d e d f r o m diverse social situations
t o show the relevance a n d v a l u e of t h e proposed three-dimensional
scheme for studies of n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n . O n e of t h e b y - p r o d u c t s
of t h i s a p p r o a c h is t h a t i t p r o v i d e s t h e b a c k g r o u n d for an e m p i r i c a l de
s c r i p t i o n o f social i n t e r a c t i o n . T h i s d e s c r i p t i o n , e x p l o r e d later i n t h e book,
provides some measures of social b e h a v i o r t h a t can b e of value to i n
vestigators i n the social a n d personality areas.
Portions of this b o o k have p r e v i o u s l y b e e n p u b l i s h e d i n a different f o r m
i n " N o n v e r b a l C o m m u n i c a t i o n , " i n Nebraska Symposium on Motivation,
1971, e d i t e d b y James K . C o l e ( L i n c o l n : U n i v e r s i t y of Nebraska Press,
1972). I a m g r a t e f u l to t h e U n i v e r s i t y of Nebraska Press, as w e l l as t o t h e
A c a d e m i c Press, t h e A m e r i c a n Psychological Association, A p p l e t o n - C e n -
t u r y - C r o f t s , D u k e U n i v e r s i t y Press, Psychonomic Society, a n d W a d s w o r t h
P u b l i s h i n g C o m p a n y for t h e i r k i n d permission to use materials f r o m m y
previous p u b l i c a t i o n s .
T h e research t h a t is r e p o r t e d i n this v o l u m e w o u l d n o t have been possi
b l e w i t h o u t t h e m a n y sources of h u m a n a n d financial assistance t h a t I
received. I n i t i a l s m a l l grants f r o m t h e U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a ( g r a n t
PREFACE ix
2189 a n d N a t i o n a l Science F o u n d a t i o n grant 89) a l l o w e d m e t o b e g i n

most o f this w o r k . Subsequent f u n d i n g f r o m grants M H 12629 a n d M i l
13509 f r o m the U n i t e d States P u b l i c H e a l t h Service, a n d GS 2482 f r o m
t h e N a t i o n a l Science F o u n d a t i o n , p r o v i d e d the s u p p o r t n e e d e d to r a p i d l y
accelerate our w o r k i n this area. T h e F e d e r a l W o r k - S t u d y p r o g r a m was
another i m p o r t a n t , t h o u g h i n d i r e c t , source of funds. I t was p a r t i c u l a r l y
g r a t i f y i n g to e m p l o y students i n this p r o g r a m . T h i s g r o u p i n c l u d e d
some o f the most conscientious a n d p r o m i s i n g students w i t h w h o m I have
ever h a d occasion t o come i n contact.
E v e n t h o u g h a l i s t i n g of names is h a r d l y adequate t o express m y ap
p r e c i a t i o n , I do, nevertheless, w a n t t o m e n t i o n t h e f o l l o w i n g students
w h o assisted m e w i t h the experiments: N i k i B o o n , Jerry B r e n n a n , N a n c y
B u r k e , I r a E l l e n b o g e n , Sandy F i n k e l m a n ( G o l d h a b e r ) , C a r e y Fox, L a u r i e
G o m p e r t , C a r o l y n G o r e n , D a v i d H u m p h r e y , James L a n e , Pelayo Lasa,
R o b e r t L a w , A l l a n L o w e , E r n i e N a t h a n , Sylvia N o r m a n , H a r o l d Reznick,
Peter R o d r i g u e z , L a u r i e Snow, Stanley Sue, L a r r y W e n t i n k , Charles W e s t ,
a n d T o n y Z a n n i n i . I w a n t to especially t h a n k m y colleagues a n d g r a d u a t e
students w h o w e r e a c t i v e l y i n v o l v e d i n the design a n d c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n
of some of the experiments: N a n c y Beakel, Shirley D i a m o n d , N o r m a n
E p s t e i n , John F r i a r , Sheldon K s i o n z k y , H e n r y Reed, James Russell, M o r
t o n W i e n e r , M a r t i n W i l l i a m s , a n d Susan Ferris ( Z a i d e l ) . F i n a l l y , I a m
most grateful t o Sherry L e f f e l l , K a t h l e e n D a l z e n , a n d p a r t i c u l a r l y t o
L e n a C h o w , w h o h e l p e d w i t h the e d i t i n g , a n d to D r . Starkey D u n c a n , Jr.
for his h e l p f u l reactions to an earlier version of t h e m a n u s c r i p t .
Contents
Preface vii
1. A Semantic Space for N o n v e r b a l B e h a v i o r 1
2. T h e L a n g u a g e of Posture a n d P o s i t i o n 16
3. Language w i t h i n Language 31
4. I m p l i c i t Rhetoric 54
5. Nonverbal Betrayal of Feeling 84
6. Inconsistent Messages a n d Sarcasm 104
7. Styles a n d A b i l i t i e s i n I m p l i c i t C o m m u n i c a t i o n 133
8. Categories o f Social B e h a v i o r 147
9. Child Communication 159
10. Overview 178
APPENDIX A : Scoring C r i t e r i a for Some Categories of N o n v e r b a l

and I m p l i c i t Verbal Behavior 191
APPENDIX B : Personality Measures R e l a t i n g t o Affective
Communication 199
Bibliography 206
Index 218
1
A Semantic Space For

Nonverbal Behavior
Defining Nonverbal Behavior and its Functions
T h e last decade has seen a tremendous upsurge i n research a n d p o p u l a r

interest i n t h e p h e n o m e n a o f n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n . W h e n e v e r any
t o p i c stimulates a r a p i d a c c u m u l a t i o n of research evidence, p e r i o d i c over
v i e w a n d i n t e g r a t i o n become essential to c o n t i n u e d progress a n d under
s t a n d i n g . Such is t h e a t t e m p t of this v o l u m e , t o r e v i e w t h e m o r e subtle
aspects o f h u m a n c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d t o p r o v i d e a c o n c e p t u a l i n t e g r a t i o n
for one segment of recent findings o n t h e subject.
I n its n a r r o w a n d m o r e accurate sense, " n o n v e r b a l b e h a v i o r " refers to
actions as d i s t i n c t f r o m speech. I t thus includes facial expressions, h a n d
a n d a r m gestures, postures, positions, a n d various m o v e m e n t s of t h e b o d y
or t h e legs a n d feet ( B i r d w h i s t e l l , 1952, 1970; E f r o n , 1941; E k m a n a n d
Friesen, 1969b; E x l i n e a n d W i n t e r s , 1965; H a l l , 1959, 1963, 1966; K e n d o n ,
1967a; M e h r a b i a n , 1971c, 1972; Scheflen, 1964,1965,1966; Sommer, 1 9 6 9 ) .
I n t h e b r o a d e r sense i n w h i c h t h e concept has been used t r a d i t i o n a l l y ,
h o w e v e r , t h e t e r m " n o n v e r b a l b e h a v i o r " is a misnomer, for a v a r i e t y of
subtle aspects o f speech f r e q u e n t l y have been i n c l u d e d i n discussions of
n o n v e r b a l p h e n o m e n a . These i n c l u d e p a r a l i n g u i s t i c or v o c a l phenomena,
such as f u n d a m e n t a l frequency range a n d i n t e n s i t y range, speech errors
or pauses, speech rate, a n d speech d u r a t i o n ( f o r example, Boomer, 1963;
C r y s t a l a n d Q u i r k , 1964; D a v i t z , 1964; D i t t m a n n a n d L l e w e l l y n , 1969;
D u n c a n , 1969; G o l d m a n - E i s l e r , 1968; H u t t a r , 1967; M a h l a n d Schulze,
1964; M a t a r a z z o , W i e n s , a n d Saslow, 1965; M e h r a b i a n , 1965; Pittenger
a n d S m i t h , 1957; R u b e n s t e i n a n d C a m e r o n , 1968; Starkweather, 1964;
This chapter includes r e w r i t t e n segments from m y article, " A Semantic Space for
N o n v e r b a l Behavior," Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35 ( 1 9 7 0 ) ,
2 4 8 - 5 7 , c o p y r i g h t ( 1 9 7 0 ) b y the A m e r i c a n Psychological Association. Reproduced
b y permission.
1
2 CHAPTER ONE
Trager, 1958). I n our discussions, w e shall refer t o these v o c a l qualities

as " i m p l i c i t " aspects of speech.
Also i n c l u d e d i n discussions of n o n v e r b a l b e h a v i o r are c o m p l e x c o m
m u n i c a t i o n p h e n o m e n a , such as sarcasm, w h e r e inconsistent c o m b i n a t i o n s
of v e r b a l a n d n o n v e r b a l b e h a v i o r take o n special significance i n s u b t l y
c o n v e y i n g feelings ( A r g y l e , Salter, N i c h o l s o n , W i l l i a m s , a n d Burgess,
1970; Beakel a n d M e h r a b i a n , 1969; H a l e y , 1963; M e h r a b i a n , 1970e;
Schuham, 1967; W e a k l a n d , 1 9 6 1 ) .
I t is m o r e t h e subtlety, t h e n , of a c o m m u n i c a t i o n f o r m t h a n its v e r b a l
versus n o n v e r b a l q u a l i t y w h i c h determines its consideration w i t h i n the
n o n v e r b a l l i t e r a t u r e . N o n v e r b a l behaviors per se f o r m t h e backbone of
this l i t e r a t u r e . T h e i r s u b t l e t y can be a t t r i b u t e d t o the lack of e x p l i c i t
c o d i n g rules f o r these behaviors i n most cultures. W h e r e a s v e r b a l cues
are definable b y an e x p l i c i t d i c t i o n a r y a n d b y rules of syntax, there are
o n l y vague a n d i n f o r m a l explanations o f the significance o f various n o n
v e r b a l behaviors. S i m i l a r l y , t h e r e are no e x p l i c i t rules for e n c o d i n g or
d e c o d i n g p a r a l i n g u i s t i c p h e n o m e n a or t h e m o r e c o m p l e x c o m b i n a t i o n s
of v e r b a l a n d n o n v e r b a l b e h a v i o r i n w h i c h t h e n o n v e r b a l elements con
t r i b u t e h e a v i l y t o t h e significance of a message.
D e s p i t e t h e absence of e x p l i c i t c o d i n g rules, t h e r e is some degree of
consistency b o t h w i t h i n a n d b e t w e e n cultures ( E k m a n , 1972; E k m a n a n d
Friesen, 1971) i n t h e use of subtle behaviors t o convey a c e r t a i n state,
r e l a t i o n , or f e e l i n g ( e n c o d i n g ) , a n d i n t h e inference of another's state,
r e l a t i o n , or a t t i t u d e f r o m such behaviors ( d e c o d i n g ) . A l t h o u g h t h e exact
degree o f this consistency cannot be established r e a d i l y because i t differs
for different persons, situations, a n d types of behaviors, i t is nevertheless
l e g i t i m a t e t o consider such behaviors communicative.
T h e e x p l i c i t - i m p l i c i t d i c h o t o m y seems q u i t e s u i t e d for d i s t i n g u i s h i n g
these subtle c o m m u n i c a t i o n p h e n o m e n a f r o m v e r b a l - l i n g u i s t i c cues. U s u
ally, an i d e a or f e e l i n g is m a d e e x p l i c i t w i t h w o r d s , a n d remains i m p l i c i t
w h e n the speaker refrains f r o m t a l k i n g , or w h e n he says t h e w o r d s i n a
voice t h a t conveys a subtle, or even c o n t r a d i c t o r y , shade o f m e a n i n g . T h e
e x p l i c i t - i m p l i c i t d i c h o t o m y also r e m i n d s us of t h e i d e a t h a t t h e c o d i n g
rules for v e r b a l - l i n g u i s t i c p h e n o m e n a are e x p l i c i t a n d t h a t t h e c o d i n g
rules for subtle c o m m u n i c a t i o n p h e n o m e n a are i m p l i c i t . I n this v o l u m e ,
t h e n , t h e concept of i m p l i c i t c o m m u n i c a t i o n is used i n preference t o the
misnomer, n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n .
S O M E FUNCTIONS OF I M P L I C I T BEHAVIORS
A l t h o u g h this b o o k focuses p r i m a r i l y o n t h e w a y s i n w h i c h i m p l i c i t c o m
m u n i c a t i o n behaviors relate t o feelings a n d attitudes, these behaviors also
serve other functions. A case i n p o i n t is the occurrence o f uh-huh or h e a d
nods i n conversations. A l o n g w i t h Krasner ( 1 9 5 8 ) a n d M a t a r a z z o , W i e n s ,
A Semantic Space for Nonverbal Behavior 3
a n d Saslow ( 1 9 6 5 ) , w e shall focus p r i m a r i l y o n h o w such behaviors con

