Making Sense of Nonverbal Communication1 |
This chapter is an overview of the contents of the book. It is designed to show the reader the breadth and nature of the nonverbal topics addressed. Each topic will appear in some way in the remaining chapters treated from the topical perspective of the chapter. Should the reader wish to study the Symbolic Interactionist orientation before reading this chapter, she or he should read Chapter Nine first. It provides an integrated perspective from which to study nonverbal communication.
Although there are misconceptions about the nature of nonverbal communication (Soucie, 1979), there being many popular, sometimes distorted beliefs, it is clear that humans share the meanings of their daily lives intersubjectively through verbal and nonverbal communication. Most daily conversations are conducted face-to-face, the body playing a supporting role in communication. In many circumstances, people use emblems or gestures that can stand alone. Most of the time, however, humans communicate with one another by combining spoken language with body "language". Verbal and nonverbal communication are linked together synchronously (Birdwhistell, 1970, 1975), forming a complete presentation to the partipant or observer. This verbal and nonverbal interface must exist for humans to communicate fully. It is the body, however, that conveys most of the emotional semantics in communicative interactions (Mehrabian, 1981). The potential of human communication is realized only when body messages and spoken messages work together synchronously and harmoniously. Dysfunction and confusion result when the spoken word is contradicted by body messages.
In face-to-face situations, the entire body is presented to the observer. In mediated situations, however, the body is masked. For example, when using e-mail, people substitute for emotions that are normally displayed in face-to-face situations by creating emoticons (Herring, 1996). Emotional and paralinguistic cues are artificially produced by e-mail users. It is only in face-to-face communication that the full communicative reportoire can be expressed. In face-to-face situations, people reveal emotions and rhetorical sensitivity as they construct joint, intersubjective nonverbal messages. They can create healthy relationships or they can create dysfunctional relationships.
Nonverbal skills and competencies, of course, are learned. Some pathologies exist, such as autism or schizophrenia, which appear to be neuro-chemically induced; other body related diseases, such as anexoria or body dysmorphic disease appear to be the result of distorted perceptions. Pathologies, such as these, are displayed in particular ways, as in a frozen smile, a reptilian stare, or a very thin body. Normally, however, individuals learn how to use and display their bodies just as they learned how to use spoken and written language, yet a number of scholars indicate that spoken language and nonverbal behavior are processed in different ways in the brain (LeDoux, 1996).
People create a milieau and live within it; both the built and the natural environment are part of the context that influences human behavior. Artifacts, such as buildings, clothes and communicative technologies are created by humans; these artifacts influence their behaviors in turn. The social environment includes dyadic, group and public situations, such as ceremonies and rituals in which humans engage themselves. The built environment includes houses and public structures. Cultural thoughtways influence how buildings are structured. For example, Frank Lloyd Wright, a prominent American architect, designed homes that fit into the environment; the Navajo designed the hogan, a round-shaped building that grew out of their values, beliefs and practices.
This chapter is designed to give the reader an overview of the conceptual material that will be included and used in the remainder of the book. The reader will be introduced to the Symbolic Interactionist (hereafter referred to as SI) approach, an integrative way of studying and applying nonverbal communication.
The reader is aware that there are many ways to study nonverbal communication. For example, Affiliative Conflict Theory, The Expectancy-Norm Model, The Arousal-Labelling Model, The Arousal-Valence Model, The Discrepancy-Arousal Model and The Sequential-Functional Model are recent ways that researchers have investigated nonverbal communication with arousal being the central concern. (Andersen & Andersen,1984; Andersen, 1999). These recent models, just a few selected to illustrate the point, provide unique viewpoints and research models. These important models usually focus on narrow topics. The SI perspective, more aptly described as an approach, rather than a model or theory, is broad and it can include findings from other models without losing its integrity, although researchers from the SI background, tend to use qualitative, ethnographically research methods. (Denzin, 1971;Longmore,1998; Prus, 1996; Ritzer, 1990) (see Chapters Nine and Ten). SI is compatible with a number of other approaches. Of course, the story of human communication is long and complex (Schramm, 1988) and researchers have approached the topic of human communication in multiple ways.
The Symbolic Interactionist perspective puts emphasis upon human action, or agentry, and upon intersubjectivity and interpretation. People try to make sense of the nonverbal behavior of others and of themselves attaching meaning to the behaviors. Humans frame (Goffman, 1974) their worlds drawing upon their own personal experiences, their personal identity and life scripts. People respond to factual situations, to symbolic worlds found in literature, film, TV and books (Searle, 1995); they create meanings from what they observe others doing, in what they see themselves doing. They perceive, think, create lines of action, interact and then reflect upon the meaning of social events. The SI approach provides a way of looking at the naturally occuring world of human behavior.
Framing Meaningful Acts
All human beings create action sequences. They go to school; they drive a car; they read books; they go to movies, sing, play sports and so on. These action sequences have symbolic value, recognized as forms of doing. Sequences of action are made up of singular acts; for example, people know how to drive cars, but they learned, mastering one simple act, then another. In this process, drivers create schemes; they know the procedural rules, the techniques and so on. Given sufficient practice, they drive almost nonconsciously.
Sequences of acts are usually planned in inner conversations with the self (Vallacher & Wegner, 1985). When performed often, they become routine, requiring little pre-thinking. They are symbolic activities. Drivers invest meaning in what they are doing and derive meaning from doing it. They can tell others what it means to get a driver's license; they can share their joy in being able to take a trip. Whether the action is a simple handshake or a complex display of elaborate rituals, actions such as driving a car, human acts always carry a symbolic mantle, either from the actor's view or from the observer's view. In this sense, the study of nonverbal communication is communication about human actions. The meanings of human actions are shared intersubjectively, forming the basis of community (Blumer, 1969).
Symbolic interactionists suggest that the "actor" is always in the process of doing or thinking about doing; humans are influenced by others in interaction, in groups, institutions, society and culture. Society is not "out there"; rather humans engage interactively to produce society, engaging in self-talk, or conversations with themselves, to interpret behaviors. People take up multiple roles; indeed, they have many versions of themselves, not simply one, which are observed by themselves and others. People continually evaluate, negotiate, and produce "reality"(Charon, 1995; Fine, 1990).