vey respect t o w a r d , a n d agreement w i t h , a listener; t h a t is, serve as social
reinforcers. These cues m i g h t also be used to regulate another's s p e e c h -
suggest t h a t t h e speaker c o n t i n u e , or p r o m p t t h e listener t o take over
w h e n t h e speaker stops t a l k i n g .
E k m a n a n d Friesen ( 1 9 6 9 b ) p r o p o s e d five major categories of n o n
v e r b a l b e h a v i o r t h a t i l l u s t r a t e some of these other functions. T h e first
category, emblem, refers t o t h e s m a l l class of n o n v e r b a l acts t h a t can be
accurately t r a n s l a t e d i n t o w o r d s ( f o r example, a handshake, s h a k i n g a fist
at someone, a smile, a f r o w n ) . T h e second category, illustrator, is v e r y
m u c h a p a r t of speech a n d serves t h e f u n c t i o n of emphasis. Examples
are h e a d a n d h a n d movements t h a t occur m o r e f r e q u e n t l y w i t h p r i m a r y -
stressed w o r d s ( D i t t m a n n a n d L l e w e l l y n , 1 9 6 9 ) , p o i n t i n g gestures, or
o t h e r movements t h a t r e d u n d a n t l y d r a w a p i c t u r e of t h e l i n g u i s t i c refer
ent. I n c l u d e d i n this category are those movements t h a t seem t o serve as
a d d e d p u n c t u a t i o n or emphases, such as p o i n t i n g w i t h t h e h a n d or w i t h
a t u r n of t h e head, or t r a c i n g t h e c o n t o u r o f an object or person r e f e r r e d
to v e r b a l l y .
T h e t h i r d major category, affect display, deals w i t h t h e f u n c t i o n w e
shall b e discussing most. H o w e v e r , o u r a p p r o a c h w i l l b e different. I n s t e a d
of f o c u s i n g o n p r i m a r y affects (happiness, anger, surprise, fear, disgust,
sadness, a n d i n t e r e s t ) , w e s h a l l use a m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l scheme t h a t sub
sumes these p r i m a r y affects a n d t h e i r c o m b i n a t i o n s , as w e l l as m a n y
others. T h e f o u r t h category, regulator, refers to acts t h a t h e l p t o i n i t i a t e
a n d t e r m i n a t e t h e speech o f p a r t i c i p a n t s i n a social s i t u a t i o n . These
regulators m i g h t suggest t o a speaker t h a t he keep t a l k i n g , t h a t he clarify,
or t h a t he h u r r y u p a n d finish. T h e last category, adaptor, refers t o acts
t h a t are r e l a t e d to t h e satisfaction o f b o d i l y needs, such as m o v i n g i n t o a
m o r e c o m f o r t a b l e p o s i t i o n , or scratching.
Several investigators have dealt w i t h t h e various functions of i m p l i c i t
b e h a v i o r . F o r instance, studies of i l l u s t r a t o r s are e x e m p l i f i e d b y Boomer's
( 1 9 6 3 ) e x p e r i m e n t , w h i c h s h o w e d a d i r e c t c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n speech
d i s t u r b a n c e ( p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e filled p a u s e ) a n d a composite measure of
head, h a n d , a n d foot movements o f a p a t i e n t . I n a m o r e elaborate a n d
precise study, D i t t m a n n a n d L l e w e l l y n e x p l o r e d t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l occur
rence o f m o v e m e n t s at various positions o f a p h o n e m i c clause—"a s t r i n g
of w o r d s , a v e r a g i n g five i n l e n g t h , i n w h i c h there is one a n d o n l y one
p r i m a r y stress a n d w h i c h is t e r m i n a t e d b y a j u n c t u r e " (1969, p . 9 9 ) . H e a d
a n d h a n d movements o c c u r r e d m o r e f r e q u e n t l y w i t h primary-stressed
w o r d s , b u t this r e l a t i o n s h i p a c c o u n t e d for o n l y 7 percent o f t h e variance
i n b o d y m o v e m e n t . T h i s finding suggested t h a t " i f a person wishes t o
convey t h e idea t h a t w h a t he is expressing is i m p o r t a n t o r difficult to
conceptualize or e x c i t i n g , he w i l l i n t r o d u c e movements along w i t h his
4 CHAPTER ONE
speech to get this extra i n f o r m a t i o n across. T h e t i m i n g of these movements

w i l l t e n d to f o l l o w the p a t t e r n of t i m i n g he is f a m i l i a r w i t h : t h a t is, early
i n e n c o d i n g units or f o l l o w i n g hesitations i n speech" ( p . 1 0 5 ) .
O n e i m p l i c a t i o n of t h e s m a l l a m o u n t of variance t h a t was accounted for
i n D i t t m a n n a n d L l e w e l l y n ' s results is t h a t there are other determinants
of m o v e m e n t besides t h e s t r u c t u r a l qualities of t h e statements t h a t t h e y
accompany. A c c o r d i n g t o C o n d o n a n d O g s t o n (1966, 1967) a n d K e n d o n
( 1 9 6 7 b ) , one such source of movements is t h e synchronous q u a l i t y of i n
terpersonal i n t e r a c t i o n . These investigators a t t e m p t e d a microanalysis
of m o v e m e n t sequences of p a r t i c i p a n t s i n a conversation. Some of the
forms o f s y n c h r o n y w e r e punctuation, as i n t h e D i t t m a n n a n d L l e w e l l y n
( 1 9 6 9 ) study, movement mirroring, a n d speech analogous movements.
There is a small amount of research which suggests that when subjects are
exposed to an input that has a rhythmic organization, such as music, they
tend to move i n time to i t . . . and that i f they are already performing some
activity, such as tapping, or typing, they may bring the r h y t h m of this activity
into relation w i t h the r h y t h m of the input. . . . W e have seen here, both from
the data we have reported on, and also very strikingly from the data re
ported by Condon and Ogston, that the synchrony of the listener's behavior to
that of the speaker may be very precise indeed. The precision of the syn
chrony suggests that the listeners are responding to a r h y t h m w i t h w h i c h they
are thoroughly familiar. This r h y t h m is of course, largely the r h y t h m of
speech, the rhythmical character of the syllabic pulse, and for those who have
a given language i n common this r h y t h m must be familiar. . . . I t seems
plausible, thus, that the minute synchrony observable between interactants
is a product of their attention to an input where rhythmical structuring is
highly familiar to them. (Kendon, 1967b, pp. 3 6 - 3 7 )
T h e w o r k of C o n d o n a n d O g s t o n (1966, 1967) has dealt w i t h synchron

ous relations o f a speaker's v e r b a l cues to his o w n a n d his addressee's
n o n v e r b a l behaviors. O n e i m p l i c a t i o n o f t h e i r w o r k is t h e existence of
a k i n d of coactive r e g u l a t i o n of communicator-addressee behaviors w h i c h
is an i n t r i n s i c p a r t o f social i n t e r a c t i o n a n d w h i c h is c e r t a i n l y n o t ex
hausted t h r o u g h a c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f speech alone. K e n d o n ( 1 9 6 7 a ) recog
n i z e d these a n d other functions t h a t are also served b y i m p l i c i t behaviors,
p a r t i c u l a r l y eye contact. H e n o t e d t h a t l o o k i n g at another person helps
i n g e t t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t h o w t h a t person is b e h a v i n g ( t h a t is, t o m o n
i t o r ) , i n r e g u l a t i n g t h e i n i t i a t i o n a n d t e r m i n a t i o n o f speech, a n d i n con
v e y i n g e m o t i o n a l i t y or i n t i m a c y . W i t h r e g a r d t o t h e r e g u l a t o r y f u n c t i o n ,
Kendon's ( 1 9 6 7 a ) findings s h o w e d t h a t w h e n t h e speaker a n d his listener
are a b o u t t o change roles, t h e speaker looks i n t h e d i r e c t i o n of his listener
as he stops t a l k i n g , a n d his listener i n t u r n looks a w a y as he starts
speaking. F u r t h e r , w h e n speech is fluent, t h e speaker looks m o r e i n t h e
d i r e c t i o n o f his listener t h a n w h e n his speech is d i s r u p t e d w i t h errors
a n d hesitations. L o o k i n g away d u r i n g these a w k w a r d moments i m p l i e s

r e c o g n i t i o n b y t h e speaker t h a t he has less t o say, a n d is d e m a n d i n g
less a t t e n t i o n f r o m his listener. I t also provides t h e speaker w i t h some
relief t o organize his t h o u g h t s .
T h e concept of r e g u l a t i o n has also b e e n s t u d i e d b y Scheflen (1964,
1965). A c c o r d i n g to h i m , a c o m m u n i c a t o r m a y use changes i n posture,
eye contact, or p o s i t i o n to i n d i c a t e t h a t ( 1 ) he is a b o u t t o m a k e a n e w
p o i n t , ( 2 ) he is assuming an a t t i t u d e r e l a t i v e t o several points b e i n g m a d e
b y h i m s e l f or his addressee, or ( 3 ) he wishes t o t e m p o r a r i l y r e m o v e
h i m s e l f f r o m t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n s i t u a t i o n , as w o u l d be t h e case i f he w e r e
to select a great distance f r o m t h e addressee or b e g i n t o t u r n his b a c k o n
h i m . T h e r e are m a n y i n t e r e s t i n g aspects of this r e g u l a t i v e f u n c t i o n of
n o n v e r b a l cues t h a t have b e e n dealt w i t h o n l y i n f o r m a l l y .
I n a d d i t i o n to s t u d y i n g the e m o t i o n - c o n v e y i n g , r e g u l a t i n g , or b o d y -
a d a p t a t i o n functions, investigators have also focused o n t h e s t r u c t u r a l
qualities o f i m p l i c i t c o m m u n i c a t i o n s , irrespective of any functions t h a t
these m i g h t have i n t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n process. D u n c a n ( 1969) p r o v i d e d
a r e v i e w of such studies t h a t "sought t o i d e n t i f y f u n d a m e n t a l elements
( o r u n i t s ) of n o n v e r b a l behaviors, a n d t o explore t h e systematic rela
tionships a m o n g these units . . . the questions are: (a) O u t of a l l be
haviors w h i c h are possible t o p e r f o r m , w h i c h ones a c t u a l l y occur i n c o m
m u n i c a t i o n ? a n d ( b ) D o these selected c o m m u n i c a t i v e behaviors occur i n
characteristic sequences or clusters w i t h other behaviors i n t h e same or
a different m o d a l i t y ? " ( p . 1 2 1 ) . A c c o r d i n g l y , one p r i m a r y hope a n d goal
of studies of t h e s t r u c t u r a l qualities o f i m p l i c i t c o m m u n i c a t i o n s was t o
discover h o w "the pieces are o r g a n i z e d i n t o s t a n d a r d u n i t s . . . recogniz
able at a glance a n d recordable w i t h a stroke" ( Scheflen, 1966, p . 2 7 7 ) .
I n some studies o f this k i n d , investigators have succeeded i n s h o w i n g
some sequential dependencies or c o r r e l a t e d behaviors i n different chan
nels. T h e studies of B o o m e r ( 1963 ) a n d D i t t m a n n a n d L l e w e l l y n ( 1968,
1969) e x e m p l i f y such an approach. H o w e v e r , t h e i r findings f a l l far short
of i d e n t i f y i n g s t r u c t u r a l hierarchies s i m i l a r to those used b y linguists
w o r k i n g w i t h v e r b a l behaviors. I n d e e d , i n a recent r e v i e w D i t t m a n n
( 1971 ) s h o w e d t h a t t h e p r o b e i n t o these s t r u c t u r a l notions, for w h i c h
B i r d w h i s t e l l ( 1952, 1970 ) m u s t be g i v e n p r i m a r y c r e d i t , has b e e n q u i t e
d i s a p p o i n t i n g a n d has n o t l e d t o t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of any m a j o r o r g a n i
zational units.
O t h e r studies t h a t relate t o t h e s t r u c t u r a l a p p r o a c h are p u r e l y descrip
t i v e ( M c Q u o w n , 1957; Pittenger, H o c k e t t , a n d D a n e h y , 1960; P i t t e n g e r
a n d S m i t h , 1957; a n d T r a g e r , 1958, f o r p h o n e m i c a n d p a r a l i n g u i s t i c t r a n
s c r i p t i o n systems; B i r d w h i s t e l l , 1952, 1970, f o r kinesic b e h a v i o r ) . A nota
t i o n system t h a t was designed f o r dance is b y far t h e m o s t comprehensive
m e t h o d available for r e c o r d i n g b o d y movements ( H u t c h i n s o n , 1 9 7 0 ) . I t s
6 CHAPTER ONE
d e t a i l e d signs a l l o w t h e r e c o r d i n g o f such diverse movements as those of