Nonverbal action is usually associated with verbal activity, although it can stand alone. It is dynamic and creative, but it may be patterned and somewhat predictable. Individuals may plan and create lines of action; on the other hand, they may act and react spontaneously. Although people are agentive on their own behalf, they are also interpreters of the actions of others. In short, they are performers and they are audience members (Goffman, 1967; Leary, 1996). The human body is always present in social, interactive situations. In mediated situations, as discussed in chapter eight, when people are on the telephone, for example, only the voice is heard; yet it sends nonverbal paralinguistic messages (Pittam, 1994). When e-mail is used, humans construct self images as they relate to others who cannot see them.
Obviously, the human body is a physical entity, but it is the symbolic meaning that humans attach to the body that is important (Benthrall & Polhemus, 1975). For example, when people wish to make their bodies beautiful or handsome, they work on the images that their culture or society presents to them. People share cultural meanings associated with beauty which vary from culture to culture (Buss, 1989, Jankowiak, 1992). In the United States, the media portray the images of beauty in ways that are endlessly clear to the viewer, whether the observer accepts the images or not. In short, the participant in social interaction must decide what to do with the "stuff" of society, to try to make sense of it.
The sense of a body self, or body identity is inevitably connected to a sense of the social self. The body of course is ever present, always communicating, intended or not. Humans inevitably must construct or create meanings for their bodies, by taking account of the meanings that are imbedded in society and culture. People are able to make quite accurate statements about themselves, about their own bodies, although they may at times deceive themselves. Statements about the self and the body are designed to fit the circumstances (Leary, 1996). For example, people create fictitious selves on the internet, describing themselves in ways that they hope may appeal to others.
In this text, the author focuses on how people make sense of nonverbal communication. People perceive themselves and others symbolically, labeling their own bodies and the bodies of others. People hold conversations with themselves, about themselves, about others and about events. In short, there is a symbolic, cognitive activity involved in the presentation of self and in the interpretation of the nonverbal behaviors of others. In this text, this process is referred to as sensemaking, a word that is designed to suggest the often hidden symbolic activity that accompanies nonverbal communication.
There are scores of definitions and assumptions that researchers and scholars use to define nonverbal communication (1). One such definition says that nonverbal communication is comprised of all of the messages other than words that people use in interaction (Hecht & DeVito, 1990), a useful general approach, but it appears to fail to account for how people use words paralinguistically or how people create meaning in their interactions. To some extent, each definition reflects the training and tradition of the scholar involved. In everyday life, humans create meanings by drawing upon implicit assumptions rooted in their personal life experiences; in professional research, on the other hand, scholars make their assumptions explicit so that they are testable and useful.There are several elements involved in human nonverbal communication. Cultural, social and psychological factors enter into nonverbal communication in complex ways, as do gender, ethnicity, age and technology. The milieu, or social contexts, influence human nonverbal communication because these themes are deeply embedded in the contexts of everyday life. Each of these themes contain hidden codes. Space, time and the physical environment influence human nonverbal communication as well. These themes, or background factors, inevitably influence behavior because people take account of the social contexts in which they act. Meaningful lines of action are best created when people are aware of the dynamics of the social context in which they find themselves. Nonverbal communication is deeply influenced by these dynamic elements.
Humans are socialized into their worlds but, in becoming socialized, they take part in their own creative unfolding, not being passive; the baby gradually learns to use her body in appropriate ways. As humans go through life to a gerontological or even a centenarian age, they learn to construct new ways of thinking and doing, to modify their own identities, to alter the ways that they use the body. Humans enact strategies of behavior that will help them adapt and survive in a complex social world.
Framing A Definition of Nonverbal Communication
Nonverbal communication is a dynamic process that engages the mind, body and society as intersubjective entities. Humans create symbolic meanings for--and attach them to--the behaviors of self and others. They are influenced by the contexts of action and by master themes in society. In inner conversations with the self, or self-talk, humans propose and enact lines of action to fulfill the perceived demands of the situation, or the expectations of others. In this dramaturgy of behavior, humans learn to modify their nonverbal behaviors to meet the demands of new situations. Human identity, achieved in interaction, is poignantly expressed in self presentations.
Distinctions between behavior and communication are often made by scholars who study nonverbal communication. For example, it is suggested that spoken words represent something symbolically, but nonverbal communication is not representative of anything else. It stands for itself (Hecht & DeVito, 1990). For reasons dealt with more thoroughly in chapter ten, this text uses the terms behavior and nonverbal communication in similar ways. The better expression would be behavioral communication, the result of blending the concepts of behavior and communication. Except when people are talking within themselves, in self-talk, they are performing acts of meaning in interaction with others. People cannot not communicate! (Watzlawick, Beavin & Jackson, 1967).
The interpretation of self behaviors and the interpretation of others' behaviors is essentially a subjective, symbolic process; that is, to interpret behaviors, whether it is of the self or of others, requires one to think in meaning terms, essentially linguistic in nature. That nonverbal behaviors may arise in different areas of the brain than does spoken language (Andersen, 1999) is not the issue. The end result is that people create meanings in interaction. Even when people perform acts that are not meant to convey meaning to others, observers take note of the behavior and interpret it as they see fit regardless of the inner workings of neuronal processes. In short, people are always "on stage" being observed by others, unless, of course, they are simply ignored or dismissed. The communication-behavior nexus is firm and unavoidable; to focus only upon intentional nonverbal communication without stressing the "accidental" side is to miss what is going on in the theater of action. Humans act intersubjectively, sharing meaningful behaviors with fellow humans. Humans are inveterate actors and observers.
A number of scholars have delineated the differences between verbal and nonverbal communication, some suggesting that they are principally localized in different areas of the brain, the verbal in the left hemisphere and the nonverbal in the right hemisphere; that the verbal is primarily culturally based while the nonverbal is primarily biologically based; and that the verbal is digital while the nonverbal is analogic.(2) Further, they are processed differently in the brain, the verbal being processed discretely while the nonverbal is processed as a gestalt (Andersen, 1999). Continued research refines the knowledge about human nonverbal communication. For example, it is suggested that spoken language is predicated on a kind of nonverbal corporeal semantics (Armstrong, Stokoe & Wilcox,1995; Armstrong, 1999;Gilroy, 1996; Ruthrof, 2000) and that the intimate nature of bodily processes are inseparable from verbal processes. It is clear that some aspects of nonverbal behavior are lodged within the individual, unseen, while others are on display publicly. In self-talk, people make sense of events and they make plans or form intended lines of action. These acts of meaning (Bruner, 1990), public and private, are part of the same sensemaking process.
Framing Related Thoughts About Nonverbal Communication
It is omnipresent. All face-to-face interaction has a nonverbal component. It is useful in diverse ways . That is, humans use nonverbal means to persuade or control others, to clarify or embellish verbal expressions, or even to mislead others. It can be used to substitute for verbal expression, as in the use of emblems.
It is emotionally expressive. That is, people from all cultures smile, cry, caress or repress their emotions through body or facial action. Many emotional expressions seem to be at least minimally shared and displayed universally.
It exhibits both phylogenetic and ontogenetic primacy. That is, in the development of human communication, nonverbal behavior predated the development of verbal communication; individuals, upon birth, rely first upon nonverbal means to express themselves.
It has interaction primacy; even before a sentence is uttered, observors take note of body behaviors, trying to make sense of actors' behaviors.
It seems to be trustable. That is, people assume that nonverbal actions do not lie. People tend to believe a nonverbal message when a verbal message contradicts it. (Burgoon, Buller, Woodall, 1995)
Nonverbal communication can accent, complement, contradict, regulate, repeat and substitute for verbal communication.(Richmond & McCroskey, 1992)
It is the thesis of this text, following an SI approach, that the verbal and nonverbal sides of human communication are meaningful events, subjectively interpreted by individuals. To interpret the spoken word one may draw primarily upon the aural system; to interpret a nonverbal act one may draw primarily upon the visual system.
The important thing, emphasized in this book, is that the individual doing the interpreting is making sense of the behaviors of others, resulting in nonverbal communication.
People seem to use their bodies almost effortlessly, almost routinely without thinking. But, of course, the effortlessness is due to their experience. Everyday routines are the result of learning and achievement (Schegloff, 1986). Once learned, some body behaviors are displayed in the same way again and again without the necessity of personal attention or awareness. Indeed, it would appear that many behaviors are mindlessly enacted (Burgoon & Langer, 1995; Langer, 1989). Research reveals that a complex web of factors influence an individual's behavior. Why are some persons very skilled and competent nonverbally while others are awkward, even incompetent?(Hargie, 1986). The ability to manage and present oneself varies considerably in the general population due to a variety of hidden influences.
The complexity of human nonverbal communication may be illustrated by referring to research dealing with the physical face and the eyes, the face being the primary expresser of emotions, having features that seem to have minimum universality. (Ekman, Oster, 1979). The face displays primary emotions in unique ways. The study of oculesics, the pupils of the human eye, shows that they respond variously to different circumstances. The pupil either closes or widens under fearful or friendly conditions (Hess, 1975).
Eye movement is a key part of facial behavior, directing others' attention or showing surprise or happiness and other emotional displays. Eye gaze and gaze aversion help observers to know what the actor is up to. It is commonly believed that when people avoid looking one another in the eye that they are not trustworthy, or that they are lying. Are the eyes the window to the soul? Probably not. Cultural display rules influence how people use their faces and eyes. Black and Asian American children, for example, are taught not to look at an adult directly in the eye. Does this mean that they were lying? Stereotypes must be sorted out. The eyes are invariably involved in facial displays.
The face seems to emit emotionally contagious expressions (Hatfield, Cacioppo, and Rapson, 1994); for example, a smiling face may prompt a spontaneous response in another person. Facial expressions show approval, encourage friendship or deceive others (Ekman & Friesen, 1972, 1975; Ekman and Oster, 1979). Unfortunately most humans are not terribly good at detecting deception (Burgoon, Buller, Woodall, 1996; Ekman & Friesen, 1969).
The leakage hypothesis (Ekman, 1969)) suggests that, in some Freudian way, the human body leaks information even when actors are not aware of it(3). Perceptive, trained observers can sometimes unmask these hidden meanings. There appears to be a public interest in unmasking the personae of others, ferreting out nonverbal leakage. For example, professionals claim to be able to pick jurists by observing their nonverbal behaviors searching out those leaks of information that might indicate whether the potential juror is qualified to serve on the jury. Probably most people are interested in knowing the hidden secrets of others (Fast, 1970). In short, people try to make sense of how others use their eyes and their faces in interaction. The entire body, not just the eyes or face is involved in nonverbal communication.
Nonconscious communication refers to the fact that humans act nonverbally without paying attention to themselves. People are not always aware of themselves. The word unconscious, used instead by some writers, may refer to persons who literally are not awake, as is said about the boxer who is knocked out. The use of the word nonconscious refers to the fact that people can be awake but unobserving or unaware of what is going on about them. Of course, human action may operate below the perceptual or sensory threshold. For example, research shows that the the face buzzes with activity hidden just below the visual threshold (Birdwhistell, 1970).
As a practical matter, any reader will struggle in answering the following questions: How many facial wrinkles do you have? Does your face have a built-in smile or frown? Is one side of your face different from the other side? Is your facial skin color different from the skin color of your arms or legs? Are the pupils of your eyes normally wide or very small? Under what conditions do they change? Some observers will know the answers to these simple questions. Others will not due to inattentiveness, being unaware.
If it were necessary for humans to keep track of their breathing, the way they walk, or how they swing their arms, they would do little else in life. Habituated behavior enables people to get through the day without unnecessary attention to what they are doing. Dressing for the day, walking to school, having coffee and so on, tasks that may be simple or complex, can be performed without special attention. On the other hand, because they are habituated in their daily behaviors, they may lose sight of the fact that all human behavior is potentially full of rich meaning, as this book suggests. Erving Goffman, a prominent figure in the history of Symbolic Interactionism, unmasked everyday behaviors, finding meaning where others failed to look (Goffman, 1967).
Unlike most other primates, humans plan to do things and then they bring them about. That is, they clothe themselves to keep warm or cool, but, depending on their outlook, they may also dress to show themselves off. In daily discourse, humans use their bodies to make a point, to emphasize or illustrate what they are saying. People can point a finger in an emblematic gesture and convey a definite meaning, no words required. In short, they send intentional messages. Humans use strategies (Berger, 1997); they play games (Berne, 1964); they try to influence others using their bodies. When working jointly with others in common tasks, such as in playing in an orchestra, humans use their bodies in very specific skilled ways; otherwise, they cannot play the part. Humans perform meaningful and intentional acts in the presence of others.
But nonverbal presentations may be judged by others in ways that were not intended by the actor; unintended messages may be received and interpreted by observors. In these instances communication is accidental. In short, humans are always on stage whether they choose to be or not. People "shine" and give off signals and cues that they did not intend to send (Goffman, 1967).