the eyes a n d other parts o f t h e face a n d those of t h e toes, together w i t h
the p o s s i b i l i t y o f s p e c i f y i n g t h e speed of movements. Such n o t a t i o n sys
tems w e r e devised for various facets o f i m p l i c i t behavior. N o a t t e m p t was
m a d e t o relate t h e categories o f each t o t h e functions w h i c h these cate
gories m i g h t serve i n interpersonal processes. W i e n e r a n d M e h r a b i a n
( 1968 ) a r g u e d t h a t such n o t a t i o n a n d category systems generally have
f a i l e d to relate m e a n i n g f u l l y t o c o m m u n i c a t o r states, feelings, emotions,
c o m m u n i c a t o r characteristics, relations a m o n g c o m m u n i c a t o r s , or other
c o m m u n i c a t i o n behaviors. Therefore, t h e systems are seldom used b y
other investigators. I n contrast, t h e categories t h a t have b e e n e l a b o r a t e d
w i t h a v i e w t o t h e i r significance i n t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n process ( as exem
p l i f i e d b y t h e p r o x e m i c categories of H a l l , 1963) have b e e n far m o r e
p r o d u c t i v e i n g e n e r a t i n g research interest a n d e m p i r i c a l findings for
u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n process.
C U L T U R A L DIFFERENCES
Recent l i t e r a t u r e also contains some c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e c u l t u r a l differ

ences i n i m p l i c i t c o m m u n i c a t i o n codes. H a l l ( 1959, 1966) was one of t h e
first researchers to p o i n t o u t t h e difficulties e n c o u n t e r e d d u r i n g an i n t e r
a c t i o n b e t w e e n members of different cultures. Such difficulties can be
a c c o u n t e d for b y t h e u n q u e s t i o n e d a n d i m p l i c i t assumptions people m a k e
w h e n t h e y t r y t o i n t e r p r e t t h e behaviors o f others, w h e t h e r t h e l a t t e r b e
f r o m t h e i r o w n , or f r o m a different, c u l t u r e . T h e r e is u n f o r t u n a t e l y v e r y
l i t t l e e x p e r i m e n t a l evidence t o d o c u m e n t t h e differences i n t h e c o m m u n i
c a t i o n codes o f various cultures or subcultures. T h e available studies are
reviewed briefly below.
Efron's ( 1941 ) early observations of Jewish a n d I t a l i a n i m m i g r a n t s i n
t h e U n i t e d States s h o w e d a greater preference for closeness a n d t o u c h i n g
a m o n g t h e Jews. Whereas t h e Jews m a d e m o r e f r e q u e n t use o f emphasis-
t y p e illustrators, t h e I t a l i a n s h a d a greater preference for those illustrators
t h a t r e d u n d a n t l y describe the shape of t h e object t h a t is b e i n g r e f e r r e d
to w i t h words.
D i f f e r e n t i a l preferences of p r o x e m i c ( H a l l , 1963, 1964) or i m m e d i a c y
( M e h r a b i a n , 1967a; W i e n e r a n d M e h r a b i a n , 1968) cues have b e e n t h e
major focus o f t h e available studies of c u l t u r a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n codes.
I m m e d i a c y behaviors are those w h i c h increase t h e m u t u a l sensory s t i m u
l a t i o n b e t w e e n t w o persons. Several studies have s h o w n consistent c u l
t u r a l a n d s u b c u l t u r a l differences i n i m m e d i a c y - r e l a t e d behavior. W a t s o n
a n d Graves ( 1966 ) f o u n d A r a b students m o r e i m m e d i a t e i n t h e i r i m p l i c i t
social behaviors vis-à-vis each other t h a n A m e r i c a n students. T h e Arabs
o r i e n t e d m o r e d i r e c t l y t o w a r d each other, w e r e closer, t o u c h e d m o r e , h a d
m o r e eye contact, a n d t a l k e d l o u d e r . I n c o m p a r i n g t h e p r e f e r r e d i m
m e d i a c y levels o f a set o f five cultures, L i t t l e ( 1968 ) requested subjects
of various n a t i o n a l groups t o p o s i t i o n dolls r e l a t i v e to one another t o por-
t r a y a v a r i e t y of social situations. H i s findings i n d i c a t e d that, averaging

over t h e different social situations, Greeks, A m e r i c a n s , Italians, Swedes,
a n d Scots, i n t h a t order, assigned increasing distances b e t w e e n c o m
municators.
T h e r e are also t w o studies of i m m e d i a c y preferences of various sub
cultures i n t h e U n i t e d States. A m o n g his A m e r i c a n subjects, W i l l i s ( 1 9 6 6 )
f o u n d t h a t blacks greeted others at greater distances t h a n d i d w h i t e s ; this
was especially t h e case w h e n t h e persons b e i n g greeted w e r e also blacks.
Baxter ( 1 9 7 0 ) r e p l i c a t e d this finding i n t h e most t h o r o u g h e x p e r i m e n t of
i m m e d i a c y preferences a m o n g various e t h n i c groups available t o date. H i s
observations of pairs of subjects v i s i t i n g at a zoo s h o w e d t h a t Mexicans
stood closest t o one another a n d A n g l o s next closest. Blacks selected t h e
most distant positions.
T o summarize, t h e present a p p r o a c h makes t h e t r a d i t i o n a l d i s t i n c t i o n
b e t w e e n v e r b a l - l i n g u i s t i c c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d t h e p h e n o m e n a of n o n
v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n . H o w e v e r , t h e subtle aspects of social i n t e r a c t i o n
t h a t are discussed i n t h e n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e s h o u l d m o r e
a p p r o p r i a t e l y a n d g e n e r i c a l l y b e t e r m e d implicit behaviors, d i s t i n c t f r o m
v e r b a l - l i n g u i s t i c , or e x p l i c i t , behaviors. T h e w o r d implicit is used b e l o w
w h e n t h e entire r e a l m o f p h e n o m e n a is t h e referent, a n d t h e concept non
verbal is reserved for special instances w h e n actions, r a t h e r t h a n w o r d s ,
are t h e referent. A l t h o u g h i t is r e c o g n i z e d t h a t i m p l i c i t behaviors have
several functions, t h e w o r k described b e l o w deals p r i m a r i l y w i t h o n l y one
of these functions—the affect or a t t i t u d e c o m m u n i c a t i o n value. ( T h e
other functions have been d e t a i l e d b y A r g y l e , 1969; D u n c a n , 1969; a n d
E k m a n a n d Friesen, 1 9 6 9 b ) . Since people differ i n t h e i r characteristic
e m o t i o n a l reactions t o others, t h e present a p p r o a c h r e a d i l y p r o v i d e s a
means for s t u d y i n g i n d i v i d u a l differences i n i m p l i c i t c o m m u n i c a t i o n .
These i n d i v i d u a l differences are therefore a f r e q u e n t object of s t u d y i n
t h e f o l l o w i n g chapters.
Categorizing Implicit Behaviors from the

Standpoint of Their Referents
O n e of the most t r o u b l e s o m e aspects of research i n any r e l a t i v e l y u n

e x p l o r e d area of s t u d y is t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n of basic categories or d i m e n
sions t h a t c u t across most o f t h e p h e n o m e n a o f interest. I n t h e s t u d y of
i m p l i c i t behaviors, this has b e e n an ever present p r o b l e m . N u m e r o u s
categories can be selected f r o m t h e f o l l o w i n g realms: c o m m u n i c a t i o n
behaviors, such as facial expressions, verbalizations, movements, or pos
tures; referents, such as feelings or attitudes; c o m m u n i c a t o r or addressee
attributes, such as personality, p s y c h o l o g i c a l w e l l - b e i n g , age, sex, or
status; or c o m m u n i c a t i o n m e d i a , such as face-to-face, telephone, or v i d e o
interactions.
W h a t are t h e i m p o r t a n t behaviors t o explore i n s t u d y i n g i m p l i c i t c o m -
8 CHAPTER ONE
m u n i c a t i o n ? A l t h o u g h any b e h a v i o r is i n p r i n c i p l e communicative—since
i t is observable a n d has some significance—certain behaviors are m o r e a
p a r t o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n t h a n others ( f o r example, facial expressions i n
contrast t o foot m o v e m e n t s ) . T h e selection of i m p l i c i t cues for s t u d y has
sometimes been based o n expressive qualities—that is, p a t h o l o g y - r e l a t e d
attributes ( B r a a t o y , 1954; D e u t s c h , 1947, 1952; D e u t s c h a n d M u r p h y ,
1955; or R e i c h , 1945) or p e r s o n a l i t y - r e l a t e d attributes ( A l l p o r t a n d
V e r n o n , 1967). Such psychoanalysts as B r a a t o y or R e i c h i n t e r p r e t e d pos
t u r a l r i g i d i t y t o i n d i c a t e obsessional tendencies a n d greater resistance t o
change. Some c l i n i c i a n s w e r e also interested i n t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of par
t i c u l a r moods or feelings f r o m specific behaviors ( F r o m m - R e i c h m a n n ,
1 9 5 0 ) . E x p e r i m e n t a l investigations l e d t o t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of seven
affects t h a t w e r e consensually c o d e d i n t o facial a n d v o c a l expressions, b u t
f a i l e d t o p r o v i d e a general f r a m e w o r k for t h e classification o f n o n v e r b a l
b e h a v i o r ( f o r example, findings r e v i e w e d b y D a v i t z , 1964; E k m a n , 1972;
T o m k i n s a n d M c C a r t e r , 1964; or W o o d w o r t h a n d Schlosberg, 1954,
Chapter 5 ) .
I n o u r present approach, t h e basic categories are d e v e l o p e d f r o m a
d e t a i l e d consideration of t h e referents, a n d n o t o f t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n be
haviors or t h e communicator-addressee attributes. T h e dimensions t h a t
are used t o characterize t h e referents i n t u r n p r o v i d e a f r a m e w o r k for
classifying a n d s t u d y i n g t h e effects of t h e l a t t e r factors. Referents w e r e
chosen as t h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t because t h e existing i m p l i c i t c o m m u n i c a t i o n
l i t e r a t u r e p r o v i d e s a d e q u a t e evidence t o characterize t h e m i n a q u i t e
general w a y . C o n s i d e r i n g some o f this evidence, t h e referents are de
s c r i b e d i n terms o f a t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l f r a m e w o r k : e v a l u a t i o n , p o t e n c y
or status, a n d responsiveness. Positive e v a l u a t i o n is c o m m u n i c a t e d b y
facial a n d v o c a l cues ( w h i c h express variations i n l i k i n g ) a n d also b y
several postures a n d positions ( a closer p o s i t i o n , a greater f o r w a r d lean,
increased eye contact, a n d m o r e d i r e c t o r i e n t a t i o n ) . Postural r e l a x a t i o n
conveys p o t e n c y or status, a n d increasing i m p l i c i t a c t i v i t y ( s u c h as facial
or v o c a l a c t i v i t y ) expresses responsiveness t o another person.
F A C I A L A N D V O C A L EXPRESSIONS
O n e of t h e first attempts f o r a m o r e general c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of t h e refer