Social semiotics is a science of language, both verbal and nonverbal. Semioticians make distinctions between signs, symbols, codes and display rules (4). Although there are differences in approaches to signs, for the purposes of this book, a sign is denotative and specific. It points to something, as smoke may indicate a fire. A reddened face may indicate that the owner is embarrassed or weary from body exertion. The interpretation is usually framed in context. That is, when a young lady’s face is reddened from physical exertion, one knows that she is not embarrassed. The context furnishes the clues to the meaning of her reddened face.
Signs and their usage vary from culture to culture. They are polysemic; that is, different persons may interpret them differently, there being many possible meanings. Signs, of course, occur in contexts which aid in their interpretation (Hodge & Kress, 1988; Kim, 1996). Symbols tend to be more complex kinds of signs. Humans create symbols arbitrarily to represent things, people or events. Symbols may be non-specific but meaningful. For example, it is said that wine symbolizes romance, health and the good life. Similarly, a wedding ring symbolizes one’s commitment to another; it symbolizes durable value and beauty. Symbols may exist in a master form, as in the Mona Lisa or the Statue of Liberty but their symbolic value lies in their interpretation by the observor, who has a frame of reference. In short, master symbols are embedded deeply in a culture or society (Duncan, 1968). Individuals born into that society must learn to make sense of the symbols. Humans construct society (Berger & Luckmann, 1963) and cultural elements; in turn, they must learn how to manage in a cultural milieu that is loaded with symbols. As part of symbolic interactionism, humans learn about cultural symbols, they use symbolic language and they symbolize the human body (Vlahos, 1979). They make sense of things; they create meanings. For example, the word mother may convey comfort, caring and attentiveness; the word father may convey strength, goal mastery and so on. To the abused child, the words mother and father may mean something very frightful. Interpretation, therefore, depends on contexts.
Codes refer to broader categories than do signs or symbols. They are not fixed entities; rather, they are modified over time, in keeping with social change. Deeply buried within a given society are underlying codes that inform humans how they should behave. For example, underlying codes indicate that people should shake hands or issue other forms of pleasant greetings when they first meet. Codes exist even though they may not be written down; humans learn about codes through indirect socialization, as they become aware of social expectations. Behaviors, habits and beliefs are shaped around these underlying codes or display rules.
Emblems are body acts that require no verbal accompaniment to be understood. Hand signals, such as waving goodbye, the V for victory sign, the high five signalling victory--all are examples of emblems. Nonverbal emblems may be sufficiently stable to categorize and label them. Scholars have constructed emblem dictionaries illustrating emblematic usage around the world (Morris, 1994). Not all people know the meanings of emblems just as they may not know the meanings of some words. An emblematic sign in one culture may mean something quite different in another, as in the use of the zero shape made by the fingers, which in American culture refers to one thing but in some European societies means something else, perhaps embarrassingly so. (Axtell, 1991). Meaning "OK" in English it may be a "bad" expression in other cultures, something that is not OK. Thus an emblem may be a taboo expression. Pantomime is a special form of emblematic communication; few, if any, words are needed to convey what the pantomimist wants to convey.
Artifacts are used in human nonverbal communication, often in the background. The word objectics is sometimes used to refer to artifacts. A boat, a watch or perfumes are artifactual in that they tell observers something about their users. Artifacts are not simply lifeless physical objects; contrarily, people invest meaning in them. They are semantic indicators. Thus, a watch, purchased to tell time, may also convey the status or social standing of the owner to the observer. Artifacts may reveal to others the values of their owners. Archaeologists are specially trained to read artifacts, to show how they represented cultures from the past.
Ritualistic and ceremonial behaviors are usually collective events. Customs and holidays are celebrated by social gatherings, special foods, games and other activities (Alexander, 1988; Deegan, 1989;Turner, 1986). They reflect cultural values and folkways and they exist separately from the individual who takes part in them. Rituals are often associated with religious activities, although much everyday behavior can be ritualized. Rituals are social events, usually jointly performed, that are nonverbal in nature. Going to church, attending synagogue, going to the football game and so on can become ritualized, yet deeply imbued with meaning. They are recognizable, patterned activities that exist in all cultures in different forms.
Ceremonies, similar to rituals, are usually public events that are jointly produced. The wedding ceremony, the funeral, rites of passage, births and so on are ceremonialized according to social custom. For the individuals involved, they take on meaning according to the experiences, life construals and frames of references of the individuals involved. Ceremonies, rituals and artifactual usage occur in all societies, conveying deeply held meanings with which the individual must come to terms. Ceremonial events may be quite structured although they may be altered from one generation to another; they may convey joy, bonding or togetherness, or enact or depict myths, depending on their function in society. Ceremonies involve life and death and all that falls in-between. They can act as rites of passage (Turner, 1967).
Some texts about nonverbal communication include sections dealing with the sixth sense (Leathers, 1978). However, there has been considerable debate by researchers over whether humans can and do communicate by using the sxith sense. The field of study, called parapsychology, has inspired research from both sides, from the skeptics(Blackmore, 1990) to the believers (Tart,1989), the so-called goats and sheep. People who claim to have extrasensorial abilities are fairly numerous in popular American culture. In other cultures, similar powers may be invested in a shaman or a witch doctor (Castaneda, 1969), as in the Navajo culture discussed in this book. Although there is good reason to discuss the sixth sense, given its place in the popular mind and in the minds of some scholars, there is far less clarity about parapsychological research than there is about the five senses; which, when taken together are referred to as the human sensorium, the five basic senses which all primates have.
Ethologists, those who study animal behaviors, usually from an evolutionary perspective, point out the sensate differences that are found among various species. Dogs, for example, have a well developed sense of smell; owls have well developed hearing and visual abilities; and monkeys and chimpanzees have well developed tactile abilities. All creatures have a neurological system; they are sentient, capable of sensing things in their environment. Evolutionists and ethologists emphasize that this differential development of the senses is due to the need for each species to adapt to complex environmental circumstances in order to survive. Thus, animals who hunt at night need good vision, for example (Wilson, 1992).
Unlike most other primates, humans, who sit atop the primate evolutionary ladder, can knowingly improve the use of their senses. They can employ tools, develop their sensitivities, train the body, build muscles and so on, all of which seems to enable humans to take part in their own evolution. As an everyday example, the ordinary human may not be able to discern between the fine nuances and bouquets found in various wines, but the enologist, trained to do so, can detect and distinguish thousands of odors and tastes associated with wine. Indeed, chemists have created an elaborate vocabulary detailing very fine nuances of smells and tastes that is useful to specialists (Cain, 1990). Although some lower order animals seem to create tools and make plans (Eibl-Eibestadt, 1975), it is not clear how much cognitive ability primates share with humans, although recent evidence suggests that chimps and humans are not far apart genetically. Chimps have learned emblematic vocabularies (Sagan, 1977).
Smell and taste are referred to as chemical senses. That is, they are very closely associated with each other and in close proximity to the brain, serving rudimentary functions. They are referred to as olfactory and gustatory processes. As in the case of tactility, or touch, they come into play mostly when they are in immediate contact with foods or other items. The chemical senses change as humans age; they are affected by hormonal changes in women who are menstruating or giving birth. Smell and taste perform important basal functions, such as enhancing as food odors. A recent internationally based smell study, performed by National Geographic (Gilbert & Wysocki, 1987) revealed key differences between males and females on a smelling index and how culture influences perceptions of odors and taste. In short, there are cultural overlays resting on top of the physical function of smelling. Another line of inquiry suggests that humans have individualized olfactory signatures. Pheromones, active in lower order animals in the sexual act, may be active in humans, influencing the mating, courtship ritual. Scientific research needs to validate the possibility. Perfume makers would like to know the answer to the question! They have put a perfume on the market called Pheromone.
Oculesics, mentioned above, is a field of study that refers to the use of the eyes and eye movement, including to some extent, perceptual processes (Webbink, 1986). From early studies focusing on what happens when a cat sees a mouse--the iris opens automatically-- (Hess, 1975) to recent research about the color of they eyes, eye attraction and gaze behavior, research about the eyes indicates that the eyes have directive features; that is, humans can influence others merely by the way they use their eyes. When a speaker suddenly looks to the side of the room, her observors may look there as well. Humans can encourage affiliation or they can discourage contact, merely by how they use their eyes. There are cultural, gender and ethnic differences among humans influencing how they use their eyes and in how that use is interpreted by observers. Staring is a common nonverbal activity found among lower order animals.
Aurality refers to the ability of humans to hear, an ability that varies highly among cultures. It also is age-related. The young enjoy loud music; the old enjoy softer music. Hearing can be improve with training. For example, a recent study showed that conductors could hear orchestral sounds that others in the orchestra could not detect (New York Times, Feb 1, 2001). However, the human hearing mechanism does not permit them to hear as well as many lower order animals. In some lower order animals, the use of echolocation mechanisms help them as they hunt, mate or move about in the physical environment.
Tactility, or haptics, refers to one's ability to touch and feel, the skin being the largest sensitive organ in the human body. Touching has been associated with gentling and bonding in both humans and other primates (Montagu, 1971) and to attitudes about body accessibility (Jourard, 1966; Jones, 1994)) and self-confidence (Jones, & Brown, 1996). The human skin is sufficiently sensitive that individuals can discern writing patterns performed on their backs, out of sight. The ability to touch, or grasp, differs among lower and higher order species; for example, it is clear that a hippopotamus cannot grasp a tree limb as a simian can. In the case of humans, the use of the fingers, thumbs and hands occurs within the field of vision, greatly enhancing human tactile abilities. Touching, holding, pushing, grasping, shaping, or throwing come easily to human beings. Humans take these activities and possibilities for granted. Most lower order animals can not perform these tasks.
Display rules suggest that how people touch one another conveys important and specific meanings. The question has been asked whether there is a right touch. (Jones, 1994). There are power touches, professional touches, intimacy touches and so on, each having social codes attached. Laws protect citizens from inappropriate touch, as in rape or beatings. In short, touching must be acceptable and appropriate. At one extreme lies touch aversion; that is, some people fear the touch of others, based on their negative experiences. At the other extreme, there is supportive touch. It is said that some cultures promote touch starvation; that is, the natives seem to be starved for affection, which they may not get in interpersonal situations (Jourard, 1966).
In sum, research about the five senses and how they interact in the daily lives of human beings is increasing. Research is showing how these sensory mechanisms, sometimes referred to as nonverbal channels, work together, how they are used in gendered ways, how they vary between cultures and ethnic groups and so on. It is obvious that humans need to know little about these mechanisms even though they rely on them for information. Research suggests that in the Western world especially, the eyes take primacy,(McLuhan, 1964; Ong, 1982) not surprising in an age of television and film; nor is it surprising that engineers have created machines that hear, speak, listen, and send odors.
Framing the "Sixth" Sense
Returning to the topic of the sixth sense. Is there a sixth sense? Do people know things other than through use of the corporal senses? Considerable research has been conducted on human subjects, in an attempt to determine whether telepathy, aura reading, precognition, clairvoyance, remote viewing, the moving of objects by kinetic energy and other phenomena are legitimate aspects of human experience; if so, how are they to be interpreted? The field of parapsychology has serious scholars researching and working on the many issues involved. Again, many scholars dismiss entirely the claims of parapsychologists.
One major issue is whether results of experiments can be replicated; another major issue deals with the nature of the experimentation itself. Subjects, who are thought to have some telepathic ability, often called psychics or sensitives--terms that are often used pejoratively--complain that laboratory situations restrict their performances. For example, Ganzfeld experiments require the subject to be deprived sensorily by placing blinders over the eyes while the eyes are kept open. White noise is used as a mask throughout the experiment. The subject is asked to receive a message telepathically from the sender outside the cage while these sensory impediments are in place. This bizarre experimental method seems to be faulty on the face of it because subjects claim that it interferes with their psychic senses. How can one access the alpha state when machines impede and interfere? Could a psychic, or any subject, relax under these laboratory conditions?
A third issue seems to be centered on the effect of belief. If one is a believer, perhaps she or he is more likely to claim that unusual experiences are psychic experiences. Research about psychic phenomena, the world of parapsychology, seems to be interesting to most people ; yet, the sixth sense does not seem to be established clearly enough to give it the sixth sense label. This is not to say that people who experience psychic phenomena are to be disregarded. Indeed, future research may reveal much more than is presently known. Perhaps new research paradigms will yield better results; the models used until now seem to fail.