ents of i m p l i c i t b e h a v i o r and, therefore, possibly of t h e behaviors t h e m
selves, was m a d e b y Schlosberg ( 1 9 5 4 ) . H e suggested a t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l
f r a m e w o r k i n v o l v i n g pleasantness-unpleasantness, sleep-tension, a n d at
t e n t i o n - r e j e c t i o n . A n y f e e l i n g c o u l d be assigned a v a l u e o n each of these
three dimensions, a n d different feelings w o u l d correspond t o different
points i n this t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l space. T h i s shift a w a y f r o m t h e s t u d y of
isolated feelings a n d t h e i r c o r r e s p o n d i n g n o n v e r b a l cues a n d t o w a r d
a c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f t h e general referents of n o n v e r b a l b e h a v i o r o n a
l i m i t e d set o f dimensions was seen as beneficial. I t was h o p e d t h a t i t
c o u l d a i d i n t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of large classes of i n t e r r e l a t e d n o n v e r b a l
behaviors.
Recent factor-analytic w o r k b y W i l l i a m s and Sundene (1965) and
O s g o o d ( 1 9 6 6 ) p r o v i d e d f u r t h e r i m p e t u s for c h a r a c t e r i z i n g t h e referents
of i m p l i c i t b e h a v i o r i n terms o f a l i m i t e d set o f dimensions. W i l l i a m s a n d
Sundene ( 1 9 6 5 ) f o u n d t h a t facial, v o c a l , or facial-vocal cues can be
categorized p r i m a r i l y i n terms o f t h r e e o r t h o g o n a l factors: general evalua
t i o n , social c o n t r o l , a n d a c t i v i t y .
F o r facial expression o f emotions, O s g o o d ( 1 9 6 6 ) suggested t h e f o l l o w
i n g dimensions as p r i m a r y referents: pleasantness ( j o y a n d glee versus
d r e a d a n d a n x i e t y ) , c o n t r o l ( a n n o y a n c e , disgust, c o n t e m p t , scorn, a n d
l o a t h i n g versus dismay, b e w i l d e r m e n t , surprise, amazement, a n d excite
m e n t ) , a n d a c t i v a t i o n ( s u l l e n anger, rage, disgust, scorn, a n d l o a t h i n g
versus despair, pity, dreamy sadness, b o r e d o m , q u i e t pleasure, com
placency, a n d a d o r a t i o n ) .
O n e w o u l d e x p e c t t o find a close r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e d i m e n s i o n s o p e r a t i n g
here a n d those repeatedly f o u n d w i t h the semantic differential technique . . .
a p p l i e d t o l i n g u i s t i c signs. Pleasantness a n d A c t i v a t i o n a p p e a r t o b e s e m a n t i -
c a l l y i d e n t i c a l w i t h E v a l u a t i o n a n d A c t i v i t y , t w o o f t h e t h r e e m a j o r factors
i n t h e g e n e r a l s e m a n t i c space; w h a t w e h a v e c a l l e d t h e C o n t r o l d i m e n s i o n is
s i m i l a r i n s e m a n t i c t o n e t o t h e P o t e n c y factor—scorn, sullen anger a n d t h e l i k e
seem t o i m p l y s t r e n g t h a n d bewilderment, surprise a n d t h e l i k e weakness—
b u t t h e r e l a t i o n is n o t as c o m p e l l i n g . ( O s g o o d , 1 9 6 6 , p . 2 7 )
H A N D GESTURES
I n one o f t h e f e w studies a v a i l a b l e i n t h e area of h a n d gesturing, G i t i n
( 1 9 7 0 ) presented 36 p h o t o g r a p h s o f h a n d gestures t o subjects w h o r a t e d
each o f t h e p h o t o g r a p h s o n 40 semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l scales. H e r first t h r e e
factors w e r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y t h e f o l l o w i n g sets of scales:
Factor I : active-passive, s h a r p - d u l l , i n t e r e s t i n g - u n i n t e r e s t i n g , tense-
sleepy, exciting-boring, curious-indifferent, meaningful-
senseless, a n d i n t e n t i o n a l - u n i n t e n t i o n a l .
Factor I I : pleasant-unpleasant, friendly-unfriendly, good-bad, and
beautiful-ugly.
Factor I I I : submissive-dominant, weak-strong, unarmed-armed, doubt
f u l - c e r t a i n , shy-brave, a n d slow-fast.
G i t i n ' s first factor corresponds t o o u r responsiveness d i m e n s i o n , w h i c h
is r e f e r r e d t o as activation or activity i n other studies. H e r second factor
is t h e c o u n t e r p a r t o f o u r e v a l u a t i o n d i m e n s i o n . H e r t h i r d factor relates
to t h e p o t e n c y or status d i m e n s i o n . T h e semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l scales cor
r e s p o n d i n g t o these three factors f u r t h e r h e l p c l a r i f y the- r e f e r e n t i a l sig
nificance o f an i m p o r t a n t aspect of n o n v e r b a l b e h a v i o r ( h a n d gestures),
as w e l l as other i m p l i c i t behaviors i n general.
I t is i n t e r e s t i n g t o find t h a t , at least for facial, v o c a l a n d m a n u a l expres-
10 CHAPTER ONE
sion, s i m i l a r dimensions characterize t h e referents of i m p l i c i t as w e l l as

e x p l i c i t v e r b a l behaviors. Such a correspondence is reassuring, for i t
confirms t h e expected s i m i l a r i t y for c o g n i t i v e categories despite t h e dis
s i m i l a r i t y of c o m m u n i c a t i o n channels. T h e s i m i l a r i t i e s f u r t h e r suggest t h e
possibility—as w i t h v e r b a l communications—of i d e n t i f y i n g other classes of
i m p l i c i t c o m m u n i c a t i o n t h a t relate p r i m a r i l y t o one o f t h e three referen
t i a l dimensions. T h i s i n d e e d seems t o be t h e case f o r those aspects of
social i n t e r a c t i o n i n v o l v i n g stationary postures a n d positions.
POSTURE A N D P O S I T I O N
Scheflen (1964, 1965, 1966) p r o v i d e d d e t a i l e d observations of an i n f o r m a l

q u a l i t y o n t h e significance of postures a n d positions i n interpersonal situa
tions. A l o n g s i m i l a r lines, K e n d o n ( 1 9 6 7 a ) a n d E x l i n e a n d his colleagues
e x p l o r e d t h e m a n y - f a c e t e d significance of eye contact w i t h , or observation
of, another ( E x l i n e , 1962, 1963, 1972; E x l i n e a n d E l d r i d g e , 1967; E x l i n e ,
G r a y , a n d Schuette, 1965; E x l i n e a n d W i n t e r s , 1 9 6 5 ) . These investigators
consistently f o u n d , a m o n g same-sexed pairs o f c o m m u n i c a t o r s , t h a t fe
males generally h a d m o r e eye contact w i t h each other t h a n d i d males;
also, m e m b e r s o f b o t h sexes h a d less eye contact w i t h one another w h e n
t h e i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e m was aversive ( E x l i n e , G r a y , a n d Schuette,
1 9 6 5 ) . I n generally p o s i t i v e exchanges, males h a d a t e n d e n c y t o decrease
t h e i r eye contact over a p e r i o d o f t i m e , whereas females t e n d e d t o increase
i t ( E x l i n e and Winters, 1965).
O n e v e r y d i s t i n c t i v e aspect of t h e methodologies e m p l o y e d b y E x l i n e
a n d his colleagues i n some o f t h e i r studies s h o u l d be c a r e f u l l y considered
i n i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e i r findings. These investigators' e x p e r i m e n t a l confeder
ates b e h a v e d i n specified ways w i t h subjects whose behaviors w e r e t h e
d e p e n d e n t measures i n t h e various situations. Specifically, t h e confederates
w e r e i n s t r u c t e d t o either l o o k at t h e subject w i t h a steady gaze (100 per
cent eye c o n t a c t ) or t o l o o k a w a y ( z e r o eye c o n t a c t ) . Such extreme
variations i n t h e v i s u a l b e h a v i o r o f t h e confederate can f a c i l i t a t e t h e ex
p e r i m e n t a l c o n t r o l o f his behaviors a n d are l i k e l y t o m a x i m i z e t h e effects
of eye contact o n t h e various d e p e n d e n t measures. H o w e v e r , t h e d r a w
b a c k of t h e m e t h o d used i n these studies ( f o r example, E x l i n e a n d
E l d r i d g e , 1967) was t h a t t h e v i s u a l b e h a v i o r of t h e confederate was q u i t e
u n u s u a l , r a r e l y o c c u r r i n g i n e v e r y d a y social interactions. F o r instance,
extensive data p r o v i d e d b y K e n d o n ( 1 9 6 7 a ) s h o w e d t h a t observation
of another person d u r i n g a social exchange v a r i e d f r o m a b o u t 30 per cent
t o 70 p e r cent, a n d t h a t c o r r e s p o n d i n g figures for eye contact r a n g e d
f r o m 10 per cent t o 40 per cent.
M e h r a b i a n ( 1 9 6 8 d , 1969b) r e v i e w e d e x p e r i m e n t a l findings r e l a t i n g t o
t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n of attitudes ( e v a l u a t i o n a n d l i k i n g ) a n d status ( p o
t e n c y or social c o n t r o l ) v i a posture a n d p o s i t i o n cues. P h y s i c a l p r o x i m i t y ,
t o u c h i n g , eye contact, a f o r w a r d lean rather t h a n a r e c l i n i n g p o s i t i o n , a n d

an o r i e n t a t i o n o f the torso t o w a r d rather t h a n a w a y f r o m a n addressee
have a l l been f o u n d to c o m m u n i c a t e a m o r e positive a t t i t u d e t o w a r d h i m .
A second set of cues t h a t indicates p o s t u r a l r e l a x a t i o n includes a s y m m e t r i
c a l p l a c e m e n t of t h e l i m b s , a sideways lean a n d / o r r e c l i n i n g p o s i t i o n b y
t h e seated c o m m u n i c a t o r , a n d specific r e l a x a t i o n measures o f t h e hands
or neck. T h i s second set of cues relates p r i m a r i l y t o status differences
b e t w e e n a c o m m u n i c a t o r a n d his addressee: there is m o r e r e l a x a t i o n w i t h
an addressee of l o w e r status, a n d less r e l a x a t i o n w i t h one of h i g h e r status.
A l t h o u g h t h e r e l a x a t i o n cues are i n t e r c o r r e l a t e d a n d have b e e n extracted
as factors i n some experiments ( M e h r a b i a n a n d W i l l i a m s , 1 9 6 9 ) , t h e
p r o x e m i c ( H a l l , 1963, 1966) or i m m e d i a c y ( M e h r a b i a n , 1967a; W i e n e r
a n d M e h r a b i a n , 1968) cues are n o t i n t e r c o r r e l a t e d . H o w e v e r , insofar as
t h e set o f i m m e d i a c y cues ( 1 ) do together reflect a m o r e p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e
t o w a r d a n addressee, ( 2 ) can be c o n c e p t u a l l y r e l a t e d as increasing t h e
p h y s i c a l p r o x i m i t y b e t w e e n a c o m m u n i c a t o r a n d his addressee, a n d
( 3 ) increase the m u t u a l sensory s t i m u l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e c o m m u n i c a t o r s ,
t h e r e is some basis for g r o u p i n g the cues as p a r t o f a single n o n v e r b a l
dimension.
I n sum, the findings f r o m studies of posture a n d p o s i t i o n a n d subtle
variations i n v e r b a l statements ( W i e n e r a n d M e h r a b i a n , 1968) s h o w t h a t
i m m e d i a c y cues p r i m a r i l y denote e v a l u a t i o n , a n d p o s t u r a l r e l a x a t i o n
cues denote status or p o t e n c y i n a r e l a t i o n s h i p . I t is i n t e r e s t i n g to n o t e a
weaker effect: less r e l a x a t i o n of one's posture also conveys a m o r e p o s i t i v e
a t t i t u d e t o w a r d another. O n e w a y t o i n t e r p r e t this o v e r l a p i n t h e referen
t i a l significance o f less r e l a x a t i o n a n d m o r e i m m e d i a c y i n c o m m u n i c a t i n g
a m o r e p o s i t i v e f e e l i n g is i n terms of t h e i m p l i e d p o s i t i v e connotations o f
h i g h e r status i n o u r c u l t u r e . A respectful a t t i t u d e ( t h a t is, w h e n one con
veys t h a t t h e other is o f h i g h e r status) does i n d e e d have i m p l i e d p o s i t i v e
connotations. T h e r e f o r e i t is n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n of
respect a n d of p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e exhibits some s i m i l a r i t y i n t h e n o n v e r b a l
cues t h a t t h e y r e q u i r e . H o w e v e r , whereas t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f l i k i n g is
m o r e h e a v i l y w e i g h t e d b y variations i n i m m e d i a c y , t h a t o f respect is
w e i g h t e d m o r e b y variations i n relaxation.
T h e results for posture a n d p o s i t i o n cues r e v i e w e d above w e r e n o t
o b t a i n e d w i t h i n t h e f r a m e w o r k presently b e i n g proposed; rather, t h e
f r a m e w o r k e v o l v e d f r o m these studies. T h e general correspondence o f
these findings w i t h those o f G i t i n ( 1 9 7 0 ) , O s g o o d ( 1 9 6 6 ) , Osgood, Suci,
a n d T a n n e n b a u m ( 1 9 5 7 ) , a n d of studies r e p o r t e d i n Snider a n d O s g o o d
( 1 9 6 9 ) a n d W i l l i a m s a n d Sundene ( 1 9 6 5 ) suggested f u r t h e r e x p l o r a t i o n
of t h e a p p r o a c h for other i m p l i c i t cues. T h e r e f o r e , t h i s f r a m e w o r k is u s e d
b e l o w to discuss various aspects o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n , such as facial m o v e
m e n t , v o c a l expressions, a n d verbalizations.
12 CHAPTER ONE
M O V E M E N T S A N D I M P L I C I T ASPECTS O F V E R B A L I Z A T I O N
M a h l , D a n e t , a n d N o r t o n ( 1 9 5 9 ) suggested t h a t m o v e m e n t i n f o r m a t i o n
c o m p l e m e n t s v e r b a l messages b y a n t i c i p a t i n g , c o n t r a d i c t i n g , or b e i n g
c o n c u r r e n t w i t h t h e referents of t h e v e r b a l channel. M o r e specific w o r k
b y E k m a n ( 1964, 1965 ) a n d E k m a n a n d Friesen ( 1967 ) o n t h e referents
of m o v e m e n t s of various b o d y parts s h o w e d t h a t stationary positions
c o m m u n i c a t e gross affects ( t h a t is, a t t i t u d e s ) , whereas m o v e m e n t s a n d
facial expressions c o m m u n i c a t e specific emotions.
Rosenfeld ( 1966a, 1966b ) used a r o l e - p l a y i n g p a r a d i g m i n w h i c h his
subjects w e r e requested t o i n t e r a c t w i t h someone a n d e l i c i t v a r y i n g de
grees of l i k i n g f r o m h i m . T h e i m p l i c i t behaviors of t h e subjects w e r e t h e
d e p e n d e n t measures. H i g h e r speech rates, l e n g t h i e r c o m m u n i c a t i o n s , fre
q u e n t v e r b a l reinforcers t o t h e addressee, gesticulation, s m i l i n g , p o s i t i v e
h e a d nods, a n d less f r e q u e n t self references w e r e f o u n d t o b e associated
w i t h the attempt to elicit more liking.
I n t h e t w o studies described b e l o w , i t was assumed t h a t i n c e r t a i n
i n t e r p e r s o n a l situations t h e i m p l i c i t c o m m u n i c a t i o n of attitudes is either
m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e or a necessary c o n c o m i t a n t of t h e c o m m u n i c a t o r ' s
affect. F o r instance, Z a i d e l a n d M e h r a b i a n ( 1969 ) f o u n d t h a t c o m m u n i
cators w e r e able t o express variations i n negative affect b e t t e r t h a n v a r i a
tions i n p o s i t i v e affect, w h e t h e r u s i n g facial or v o c a l channels. Perhaps
i m p l i c i t expressions o f negative a t t i t u d e are p r a c t i c e d m o r e t h a n are
p o s i t i v e ones, because i t is s e l d o m a p p r o p r i a t e t o express negative feelings
o p e n l y . T h u s , negative feelings are delegated t o these subtle channels
m o r e f r e q u e n t l y t h a n are p o s i t i v e feelings, a n d people become proficient
at i m p l i c i t l y expressing t h e i r negative feelings r a t h e r t h a n t h e i r p o s i t i v e
feelings.
I n stress situations, i m p l i c i t channels once a g a i n m a y become salient
indicators, p a r t i c u l a r l y w h e n t h e c o m m u n i c a t o r is u n w i l l i n g t o express his
feelings e x p l i c i t l y . E a r l y p s y c h o a n a l y t i c interest i n n o n v e r b a l b e h a v i o r
was p r i m a r i l y m o t i v a t e d b y this a s s u m p t i o n ( f o r example, D e u t s c h a n d
M u r p h y , 1955 ) . T h e recent interest i n t h e d e t e c t i o n o f deceit f r o m i m
p l i c i t behaviors also seems t o b e r e l a t e d ( E k m a n a n d Friesen, 1969a ) .
T h e i m p o r t a n c e o f i m p l i c i t behaviors is h i g h l i g h t e d i n situations i n
w h i c h u n f a m i l i a r persons interact, w i t h one seeking t o influence t h e
other (as i n p o l i t i c a l speeches or a d v e r t i s i n g ) . V e r b a l expression o f
feelings t o w a r d another is less p e r m i s s i b l e i n these situations t h a n is an
a r g u m e n t or i n f o r m a t i o n r e l a t i n g t o t h e t o p i c i n question. I n t h e experi
ments s u m m a r i z e d b e l o w , t h e i n t e r a c t i o n s i n v o l v e d dyads, m o s t l y of
peers. O n e m e m b e r o f each d y a d was a confederate o f t h e experimenter.
T h i s m e m b e r e x h i b i t e d a p r e a r r a n g e d set o f behaviors designed t o seem
" n o r m a l " for t h a t s i t u a t i o n . T h e other m e m b e r o f t h e d y a d , t h e actual
subject, was observed t h r o u g h a o n e - w a y m i r r o r . H i s or her behaviors
were video recorded.
Perceived and Intended Persuasiveness. I n t h e first t w o experiments