Humans are fond of watching one another (Morris, 1985); the body, of course, is gendered (Holland & Adkins, 1996). Women and men present themselves to others, whether their body action is confined to the eyes, the entire head, the trunk of the body or the entire body. Body behaviors have been given considerable attention in the research literature, as has somatyping, the idea that body shape and size are correlated with certain kinds of behaviors. Endomorphic, mesomorphic or ectomorphic shapes have been described. (Sheldon, 1959). In early research it was believed that ectomorphs, the tall, thin people, had delicate personalities; medium sized people, the mesomorphs, were generally outgoing or athletic. The endomorphs, very heavy people, were thought to be languorous and slow.
Correlation is not causation, although it is often interpreted as causational. Biological structure may influence attitudes, but it does not predetermine attitudes; attitudes are created by the owner of the body, who in turn is influenced by her or his society. The importance of perceptions and stereotypes associated with body size and shape cannot be overstated, especially in Western countries, where body ideals are promoted by the media, a powerful force in Western societies. Everyone knows, generally speaking, what Miss America should look like, even though the criteria for winning it changes over time. Never should she be too heavy or too short!
Body communication has been studied under the general name of kinesics. People often associate the idea of bodily communication (Argyle, 1983) exclusively with the use of gestures, but the field of study is now much broader. A body lexicon used to describe body behavior was created in early research including words like kines, morphs, kinemorphic constructions and other words, created to enhance the study of nonverbal behavior (Birdwhistell, 1970). A kine is the smallest unit of body expression, such as a facial movement; a morph may express the movement by two or more head motions; and, a kinemorphic construction may refer to the movement of the entire upper torso----all in synchrony with the verbal stream. Using this body language system, researchers have attempted to show how the verbal and the nonverbal streams work together in synchrony. Dancing, for example, reveals the integration of the body (Farnell, 1995) and how it manifests action signs.
Semioticians focus on the ways that spoken language is tied into human behavior (Leeds-Hurwitz, 1993) and they are able to differentiate between male and female language use (Mulac, Ludell, & Bradac, 1986). Within spoken language there are paralinguistic features. Paralinguistic studies focus on how humans use language, rather than with what they actually say. Emotional elements are expressed in everyday conversation; gender and social class markers are found there. For example, older people, males and females and members of various ethnic groups, use different voice pitch, loudness or range of tonality, compared to one another. Females typically have a higher vocal range than do males (Buck, 1982) as is commonly observed. This difference, of course, is not absolute. To a large extent, it is a learned difference.
The word genderlect has been used to the distinctive ways that males and females express themselves, as learned through socialization. Not only do males and females differ in the patterning of vocal sounds, but they tend to use different sentence phrasing, different conversational styles and different conversational floor patterns, including different conversational turn-taking styles (Pittam,1994). Animated vocalization has been associated with extroverted personalities, while interrupted speech patterns have been associated with mental and emotional disturbance (Mahl, 1987). Attempts have been made to associate psychological and personality traits with vocal patterns and various paralinguistic styles (Argyle, 1983). As one can hear that the vocal patterns, or voice set, of older people, are very different from the vocal patterns of young children.
People from Latin America may differ substantially in their vocal patterns, or their voice set, compared to Whites or Blacks in North America. Cubans and Native Americans may differ substantially between groups. These are learned and practiced ethnic differences. Japanese “manage the floor” in conversations differently from Americans.
It is obvious that humans move about in space; less obvious, is that their ways of moving about vary considerably, based on the ways they have been socialized (Sommers, 1969, 1974). Smaller in body, females need less space generally speaking than do males. The ways that the British, the Japanese, the Arabs and others from other areas of the world use space differ, sometimes substantially. Americans tend to feel crowded when people enter their personal space closer than three feet, the desired norm. Arabs, on the other hand, feel quite normal when they are close to one another in dyads or groups.
It has been said that the ways humans use space is governed by a hidden language(Hall, 1966, 1973); hidden codes exist, guiding people, although they are not aware of them. Humans become aware of the norms of space when that space has been violated. Spatial zones of interaction have been devised, varying by cultures. For example, intimate distance, personal distance, social distance and public distances vary considerably. (Hall, 1966, 1973). The concept of zero proxemics implies that there is no space between bodies, a condition, which, in most instances, makes humans feel uncomfortable. In loving situations, of course, one expects to be touching, body to body. A mother who does not touch her child is said to be cold and reserved. On the other hand, in other situations, space violations occur, as in rape, physical abuse and other demeaning activities. In general, extreme body closeness is shunned from culture to culture but there is considerable variation between cultures.(Altman, 1975)
The concept of territoriality, a concept borrowed from the ethological study of animals (Ardrey, 1966), suggests strongly that humans, like other species, share normative expectations about how their space is claimed. Humans mark their spaces, perhaps by putting a purse on the table to define their space in their absence, or by putting fences between them and their neighbors. Lower order species, by contrast, mark their territory by urination or body rubbing. When students enter classrooms, they tend to choose their seats in accordance with their perception of comfort, barring other reasons, as sociometrists have shown. The use of space varies enormously from situation to situation, from culture to culture; nevertheless, humans follow hidden display rules and context codes as they determine how they will use space.
Chronemics is the study of the human invention and use of time. In some societies, it is clear that humans are almost cultish about time; they follow a cult of the clock. Researchers suggest that humans have built- in physiological, psychological and social clocks (Bruneau, 1979; Gonzales & Zimbardo, 1990) and that there are biological rhythms which vary according to age and sex. For example, some people work best in the morning while others work best at night, like sparrows and owls.
Time, of course, is a human conception. It does not have fixed dimensions. Early Native Americans relied upon seasonal changes for their sense of time, as do many members of traditional cultures in various parts of the globe. Today, some modern Navajo members may live away from the Reservation working in an industry that is governed by the hourly clock, returning at night to the Reservation, where different meanings for time are used.
The sense of time is related even to emotional and body health. Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD), a form of depression, has been reported to be associated with the dark months of winter (USAToday, Jan 3, 1999). Speed in walking, talking and behaving vary highly between and among regions of the United States based on the underlying hidden codes for the region.
Some cultures are past-oriented; others are present or future-oriented. It is said that American youth tend to be future-oriented while older citizens tend to be past oriented. These generalizations appear to have some validity; but, of course, humans are free to change the way they think and behave.
The environment influences nonverbal communication. Colors in the background are thought to influence moods and behaviors. For example, the soft color of green is often painted onto library walls furnishing a quiet, restful context. Bright red would seem to destroy the study mood. Unfortunately, the study of color and its influence on human behavior is only beginning to receive solid research attention. Anecdotal and popular notions seem to be pervasive. Yet, from a practical view, it seems that humans choose colors in clothing, in their houses, or for their cars because they like them or feel comfortable with them. Not just any color will work for them.