r e p o r t e d b y M e h r a b i a n a n d W i l l i a m s ( 1 9 6 9 ) , subjects presented messages
to someone else, e m p l o y i n g v a r y i n g degrees o f persuasion. T h e subjects'
n o n v e r b a l , v o c a l , a n d v e r b a l behaviors w e r e r e c o r d e d a n d analyzed. T h e
m o v e m e n t cues r a t e d w e r e l a t e r a l swivels i n a desk chair, r o c k i n g , h e a d
n o d d i n g , g e s t i c u l a t i o n , s e l f - m a n i p u l a t i o n such as s c r a t c h i n g or t a p p i n g
one p a r t of a h a n d w i t h another, a n d l e g a n d foot m o v e m e n t s . Measures
r e l a t i n g t o t h e facial expressions i n c l u d e d facial pleasantness a n d a c t i v i t y .
Measures r e l a t i n g to verbalizations w e r e l e n g t h o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n i n
terms o f n u m b e r o f w o r d s or d u r a t i o n , speech rate, t h e u n h a l t i n g q u a l i t y
of speech, speech error rate, v o l u m e , a n d a c t i v i t y . T h e c r i t e r i a for scoring
these categories of i m p l i c i t b e h a v i o r are s u m m a r i z e d i n A p p e n d i x A .
T h e analyses of these data l e d t o t h e p o s t u l a t i o n of an a c t i v i t y d i m e n
sion for i m p l i c i t behaviors. T h e variables g r o u p e d u n d e r t h i s d i m e n s i o n
i n c l u d e d facial a n d v o c a l a c t i v i t y , speech v o l u m e , a n d speech rate.
Whereas i m m e d i a c y a n d r e l a x a t i o n i n d i c a t e v a r i a t i o n s i n l i k i n g a n d status
respectively, a c t i v i t y communicates responsiveness ( n o t e Bender's 1969
data for a d j e c t i v e s ) , a n d is a f u n c t i o n of t h e salience of t h e addressee.
T h e findings f r o m these persuasion studies s h o w e d t h a t a c o m m u n i
cator's a c t i v i t y increased w i t h his i n t e n t i o n t o persuade, a n d t h e p e r c e i v e d
persuasiveness o f a message was c o r r e l a t e d w i t h t h e l e v e l of a c t i v i t y ex
h i b i t e d i m p l i c i t l y b y t h e c o m m u n i c a t o r . B o t h of t h e e n c o d i n g experi
ments y i e l d e d this major effect r e l a t i n g a c t i v i t y a n d persuasion. A second,
t h o u g h weaker, r e l a t i o n s h i p o c c u r r e d b e t w e e n a t t e m p t e d persuasiveness
a n d i m m e d i a c y : c o m m u n i c a t o r s w e r e m o r e i m m e d i a t e t o an addressee
w h e n t h e y a t t e m p t e d t o b e m o r e persuasive. F u r t h e r , m o r e i m m e d i a t e
c o m m u n i c a t i o n s w e r e also p e r c e i v e d as m o r e persuasive i n t h e t w o
experiments.
F i n d i n g s for t h e i m p l i c i t concomitants o f persuasion can be r e a d i l y
s u m m a r i z e d : p o s i t i v e responsiveness t o an addressee enhances t h e per
ceived persuasiveness of a message. W h e n a person attempts t o b e per
suasive, he exhibits m o r e p o s i t i v e responsiveness t o t h e addressee.
Deceit. T h r e e o f our experiments have e x p l o r e d t h e i m p l i c i t b e h a v i o r a l
concomitants o f d e c e i t f u l a n d t r u t h f u l c o m m u n i c a t i o n s ( M e h r a b i a n ,
1971a). A v a r i e t y of p a r a d i g m s w e r e used i n w h i c h a subject c o m m u n i
cated d e c e i t f u l l y or t r u t h f u l l y t o someone else. A l l t h e behaviors n o t e d
i n t h e p r e c e d i n g discussion of p e r c e i v e d a n d i n t e n d e d persuasiveness
w e r e r e c o r d e d a n d scored.
F i n d i n g s f r o m t w o of t h e M e h r a b i a n ( 1 9 7 1 a ) experiments i n d i c a t e d
t h a t i m m e d i a c y t o w a r d a n addressee is greater w h e n one is t r u t h f u l t h a n
d e c e i t f u l . I n t h e first e x p e r i m e n t , t h e subject was either p r o m i s e d a r e w a r d
for successful deceit or t h r e a t e n e d t h a t he w o u l d receive an electric
shock i f his deceit was detected. Subjects w h o w e r e p r o m i s e d r e w a r d
w e r e m o r e i m m e d i a t e w h e n t r u t h f u l t h a n w h e n d e c e i t f u l , b u t there was
no c o r r e s p o n d i n g significant difference w h e n subjects w e r e t h r e a t e n e d
14 CHAPTER ONE
w i t h shock. T h e second e x p e r i m e n t i n v o l v e d r o l e - p l a y i n g of deceit versus

r o l e - p l a y i n g of t r u t h . Subjects w e r e f o u n d to be m o r e i m m e d i a t e w h i l e
t h e y w e r e r o l e - p l a y i n g at b e i n g t r u t h f u l t h a n at b e i n g d e c e i t f u l .
R e l a x a t i o n was n o t a d i s c r i m i n a t o r b e t w e e n deceit a n d t r u t h i n any
o f t h e experiments. Subjects i n t h e first e x p e r i m e n t w h o a n t i c i p a t e d pos
sible r e w a r d w e r e m o r e relaxed t h a n those w h o a n t i c i p a t e d possible
shock. T h e second e x p e r i m e n t i n d i c a t e d t h a t males w e r e generally m o r e
r e l a x e d t h a n females. F i n a l l y , i n t h e t h i r d experiment, the subjects w e r e
i n d u c e d t o cheat i n an ESP s t u d y b y a confederate, so t h a t t h e i r m o t i v a
t i o n t o be d e c e i t f u l i n a subsequent i n t e r v i e w w i t h the experimenter was
m a x i m i z e d . I n this case, extroverts w e r e f o u n d t o be m o r e relaxed t h a n
introverts.
T h u s , these deceit studies p r o v i d e d f u r t h e r v a l i d i t y for the r e l a x a t i o n
cues, a n d suggested a r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n i m m e d i a c y o f postures a n d
d e c e i t f u l versus t r u t h f u l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , w h i l e not p r o v i d i n g any rela
t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n a c t i v i t y l e v e l a n d deceit.
T h e e x p e r i m e n t a l data r e v i e w e d thus far p r o v i d e d a p r e l i m i n a r y basis
for g r o u p i n g n o n v e r b a l a n d i m p l i c i t v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n cues, a n d
i n d i c a t e d t h e p r i m a r y significance of each o f three sets of cues i n a v a r i e t y
of social situations. These t h r e e sets o f cues p r o v i d e a w a y of o b j e c t i v e l y
c h a r a c t e r i z i n g social i n t e r a c t i o n . T o f a c i l i t a t e f u r t h e r e x p l o r a t i o n of the
i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s a m o n g these cues a n d t h e i r r e l a t i o n to the personality
of p a r t i c i p a n t s a n d t h e social situations i n w h i c h t h e y interact, the f o l l o w
i n g section touches o n t h e t h e o r e t i c a l significance o f these groupings.
Summary and Rationale for the Choice of

Semantic Dimensions
W h y d i d t h e t h r e e proposed r e f e r e n t i a l dimensions—positiveness, po

t e n c y or status, a n d responsiveness—emerge as p a r t i c u l a r l y relevant i n
n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n ? O u r answer is based o n the premise t h a t n o n
v e r b a l b e h a v i o r is a d e v e l o p m e n t a l l y earlier a n d m o r e p r i m i t i v e f o r m of
c o m m u n i c a t i o n w h i c h m a n shares w i t h animals ( f o r example, W e r n e r ,
1957; W e r n e r a n d K a p l a n , 1 9 6 3 ) . Such a premise i m p l i e s t h a t n o n v e r b a l
behaviors reflect v e r y basic social orientations t h a t are correlates of major
categories i n t h e c o g n i t i o n o f social environments (Piaget, 1960). Positive-
negative affect a n d e v a l u a t i o n are basic c o g n i t i v e distinctions m a d e f r o m
early i n f a n c y a n d r e t a i n e d i n a d u l t life—they d e t e r m i n e a p p r o a c h a n d
avoidance tendencies t o w a r d objects or persons. T h e e v a l u a t i o n of objects
a n d persons is a c r u c i a l aspect o f i n t e l l i g e n t f u n c t i o n i n g a n d even of sur
v i v a l . I t is therefore n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t people possess b e h a v i o r a l corre
lates f o r this c o g n i t i v e distinction—the i m m e d i a c y cues—which are ever-
present i n social i n t e r a c t i o n .
T h e second d i m e n s i o n , status or potency, relates t o social c o n t r o l . I t is
p a r t i c u l a r l y salient i n t h e social l i f e o f animals, as observed i n t h e phe-
n o m e n o n o f t e r r i t o r i a l i t y ( f o r example, C a l h o u n , 1 9 6 2 ) , a n d is a major
d e t e r m i n e r of social i n t e r a c t i o n patterns a m o n g humans. T h i s is especially
e v i d e n t i n t h e h i g h l y stratified, a u t h o r i t a r i a n cultures b u t can be seen
i n even t h e most d e m o c r a t i c societies ( f o r example, H a l l , 1 9 6 6 ) .
Responsiveness is c o n c e p t u a l i z e d as t h e nonverbal-social c o u n t e r p a r t
of the o r i e n t i n g reflex ( f o r example, M a l t z m a n , 1 9 6 7 ) . As such i t is another
e l e m e n t a r y a n d basic aspect of social life. T h e degree of responsiveness
one person displays t o w a r d another indicates t h e o t h e r s salience for h i m .
I t is e l i c i t e d b y n o n n e u t r a l events or persons ( e x t r e m e instances b e i n g
u n u s u a l l y r e i n f o r c i n g or t h r e a t e n i n g o n e s ) . I n c o g n i t i o n (as i n respon
siveness ) , u n u s u a l events o f either p o s i t i v e or negative q u a l i t y are g r o u p e d
a n d reacted to s i m i l a r l y , as e x e m p l i f i e d b y t h e concept o f mana i n m a n y
p r i m i t i v e cultures ( f o r example, Cassirer, 1 9 5 3 - 5 7 ) . T h e differential re
sponsiveness of humans or animals t o various aspects of t h e i r social en
v i r o n m e n t distinguishes t h e m f r o m t h e i n a n i m a t e w o r l d and, together
w i t h t h e p r e c e d i n g t w o c o g n i t i v e distinctions ( e v a l u a t i o n a n d j u d g m e n t
of social p o w e r ) , is a basic aspect of i n t e l l i g e n t ( a d a p t i v e , a la Piaget,
1960) f u n c t i o n i n g .
T h e r a t h e r general q u a l i t y of these c o g n i t i v e a n d b e h a v i o r a l dimensions
for b o t h a n i m a l a n d h u m a n social systems p r o v i d e s a p l a u s i b l e basis f o r
u s i n g d a t a o b t a i n e d f r o m t h e social i n t e r a c t i o n o f animals. Primates, i n
p a r t i c u l a r , can p r o v i d e c o m p l e m e n t a r y i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t c e r t a i n aspects
of affect a n d a t t i t u d e c o m m u n i c a t i o n i n humans. F o r instance, Sommer
( 1 9 6 7 ) s u m m a r i z e d some o f t h e research t h a t r e l a t e d t h e s p a t i a l arrange
m e n t of persons i n a v a r i e t y o f social situations t o t h e i r social status. A
n u m b e r o f t h e studies Sommer r e v i e w e d w e r e m o t i v a t e d b y observations
of t h e m o r e f a m i l i a r p h e n o m e n o n of t e r r i t o r i a l i t y i n animals ( A r d r e y ,
1966; L o r e n z , 1966; M c B r i d e , 1964). E v e n an i n f o r m a l observation o f
chimpanzees l i v i n g together provides impressive differences i n t h e pos
tures, positions, movements, a n d facial expressions o f dyads d i f f e r i n g i n
status. Since status or p o t e n c y is r e a d i l y specified i n terms o f size or
s t r e n g t h i n such a n i m a l social systems, i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e n o n v e r b a l
correlates o f p o t e n c y is considerably s i m p l i f i e d a n d m a y y i e l d n o n v e r b a l
i n t e r a c t i o n cues t h a t have t r a n s c u l t u r a l relevance. M o r e generally, t h e
o b s e r v a t i o n of a n i m a l social interactions can c o m p l e m e n t t h e s t u d y o f
i n d i v i d u a l s o f a single c u l t u r e , such as A m e r i c a n college students, a n d
p r o v i d e c o r r o b o r a t i o n f o r i d e n t i f i e d dimensions o f social i n t e r a c t i o n .
References
Allport, G. W. , and P. E. Vernon . 1967. Studies in expressive movement. New York: Hafner.
Anastasi, A. 1958. Differential psychology. New York: Macmillan.
Anderson, N. H. 1962. Application of an additive model to impression formation, Science, 138,
817-818.
Anderson, N. H. 1964. Note on weighted sum and linear operator models, Psychonomic Science,
1, 189-190.
Anderson, R. L. , and T. A. Bancroft . 1955. Statistical theory in research. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ardrey, R. 1966. The territorial imperative. New York: Atheneum.
Argyle, M. 1969. Social interaction. New York: Atherton.
Argyle, M. F. Alkema, and R. Gilmour. 1971. The communication of friendly and hostile attitudes
by verbal and nonverbal signals. Unpublished Manuscript, Institute of Experimental Psychology,
Oxford University.
Argyle, M. , and J. Dean . 1965. Eye contact, distance, and affiliation, Sociometry, 28, 289-304.
Argyle, M. , and A. Kendon . 1967. The experimental analysis of social performance, in L.
Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 3. New York: Academic Press,
55-98.
Argyle, M. , V. Salter , H. Nicholson , M. Williams , and P. Burgess . 1970. The communication of
inferior and superior attitudes by verbal and nonverbal signals, British Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 9, 222-231.
Aronson, E. , and B. Golden . 1962. The effect of relevant and irrelevant aspects of communicator
credibility on opinion change, Journal of Personality, 30, 135-146.
Bach, G. R. , and P. Wyden . 1968. The intimate enemy. New York: William Morrow.
Baker, E. E. , and W. C. Redding . 1961. The effects of perceived tallness in persuasive speaking:
An experiment, Journal of Communication, 12, 51-53.
Bales, R. F. 1950. Interaction process analysis. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Bateson, G. , D. D. Jackson , J. Haley , and J. H. Weakland . 1956. Toward a theory of
schizophrenia, Behavioral Sciences, 1, 251-264.
Baxter, J. C. 1970. Interpersonal spacing in natural settings, Sociometry, 33, 444-456.
Beakel, N. G. , and A. Mehrabian . 1969. Inconsistent communications and psy-chopathology,
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 74, 126-130.
207 Bellugi, U. , and R. Brown . 1964. The acquisition of language, Monographs of the Society for
Research in Child Development, 29 (1, Serial No. 92).
Bentler, P. M. 1969. Semantic space is (approximately) bipolar, Journal of Psychology, 71, 33-40.
Birdwhistell, R. L. 1952. Introduction to kinesics. Louisville: University of Kentucky Press.
Birdwhistell, R. L. 1963. The kinesic level in the investigation of the emotions, in P. H. Knapp (ed.),
Expression of the emotions in man. New York: International Universities Press, 123-139.
Birdwhistell, R. L. 1970. Kinesics and context: Essays on body motion communication.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Boomer, D. S. 1963. Speech disturbance and body movement in interviews, Journal of Nervous
and Mental Disease, 136, 263-266.
Braatoy, T. F. 1954. Fundamentals of psychoanalytic technique. New York: Wiley.
Braine, M. D. S. 1963. The ontogeny of English phrase structure: The first phase, Language, 39,
1-13.
Brown, R. 1958. Words and things. New York: Free Press.
Brown, R. , and C. Fraser . 1963. The acquisition of syntax, in C. N. Cofer and B. S. Musgrave
(eds.), Verbal behavior and learning. New York: McGraw-Hill, 158-197.
Bugental, D. E. , J. W. Kaswan , and L. R. Love . 1970. Perception of contradictory meanings
conveyed by verbal and nonverbal channels, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16,
647-655.
Byrne, D. 1969. Attitudes and attraction, in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental social
psychology, Vol. 4. New York: Academic Press, 35-89.
Calhoun, J. B. 1962. The ecology and sociology of the Norway rat. Bethesda, Md.: Public Health
Service.
Cassirer, E. 1953-1957. The philosophy of symbolic forms, 3 vols. New Haven, Conn.: Yale
University Press.
Chappell, W. N. 1929. Blood pressure changes in deception, Archives of Psychology, 17, No. 105.
Cherry, C. 1966. On human communication. Cambridge, Mass.: M. I. T. Press.
Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.
Cohen, A. R. 1964. Attitude change and social influence. New York: Basic Books.
Cohen, J. 1968. Multiple regression as a general data-analytic system, Psychological Bulletin, 70,
426-443.
Condon, W. S. , and W. D. Ogston . 1966. Sound film analysis of normal and pathological
behavior patterns, The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 143, 338-347.
Condon, W. S. , and W. D. Ogston . 1967. A segmentation of behavior, Journal of Psychiatric
Research, 5, 221-235.
Coss, R. G. 1970. The perceptual aspects of eye-spot patterns and their relevance to gaze
behaviour, in C. Hutt and S. J. Hutt (eds.), Behaviour studies in psychiatry. Oxford, England:
Pergamon, 121-147.
Crowne, D. P. , and D. Marlowe . 1960. A new scale of social desirability independent of
psychopathology, Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349-354.
Crowne, D. P. , and D. Marlowe . 1964. The approval motive. New York: Wiley.
Crystal, D. , and R. Quirk . 1964. Systems of prosodic and paralinguistic features in English. The
Hague: Mouton.
208 Darwin, C. 1965. The expression of the emotions in man and animals. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
Davitz, J. R. (ed.) 1964. The communication of emotional meaning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Davitz, J. R. (ed.). 1969. The language of emotion. New York: Academic Press.
Deutsch, F. 1947. Analysis of postural behavior, Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 16, 195-213.
Deutsch, F. 1952. Analytic posturology, Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 21, 196-214.
Deutsch, F. , and W. F. Murphy . 1955. The clinical interview, Vols. 1 and 2. New York:
International Universities Press.
Dittmann, A. T. 1971. Kinesics and Context by Ray L. Birdwhistell, Psychiatry, 34, 334-342.
Dittmann, A. T. , and L. G. Llewellyn . 1968. Relationship between vocalizations and head nods as
listener responses, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 79-84.
Dittmann, A. T. , and L. G. Llewellyn . 1969. Body movements and speech rhythm in social
conversation, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 11, 98-106.
Dittmann, A. T. , M. X. Parloff, and D. S. Boomer. 1965. Facial and bodily expression: A study of
receptivity of emotional cues, Psychiatry, 28, 239-244.
Dollard, J. , and N. E. Miller . 1950. Personality and psychotherapy. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Duncan, S. , Jr. 1969. Nonverbal communication, Psychological Bulletin, 72, 118-137.
Duncan, S. , Jr ., and R. Rosenthal . 1968. Vocal emphasis in experimenters instruction reading
as unintended determinant of subjects responses, Language and Speech, 11, 20-26.
Efran, J. S. 1968. Looking for approval: Effects on visual behavior of approbation from persons
differing in importance, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 21-25.
Efran, J. S. , and A. Broughton. 1966. Effect of expectancies for social approval on visual
behavior, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 103-107.
Efron, D. 1941. Gesture and environment. New York: Kings Crown.
Ekman, P. 1964. Body position, facial expression and verbal behavior during interviews, Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 68, 295-301.
Ekman, P. 1965. Differential communication of affect by head and body cues, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 726-735.
Ekman, P. 1972. Universais and cultural differences in facial expressions of emotion, in J. K. Cole
(ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1971, Lincoln, Nebr.: University of Nebraska Press.
Ekman, P. , and W. V. Friesen . 1967. Head and body cues in the judgment of emotion: A
reformulation, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 24, 711-724.
Ekman, P. , and W. V. Friesen . 1969a. Nonverbal leakage and clues to deception, Psychiatry, 32,
88-106.
Ekman, P., and W. V. Friesen. 1969b. The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins,
usage, and coding, Semiotica, 1, 49-98.
Ekman, P. , and W. V. Friesen . 1971. Constants across cultures in the face and emotion, Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 17, 124-129.
Ellsworth, P. C. , and J. M. Carlsmith . 1968. Effects of eye contact and verbal content on affective
response to a dyadic interaction, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 15-20.
Escalona, S. K. 1945. Feeding disturbances in very young children, American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 15, 76-80.
Exline, R. V. 1962. Effects of need for affiliation, sex, and the sight of others upon initial
communications in problem-solving groups, Journal of Personality, 30, 541-556.
209 Exline, R. V. 1963. Explorations in the process of person perception: Visual interaction in
relation to competition, sex, and need for affiliation, Journal of Personality, 31, 1-20.
Exline, R. V. 1972. Visual interactionthe glances of power and preference, in J. K. Cole (ed.),
Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1971, Lincoln, Nebr.: University of Nebraska Press.
Exline, R. V. , and C. Eldridge . 1967. Effects of two patterns of a speakers visual behavior upon
the perception of the authenticity of his verbal message. Paper presented at the meetings of the
Eastern Psychological Association, Boston, April, 1967.
Exline, R. V. , D. Gray , and D. Schuette . 1965. Visual behavior in a dyad as affected by interview
content and sex of respondent, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 201-209.
Exline, R. V. , and D. Messick . 1967. The effects of dependency and social reinforcement upon
visual behavior during an interview, British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 6, 256-266.
Exline, R. V. , and L. C. Winters . 1965. Affective relations and mutual glances in dyads, in S.
Tomkins and C. Izard (eds.), Affect cognition and personality. New York: Springer, 319-330.
Eysenck, H. J. , and S. B. Eysenck . 1963. Manual for the Eysenck Personality Inventory. San
Diego: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
Feldman, S. S. 1959. Mannerisms of speech and gestures. New York: International Universities
Press.
Felipe, N. J. , and R. Sommer . 1966. Invasions of personal space, Social Problems, 14, 206-214.
Fischer, C. T. 1968. Social Schemas: Response sets or perceptual meanings? Journal of
Fisher, R. L. 1967. Social Schemas of normal and disturbed school children, Journal of
Educational Psychology, 58, 88-92.
Flavell, J. H. 1963. The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. New York: Van Nostrand.
Freedman, N. , and S. P. Hoffmann . 1967. Kinetic behavior in altered clinical states: Approach to
objective analysis of motor behavior during clinical interviews, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 24,
527-539.
Freud, S. 1938. The psychopathology of everyday life (1904), in The basic writings of Sigmund
Freud. New York: Random House.
Freud, S. 1959. Fragment of an analysis of a case of hysteria (1905), in Collected papers, Vol. 3.
New York: Basic Books.
Frijda, N. H. 1969. Recognition of emotions, in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental social
psychology. New York: Academic Press, 167-223.
Fromm-Reichmann, F. 1950. Principles of intensive psychotherapy. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
Garfinkel, H. 1964. Studies of the routine grounds of everyday activities, Social Problems, 11, 225-
250.
Gates, G. S. 1927. The role of the auditory element in the interpretation of emotion, Psychological
Bulletin, 24, 175. (Abstract)
Gitin, S. R. 1970. A dimensional analysis of manual expression, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 15, 271-277.
Goffman, E. 1961. Encounters: Two studies in the sociology of interaction. Indianapolis: Bobbs-
Merrill.
Golding, P. 1967. Role of distance and posture in the evaluation of interactions, Proceedings of
the 75th Annual Convention of the APA. 2, 243-244.
Goldman-Eisler, F. 1968. Psycholinguistics: Experiments in spontaneous speech. New York:
Academic Press.
210 Gottlieb, R. , M. Wiener , and A. Mehrabian . 1967. Immediacy, discomfort-relief quotient, and
content in verbalizations about positive and negative experiences, Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 7, 266-274.
Haley, J. 1963. Strategies of Psychotherapy. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Hall, E. T. 1959. The silent language. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday.
Hall, E. T. 1963. A system for the notation of proxemic behavior, American Anthropologist, 65,
1003-1026.
Hall, E. T. 1964. Silent assumptions in social communication, Disorders of Communication, 42,
41-55.
Hall, E. T. 1966. The hidden dimension. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday.
Hanfmann, E. , M. Rickers-Ovsiankina , and K. Goldstein . 1944. Case Lanuti: Extreme
concretization of behavior due to damage of the brain cortex, Psychological Monographs, 57
(Whole No. 264).
Hearn, G. 1957. Leadership and the spatial factor in small groups, Journal of Abnormal and Social
Henderson, E. H. , B. H. Long , and R. C. Ziller . 1965. Self-social constructs of achieving and
non-achieving readers, The Reading Teacher, 114-118.
Holt, E. B. 1931. Animal drive. London: Williams & Norgate.
Horowitz, I. A. , and B. H. Rothschild . 1970. Conformity as a function of deception and role
playing, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 224-226.
Hovland, C. I. , I. L. Janis, and H. H. Kelley . 1953. Communication and persuasion. New Haven,
Conn.: Yale University Press.
Hutchinson, A. 1970. Labanotation: The system for recording movement. New York: Theater Arts
Books.
Huttar, G. L. 1967. Some relations between emotions and the prosodic parameters of speech.
Santa Barbara, Cal.: Speech Communications Research Laboratory.
Insko, C. A. 1967. Theories of attitude change. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Jackson, D. N. 1967. Personality research form manual. Goshen, N. Y.: Research Psychologists
Press.
James, W. T. 1932. A study of the expression of bodily posture, Journal of General Psychology, 7,
405-437.
Jesperson, O. 1922. Language; its nature, development, and origin. London: Allen and Unwin.
Jones, E. E. 1964. Ingratiation: A social psychological analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts.
Jourard, S. M. 1966. An exploratory study of body accessibility, British Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 5, 221-231.