Humans don warm clothing in the winter and shed it in the summer. Clearly, humans create behaviors that are influenced by background variables. The physical environment, like the social environment, is a powerful influence on human behaviors, although the research is not substantial.
Humans create architectural environments which reflect cultural values. As mentioned, the famous Frank Lloyd Wright designed houses to blend into the landscape, creating a prairie style. His houses were designed to let the outdoors in, by using large windows, subdued lighting, skylights and overhangs. Earthy colors were used to blend the buildings into the landscape. This great American architect influenced generations of later architects. He built his houses to fit into the environment, as no prior architect had done, showing Americans how to live more meaningfully within the environmental context.
On a less appealing side, American architecture, referring especially to public buildings, has been referred to as "hard architecture" (Sommer, 1974), meaning that it conforms little to comfortable human use, being designed for the faceless public person. Railroads, prisons, banks and other buildings are said to be hard, rather than soft, and to restrict rather than to open. Modern architecture and ergonomic development attempt to build better structures, more accommodating to the comfort of the users.
Architectural variations throughout the world reflect the values of their builders. The buildings of slash and burn cultures are necessarily temporary; the open courtyards of the Spanish built structures, found in South America and Spain, reflect the need for space, using courtyards. The tribal Navajo member had a sense of place and space that used open pastoral scenes, that incorporated traditional views of the four major directions, that oriented the natives to natural phenomena, such as the sun and the moon. Architectural structures and patterns arise from symbolic meaning of space, time and place found in each culture.
Darwin, the father of evolution, was interested in how humans emerged and how they expressed themselves (Darwin, 1869 (1967). In recent years, ethologists still follow that interest. Biologists have solved the genetic code, the Book of Life; it now appears that humans are much closer to other species, such as chimps, in genetic make-up than has been previously assumed. The Great Chain of Being, a theoretical-religious view, placed all species, including humans, on an ordered hierarchy in order of importance, a species high on the ladder being more important than one lower down.This belief system is now eroded. It is now known that the common mouse and the chimpanzee share many of the genes that are found in humans and that some genes may have arisen from bacteria, hardly conceivable to early scholars.
It was once believed that male white men were higher on the Great Chain of Being than were women, Blacks and other people of color. It is now understood that there is very little physical difference between these groups; there is nothing to justify the superiority of one color or gender over the others. The study of genetics has given the ethologists new understandings about the inter-relationships of species, especially of higher primates (Agassiz, 1850; Gould, 1981; Wilson, 1992).
Self awareness and self validation seem to be characteristics that humans share, perhaps with chimpanzees, although this is not clear. It is, however, widely debated. The ability to take the role of the other, an important concept in SI, is part of the awareness of self that sentient creatures, such as humans, have evolved. Human aggression seems to be shared among most species whether they are higher order primates or not. For example, the concept of white supremacy, discussed in Chapter Six, was behind White aggression against colored people, the Blacks, the Chinese and Native Americans. Whites in the past often referred to darker skinned people as colored.
Ethologists are evolutionists who study both humans and lower order animals. Human ethologists are interested in universal behaviors such as infant attachment, emotion, dominance, nonverbal behavior and ritual. Comparative study of animal behaviors furnishes a means to put human behavior in context. For example, research on chimpanzee behavior in which the major stars have been Lucy, Washoe and Koko, suggests that humans and chimps are not terribly far apart in their evolutionary development, although there are important key differences. The claim is made that chimps can acquire substantial nonverbal vocabularies when they are raised among trainers. It has been shown that chimps can use tools to do work or to reach food (Eibl-Eibestadt, 1975) and that, by watching their elders, young chimps can learn to do what their parents do. Chimps, parrots and other animals appear to learn things, somewhat like young human children.
Animal communication, as a field of study, is now taught in universities. Parrots are shown to have remarkable "thinking" ability; some songbirds, like finches, can learn new songs, thriving in a song-rich background. A debate rages about whether higher order creatures truly think, as do humans, or whether their behavior is basically instinctive with some modifications. Some evidence shows that dolphins and chimps can recognize themselves in a mirror, presumably a first step in self-awareness. Unfortunately, the issues are confused by the persistent, almost unavoidable, anthropomorphizing of findings, in which scientists interpret animal behavior using human models and assumptions. Human beings are able to be the objects of their own thoughts, unlike most or all other animals. The implication of this ability is that humans can create a sense of self and identity. They can talk about themselves and others and construct meaningful relationships. They can make sense of their social worlds.
Sociobiologists and physical anthropologists are interested in how behavior arises. Is it tied into genetic codes? Is it learned? How does it vary by context? Are animals socialized? Which animals seem to think? How do humans differ from higher order primates? The general field called ethology is yielding important information which can be used to compare human and primate behaviors. Perhaps it is safe to say that there is a balance between nature and nurture that furnishes most of human physical and social growth.
Although the study of linguistics and anthropology have changed considerably in the past few years, spawning many subfields of inquiry, such as sociolinguistics or bio-anthropology, they were studied together for decades. Linguists, like anthropologists, know that the use of language is a key to human studies, as is the study of nonverbal communication. Early theorists assumed that language expressed unconsciously patterned social processes (Sapir, 1928) and that culture and language are one and the same. This linguistic relativity hypothesis was challenged in more recent times (Chomsky, 1980). More recently, issues have been raised about the universality of human nonverbal communication (Eibl-Eibestadt, 1979). The concept of minimum universality has been promoted relative to the display of emotions.
Anthopologists refer to acculturation and assimilation, two ways by which culture gets into human heads. Humans acquire their values, symbols, beliefs, customs, technologies and habits through these twin processes. Human nonverbal ways of behaving are deeply influenced by cultural processes. Anthropologists are interested in ceremonial behaviors, in rites of passage and in how gender, ethnicity and aging are construed in various cultures.
Early anthropologists, perhaps quite unlike modern ones, often used the case study method to study villagers, often in remote places (Kluckhohn, 1965). By studying one or two villagers, it was believed that one could understand the general make-up of the entire village because the subject had assimilated the knowledge, expected behaviors and cultural ways of the villagers at large. The subjects were the carriers of culture, influenced by the acculturation process.