Jourard, S. M. , and J. E. Rubin . 1968. Self-disclosure and touching: A study of two modes of
interpersonal encounter and their inter-relation, Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 8, 39-48.
Jung, C. G. 1905. Diagnostisch assoziationsstudien, Journal fur Psychologie und Neurologie, 4, 1-
36.
Kahl, J. A. 1964. The American class structure. New York: Holt.
Kasl, S. V. , and G. F. Mahl . 1965. The relationship of disturbances and hesitations in
spontaneous speech to anxiety, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 425-433.
Keller, H. 1903. The story of my life. New York: Doubleday.
Kendon, A. 1967a. Some functions of gaze direction in social interaction, Acta Psychologica, 26,
22-63.
Kendon, A. 1967b. Some observations on interactional synchrony. Unpublished Manuscript,
Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, Pittsburgh, Pa.
211 Knower, R. H. 1945. Studies in the symbolism of voice and action: V. The use of behavioral
and tonal symbols as tests of speaking achievement, Journal of Applied Psychology, 29, 229-235.
Krasner, L. 1958. Studies of the conditioning of verbal behavior, Psychological Bulletin, 55, 148-
170.
Kuethe, J. L. 1964. Prejudice and aggression: A study of specific social schemata, Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 18, 107-115.
Lampel, A. K. , and N. H. Anderson . 1968. Combining visual and verbal information in an
impression-formation task, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 1-6.
Leipold, W. D. 1963. Psychological distance in a dyadic interview. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of North Dakota.
Lenneberg, E. H. 1967. The biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.
Levitt, E. A. 1964. The relationship between abilities to express emotional meanings vocally and
facially, in J. R. Davitz (ed.), The communication of emotional meaning. New York: McGraw-Hill,
87-100.
Levy, P. K. 1964. The ability to express and perceive vocal communications of feeling, in J. R.
Davitz (ed.), The communication of emotional meaning. New York: McGraw-Hill, 43-56.
Lewin, K. 1935. A dynamic theory of personality: Selected papers. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lewis, M. M. 1936. Infant speech. London: Kegan Paul.
Little, K. B. 1965. Personal space, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1, 237-247.
Little, K. B. 1968. Cultural variations in social schemata, Journal of Personality and Social
Lombroso, P. 1909. Das Leben der Kinder, Pedogogische Monographien. Leipzig: Nemrich.
Long, B. H. , and E. H. Henderson . 1968. Self-social concepts of disadvantaged school
beginners, Journal of Genetic Psychology, 113, 41-51.
Long, B. H. , R. C. Ziller , and E. H. Henderson . 1968. Developmental changes in the self-concept
during adolescence, The School Review, 76, 210-230.
Lorenz, K. 1966. On aggression (trans, by M. K. Wilson ). New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
Lott, D. F. , and R. Sommer . 1967. Seating arrangements and status, Journal of Personality and
Lowen, A. 1958. Physical dynamics of character structure: Body form and movement in analytic
therapy. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Luria, A. R. 1930. The method of recording movements in crime detection, Zeitschrift fur
angewandte psychologic, 35, 139-183.
Machotka, P. 1965. Body movement as communication, Dialogues: Behavioral Science Research,
2, 33-66.
Mahl, G. F. 1959. Measuring the patients anxiety during interviews from expressive aspects of his
speech, Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, 21, 249-257.
Mahl, G. F. , B. Danet , and N. Norton . 1959. Reflection of major personality characteristics in
gestures and body movement. Paper presented at Annual Meeting, American Psychological
Association, Cincinnati, Ohio, September, 1959.
212 Mahl, G. F. , and G. Schulze . 1964. Psychological research in the extra-linguistic area, In T.
A. Sebeok , A. S. Hayes , and M. C. Bateson (eds.), Approaches to semiotics. The Hague:
Mouton, 51-124.
Malamud, D. I. , and S. Machover . 1965. Toward self-understanding: Group techniques in self-
confrontation. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C Thomas.
Maltzman, I. 1967. Individual differences in attention: The orienting reflex, in R. M. Gagne (ed.),
Learning and individual differences. Columbus, Ohio, Charles E. Merrill, 94-112.
Mandler, G. , and S. B. Sarason . 1952. A study of anxiety and learning. Journal of Abnormal and
Marston, W. M. 1920. Reaction-time symptoms of deception, Journal of Experimental Psychology,
3, 72-87.
Matarazzo, J. D. , A. N. Wiens , and G. Saslow . 1965. Studies in interviewer speech behavior, in
L. Krasner and L. P. Ullmann (eds.), Research in behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, 179-210.
McBride, G. 1964. A general theory of social organization and behavior, St. Lucia, Austr.:
University of Queensland Press.
McNeill, D. 1966. Developmental psycholinguistics, in F. Smith and G. A. Miller (eds.), The
genesis of language. Cambridge, Mass.: The M.I.T. Press, 15-84.
McQuown, N. A. 1957. Linguistic transcription and specification of psychiatric interview material,
Psychiatry, 20, 79-86.
Mehrabian, A. 1964. Differences in the forms of verbal communication as a function of positive
and negative affective experience. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Clark University.
Mehrabian, A. 1965. Communication length as an index of communicator attitude, Psychological
Reports, 17, 519-522.
Mehrabian, A. 1966a. Attitudes in relation to the forms of communicator-object relationship in
spoken communications, Journal of Personality, 34, 80-93.
Mehrabian, A. 1966b. Immediacy: An indicator of attitudes in linguistic communication, Journal of
Personality, 34, 26-34.
Mehrabian, A. 1967a. Orientation behaviors and nonverbal attitude communication, Journal of
Communication, 17, 324-332.
Mehrabian, A. 1967b. Attitudes inferred from non-immediacy of verbal communications, Journal of
Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6, 294-295.
Mehrabian, A. 1967c. Attitudes inferred from neutral verbal communications, Journal of Consulting
Mehrabian, A. 1967d. Substitute for apology: Manipulation of cognitions to reduce negative
attitude toward self, Psychological Reports, 20, 687-692.
Mehrabian, A. 1968a. Inference of attitudes from the posture, orientation, and distance of a
communicator, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 32, 296-308.
Mehrabian, A. 1968b. Relationship of attitude to seated posture, orientation, and distance, Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 26-30.
Mehrabian, A. 1968c. The effect of context on judgments of speaker attitude, Journal of
Mehrabian, A. 1968d. Communication without words, Psychology Today, 2, 52-55.
Mehrabian, A. 1968e. An analysis of personality theories, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
213 Mehrabian, A. 1968f. Male and female scales of the tendency to achieve, Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 28, 493-502.
Mehrabian, A. 1969a. Measures of achieving tendency, Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 29, 445-451.
Mehrabian, A. 1969b. Significance of posture and position in the communication of attitude and
status relationships, Psychological Bulletin, 71, 359-372.
Mehrabian, A. 1969c. Some referents and measures of nonverbal behavior, Behavior Research
Methods and Instrumentation, 1, 203-207.
Mehrabian, A. 1970a. A semantic space for nonverbal behavior, Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Mehrabian, A. 1970b. Some determinants of affiliation and conformity, Psychological Reports, 27,
19-29.
Mehrabian, A. 1970c. Tactics of social influence, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Mehrabian, A. 1970d. The development and validation of measures of affiliative tendency and
sensitivity to rejection, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 417-428.
Mehrabian, A. 1970e. When are feelings communicated inconsistently? Journal of Experimental
Research in Personality, 4, 198-212.
Mehrabian, A. 1970f. Measures of vocabulary and grammatical skills for children up to age six,
Developmental Psychology, 2, 439-446.
Mehrabian, A. 1971a. Nonverbal betrayal of feeling, Journal of Experimental Research in
Mehrabian, A. 1971b. Verbal and nonverbal interaction of strangers in a waiting situation, Journal
of Experimental Research in Personality, 5, 127-138.
Mehrabian, A. 1971c. Silent messages. Belmont, Cal.: Wads worth.
Mehrabian, A. 1972. Nonverbal communication, in J. K. Cole (ed.), Nebraska symposium on
motivation, 1971. Lincoln, Nebr.: University of Nebraska Press.
Mehrabian, E. , and S. G. Diamond . 1971a. Seating arrangement and conversation, Sociometry,
34, 281-289.
Mehrabian, E., and S. G. Diamond. 1971b. The effects of furniture arrangement, props, and
personality on social interaction, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 20, 18-30.
Mehrabian, E. , and N. Epstein . 1972. A measure of emotional empathy, Journal of Personality.
Mehrabian, E. , and S. R. Ferris . 1967. Inference of attitudes from nonverbal communication in
two channels, Journal of Consulting Psychology, 31, 248-252.
Mehrabian, E. , and J. T. Friar . 1969. Encoding of attitude by a seated communicator via posture
and position cues, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 33, 330-336.
Mehrabian, E. , and S. Ksionzky . 1970. Models for affiliative and conformity behavior,
Psychological Bulletin, 74, 110-126.
Mehrabian, E. , and S. Ksionzky . 1971a. Anticipated compatibility as a function of attitude or
status similarity, Journal of Personality, 39, 225-241.
Mehrabian, E., and S. Ksionzky. 1971b. Factors of interpersonal behavior and judgment in social
groups, Psychological Reports, 28, 483-492.
Mehrabian, E. , and S. Ksionzky . 1972. Categories of social behavior, Comparative Group
Studies.
Mehrabian, E. , and H. Reed 1968. Some determinants of communication accuracy, Psychological
Bulletin, 70, 365-381.
214 Mehrabian, E. , and J. Russell . 1972. An approach to environmental psychology.
Unpublished manuscript, UCLA.
Mehrabian, E. , and M. Wiener . 1966. Non-immediacy between communicator and object of
communication in a verbal message: Application to the inference of attitudes, Journal of
Consulting Psychology, 30, 420-425.
Mehrabian, E. , and M. Wiener . 1967. Decoding of inconsistent communications, Journal of
Mehrabian, E. , and M. Williams . 1969. Nonverbal concomitants of perceived and intended
persuasiveness, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 37-58.
Mehrabian, E. , and M. Williams . 1971. Piagetian measures of cognitive development for children
up to age two, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1, 113-126.
Menyuk, P. 1969. Sentences children use. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.
Miller, D. E. 1966. Individual differences in the communication of emotion. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Utah.
Miller, N. E. 1964. Some implications of modern behavior therapy for personality change and
psychotherapy, in P. Worchel and D. Byrne (eds.), Personality change. New York: Wiley, 149-175.
Mills, J. 1966. Opinion change as a function of the communicators desire to influence and liking for
the audience, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 152-159.
Mills, J. , and E. Aronson . 1965. Opinion change as a function of the communicators
attractiveness and desire to influence, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 173-177.
Mowrer, O. H. 1950. On the psychology of talking birdsA contribution to language and personality
theory, in O. H. Mowrer (ed.), Learning theory and personality dynamics; selected papers. New
York: Ronald, 688-726.
Nachshon, I. , and S. Wapner . 1967. Effect of eye contact and physiognomy on perceived
location of other person, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7, 82-89.
Nakazima, S. 1965-1966. A comparative study of the speech developments of Japanese and
American English in childhood (2), Studia Phonologica, 4, 38-55.
Newman, S. 1933. Further experiments in phonetic symbolism, American Journal of Psychology,
45, 53-75.
Norum, G. A. , N. J. Russo , and R. Sommer . 1967. Seating patterns and group task, Psychology
in the Schools, 4(3), 276-280.
Osgood, C. E. 1966. Dimensionality of the semantic space for communication via facial
expressions, Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 7, 1-30.
Osgood, C. E. , G. J. Suci , and P. H. Tannenbaum . 1957. The measurement of meaning.
Urbana: The University of Illinois Press.
Patterson, M. L., and D. S. Holmes, 1966. Social interaction correlates of the MPI extroversion-
introversion scale, American Psychologist, 21, 724-725 (Abstract).
Pepper, S. C. 1942. World hypotheses. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Phillips, L. 1968. Human adaptation and its failures. New York: Academic Press.
Piaget, J. 1960. Psychology of intelligence. Paterson, N. J.: Littlefield, Adams.
215 Pittenger, R. E. , C. F. Hockett , and J. J. Danehy . 1960. The first five minutes. Ithaca, N. Y.:
Martineau.
Pittenger, R. E. , and H. L. Smith, Jr. 1957. A basis for some contributions of linguistics to
psychiatry, Psychiatry, 20, 61-78.
Reece, M. M. , and R. N. Whitman . 1962. Expressive movements, warmth and verbal
reinforcement. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 64, 234-236.
Reich, W. 1945. Character analysis (Trans, by T. P. Wolfe ). New York: Orgone Institute Press.
Riesman, D. 1950. The lonely crowd. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Roe, A. 1956. The psychology of occupations. New York: Wiley.
Rogers, C. R. 1959. A theory of therapy, personality, and interpersonal relationships, as
developed in the client-centered framework, in S. Koch (ed.), Psychology: A study of a science,
Vol. 3. New York: McGraw-Hill, 184-256.
Rosenfeld, H. M. 1965. Effect of an approval-seeking induction on interpersonal proximity,
Psychological Reports, 17, 120-122.
Rosenfeld, H. M. 1966a. Approval-seeking and approval-inducing functions of verbal and
nonverbal responses in the dyad, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 597-605.
Rosenfeld, H. M. 1966b. Instrumental affiliative functions of facial and gestural expressions,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 65-72.
Rosenfeld, H. M. 1966c. Relationships of ordinal position to affiliation and achievement motives:
Direction and generality, Journal of Personality, 34, 467-480.
Rosenthal, R. 1966. Experimenter effects in behavioral research. New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts.
Rosnow, R. L. , and E. J. Robinson . 1967. Experiments in persuasion. New York: Academic
Press.
Rubenstein, L. , and D. E. Cameron . 1968. Electronic analysis of nonverbal communication,
Comprehensive Psychiatry, 9, 200-208.
Scheflen, A. E. 1964. The significance of posture in communication systems, Psychiatry, 27, 316-
331.
Scheflen, A. E. 1965. Stream and structure of communicational behavior: Context analysis of a
psychotherapy session. Behavioral Studies Monograph No. 1. Philadelphia: Eastern Pennsylvania
Psychiatric Institute.
Scheflen, A. E. 1966. Natural history method in psychotherapy: Communicational research, in L.
A. Gottschalk and A. H. Auerbach (eds.), Methods of research in psychotherapy, New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts, 263-289.
Schlosberg, H. 1954. Three dimensions of emotion, Psychological Review, 61, 81-88.
Schuham, A. 1967. The double-bind hypothesis a decade later, Psychological Bulletin, 68, 409-
416.
Shipley, W. C. 1939. Shipley institute of living scale for measuring intellectual impairment. Norton,
Mass.: Mrs. W. C. Shipley.
Slobin, D. I. (ed.) 1967. A field manual for cross-cultural study of the acquisition of communicative
competence. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Smith, G. H. 1953. Size-distance of human faces (projected images), Journal of General
Smith, G. H. 1954. Personality scores and personal distance effect, Journal of Social Psychology,
39, 57-62.
Snider, J. G. , and C. E. Osgood , (eds.) 1969. Semantic differential technique. Chicago: Aldine.
216 Sommer, R. 1959. Studies in personal space, Sociometry, 22(3), 247-260.
Sommer, R. 1967. Small group ecology. Psychological Bulletin, 67, 145-151.
Sommer, R. 1969. Personal space. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Starkweather, J. A. 1964. Variations in vocal behavior, in D. M. Rioch (ed.), Disorders of
communication. Proceedings of ARNMD, Vol. 42. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
Stern , C, and W. Stern . 1920. Die Kindersprache. Leipzig: Barth.
Strongman, K. T. , and B. G. Champness . 1968. Dominance hierarchies and conflict in eye
contact, Acta Psychologica, 28, 376-386.
Tomkins, S. S. , and R. McCarter . 1964. What and where are the primary affects? Some evidence
for a theory, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 18, 119-158.
Trager, G. L. 1958. Paralanguage: A first approximation, Studies in Linguistics, 13, 1-12.
Truax, C. B. 1966. Reinforcement and nonreinforcement in Rogerian psychotherapy, Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 71, 1-9.
Vigotsky, L. S. 1939. Thought and speech, Psychiatry, 2, 29-54.
Watson, O. M. , and T. D. Graves . 1966. Quantitative research in proxemic behavior, American
Anthropologist, 68, 971-985.
Weakland, J. H. 1961. The double bind hypothesis of schizophrenia and three-party interaction, in
D. D. Jackson (ed.), The etiology of schizophrenia. New York: Basic Books, 373-388.
Weiner, B. , P. Johnson , and A. Mehrabian . 1968. Achievement motivation and the recall of
incompleted and completed exam questions, Journal of Educational Psychology, 59, 181-185.
Weiner, B. , and A. Kukla . 1970. An attributional analysis of achievement motivation, Journal of
Weinstein, L. 1965. Social schemata of emotionally disturbed boys, Journal of Abnormal
Weisbrod, R. M. 1965. Looking behavior in a discussion group. Term paper submitted for
Psychology 546, under the direction of Professor Longabaugh, Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University.
Weiss, W. 1957. Opinion congruence with a negative source on one issue as a factor influencing
agreement on another issue, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 54, 180-186.
Werner, H. 1957. Comparative psychology of mental development (Rev. ed.). New York:
International Universities Press.
Werner , H, and B. Kaplan . 1963. Symbol formation. New York: Wiley.
Whorf, B. L. 1956. Language, thought, and reality. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.
Wiener, M. , and A. Mehrabian . 1968. Language within language: Immediacy, a channel in verbal
communication. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Wiens, A. N. , R. H. Jackson , T. S. Manaugh , and J. D. Matarazzo . 1969. Communication length
as an index of communicator attitude: A replication, Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 264-266.
Williams, F. , and B. Sundene . 1965. Dimensions of recognition: Visual vs. vocal expression of
emotion, Audio Visual Communications Review, 13, 44-52.
Williams, J. L. 1963. Personal space and its relation to extroversion-introversion. Unpublished
M.A. thesis, University of Alberta.
217 Willis, F. N. , Jr . 1966. Initial speaking distance as a function of the speakers relationship,
Psychonomic Science, 5, 221-222.
Winer, B. J. 1962. Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Woodworth, R. S. , and H. Schlosberg . 1954. Experimental Psychology. New York: Holt.
Zaidel, S. F. , and A. Mehrabian . 1969. The ability to communicate and infer positive and negative
attitudes facially and vocally, Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 3, 233-241.

Preview

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preview

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

Preview

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NONNEREML COMMUNIOmON

Published 2017 by Routledge

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

Copyright © 1972 by A l b e r t Mehrabian.

A l l rights reserved. N o part o f this book may be reprinted or reproduced or

Library o f Congress Catalog Number: 2006052288

Library o f Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

I S B N 13: 978-0-202-30966-8 (pbk)

T h i s v o l u m e deals w i t h n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n and, m o r e specifically,

for each b e h a v i o r a l cue w o u l d y i e l d an enormous c o m p e n d i u m of facts,

2189 a n d N a t i o n a l Science F o u n d a t i o n grant 89) a l l o w e d m e t o b e g i n

1. A Semantic Space for N o n v e r b a l B e h a v i o r 1

5. Nonverbal Betrayal of Feeling 84

6. Inconsistent Messages a n d Sarcasm 104

8. Categories o f Social B e h a v i o r 147

9. Child Communication 159

10. Overview 178

APPENDIX A : Scoring C r i t e r i a for Some Categories of N o n v e r b a l

APPENDIX B : Personality Measures R e l a t i n g t o Affective

A Semantic Space For

Defining Nonverbal Behavior and its Functions

T h e last decade has seen a tremendous upsurge i n research a n d p o p u l a r

Trager, 1958). I n our discussions, w e shall refer t o these v o c a l qualities

a n d Saslow ( 1 9 6 5 ) , w e shall focus p r i m a r i l y o n h o w such behaviors con­

speech to get this extra i n f o r m a t i o n across. T h e t i m i n g of these movements

T h e w o r k of C o n d o n a n d O g s t o n (1966, 1967) has dealt w i t h synchron­

a n d hesitations. L o o k i n g away d u r i n g these a w k w a r d moments i m p l i e s

d e t a i l e d signs a l l o w t h e r e c o r d i n g o f such diverse movements as those of

Recent l i t e r a t u r e also contains some c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e c u l t u r a l differ­

t r a y a v a r i e t y of social situations. H i s findings i n d i c a t e d that, averaging

Categorizing Implicit Behaviors from the

O n e of the most t r o u b l e s o m e aspects of research i n any r e l a t i v e l y u n ­

O n e of t h e first attempts f o r a m o r e general c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of t h e refer­

sion, s i m i l a r dimensions characterize t h e referents of i m p l i c i t as w e l l as

Scheflen (1964, 1965, 1966) p r o v i d e d d e t a i l e d observations of an i n f o r m a l

t o u c h i n g , eye contact, a f o r w a r d lean rather t h a n a r e c l i n i n g p o s i t i o n , a n d

Perceived and Intended Persuasiveness. I n t h e first t w o experiments

w i t h shock. T h e second e x p e r i m e n t i n v o l v e d r o l e - p l a y i n g of deceit versus

Summary and Rationale for the Choice of

W h y d i d t h e t h r e e proposed r e f e r e n t i a l dimensions—positiveness, po­

You might also like

a n d Saslow ( 1 9 6 5 ) , w e shall focus p r i m a r i l y o n h o w such behaviors con

T h e w o r k of C o n d o n a n d O g s t o n (1966, 1967) has dealt w i t h synchron

Recent l i t e r a t u r e also contains some c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e c u l t u r a l differ

O n e of the most t r o u b l e s o m e aspects of research i n any r e l a t i v e l y u n

O n e of t h e first attempts f o r a m o r e general c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of t h e refer

W h y d i d t h e t h r e e proposed r e f e r e n t i a l dimensions—positiveness, po