Anthropologists studied chronemics, the time orientation of cultures, ritualistic behaviors and ceremonies and the folkways of a given culture, referring to folk cultures. The general point to be made is that anthropologists know that the cultural background of the inhabitant of a given culture deeply influences the nonverbal behavior of that person and the ways in which humans tend to interpret life. The lifeworld of each inhabitant is created by the person, but the influences on that creative expression are powerful. A person living in a highly tooled and technologically oriented culture may not know how to survive in the jungles of the Amazon, as the local natives do. Their fund of tacit technological knowledge is not useful in a very different pre-technological culture. Tribal natives from the Amazon basin would not know how to survive in New York City.
The concept of socialization is well known to most readers. Starting from birth, perhaps even before, in its daily exposure to human society, the newborn becomes a fully functioning being. The individual is not determined by society to be anything in particular; rather, the individual must learn to make sense of what he experiences in everyday life. The colors blue and pink in American society are associated with the birth of boys and girls and, throughout life, as humans pass through the various stages of growth, from youth through the gerontological age, humans semantically tag themselves and are tagged by other members of society. They are genderized, ethnicized and aged in this construal process (Weigert, 1986, 1997). Ethnicity, gender and age are concepts that are created and applied to groups and individuals. Constructed too narrowly, they serve to isolate their members; constructed too loosely, they fail to serve the members well. The main focus of this book is upon identity adaptiveness or the ability of humans to engage positively with others who are different from themselves. How people think influences what they do.
Standpoint theory (Wood, 1995) suggests that humans are heavily influenced by their birthplace in society. The wealthy have very different expectations for their offspring than do people who live in the ghetto. They learn different ways of behaving. Social codes and the expectations of social class become imbedded in hman thinking. Social class, power and influence, ethnicity, gender and the theme of aging deeply affect how humans communicate nonverbally. These master themes, or variables, are deeply imbedded in daily life. They are revealed in the clothes that people wear, in their characteristic patterns of social conduct and in their expectations. In short, each individual must learn to make sense of the social milieau, to take account of the stuff of society, responding to it, interpreting it, and acting out roles.
Human identity is rooted in the interpretation and perception of the self, a psychological activity. In interaction with others and in conversations with the self, humans create their identities. They learn that there is an I and a Me in the self and that both are observable in human action. The I is active; the Me is responsive, both being key parts of the sense of self and identity (Mead, 1925,1934). Self concepts, identity and the construal of the meanings of human behavior is the work of psychologists, communicologists and others.
The concept of face (Goffman, 1959; Ting-Toomey, 1994) is closely allied with the concept of identity. Not to be confused with the physical face, it is symbolic. Humans present themselves to others symbolically, using their bodies and their words. People learn how to save face or to promote a confident face. They learn to ingratiate themselves with others (Jones, 1964, 1990). The face gets construed and scripted. People learn to avoid embarrassment and to create positive impressions in the minds of others, who act as audiences.
Psychologists reveal that humans use action language (Vallacher and Wegner, 1985), creating plans for action, both simple and omplex, to accomplish goals. They look back on their activities and make sense of them, building upon them, acting coordinatively with others in joint activities. They evaluate their own success or failure as they interact with others. A complex action may involve days, months or weeks of planned activity, such as those involved in courtships; or, they may be very simple, such as the brushing of the teeth in the morning. Each activity is meaningful to the participant.
A variety of communication models are used in the study of the general field of Communication and, more specifically, in the subfield called Nonverbal Communication. Each model, or approach, has advantages or disadvantages. For example, a sender-message-receiver model is popular in Communication, a linear view. This approach has been widely used in quantitative studies. The symbolic interactionist approach, has a number of advantages not shared by the SMR model, including the view that humans are creative, taking part in an interactive setting in special ways, not necessarily predictable.
Nonverbal communication is not a linear process. It is a contingent process; humans build one action upon another, reflecting upon what they have done in preparation for the next episode. They negotiate and modify their actions as needed.
Human, gendered identity is constructed and achieved; it is created in a long-term process, influenced by complex, often poorly understood elements in society (Wood, 1994). It is implied sometimes that identity, personality and character are fixed, unchanging concepts; contrarily, they are dynamic, yet fairly enduring clusters of focused concepts. Socialized from birth, humans choose, often unwittingly, how they will define themselves. Even though they are born with explicit sexual characteristics, they will genderize their identities.
Many scholars who hold an essentialist view of sex tend to show how males and females differ categorically; however, they fail to take into account that humans can and do define and redefine themselves as they choose, changing the ways they act in different circumstances (Carol Tavris, 1992). In saying this, it is not meant to imply that the creation of identity is a thoroughly rational process in which all of the elements are clearly known or depicted. Indeed, quite the opposite is often the case. Humans are often confused as they try to come to terms with self identification, especially in a society heavily saturated by the media (Gergen, 1991).
There are biological differences that clearly influence gendered behavior; men do not give birth or have menstrual periods, although it is claimed by some researchers that men have their own pronounced biological shifts. Women in general have smaller bodies than do men. Even this comparative smallness is amenable to alteration. Women can and do become physically powerful. The concept of gender is a powerful, modern concept influencing nonverbal communication(Kotthoff and Wodak, 1997). (See Chapter Five for a thorough discussion of genderized nonverbal communication).
Race and ethnicity are powerful themes in Western society; indeed, they are universal themes, meaning different things in different cultures. It is no accident that some cultures place people on the social class ladder based on their color alone. Like gender, concepts about race and color are learned. People are born into a colored world but they create the meanings of the world for themselves. Humans construe the meaning of skin color. In relatively simple and static societies, people know where they stand socially, based on skin color; in complex, change-oriented societies, people may move about in society and create new meanings about ethnicity, race or skin color.
Unfortunately, in the United States, a country that espouses an egalitarian ethos, where all people are to be treated equally, entire populations of colored persons have been--in many cases still are--treated as strangers by the dominant and prevailing white class, based almost entirely on the color of skin, although other factors come into play. This stranger-making process is complex and it varies according to the groups being studied.
In this book, four ethnic groups are discussed; each has different historical origins and experiences with early mainstream White Americans. Native Americans, or the Navajo, Black Americans and Chinese Americans are studied along the lines of how they achieved their identity in a white world. Identity is the key nonverbal concept and in the case of each of the above, the stuff of history has forced them to deal with their place in a white society. The presence of Cuban Americans in the United States arises from a very different social motif; usually, they have been treated as friends who fled a hostile home country to find a sense of place in the United States.
Broad themes emerge in this struggle for inclusion. How can a society move from a stranger-making process to a friendship- making process, ignoring differences and building on similarities? This is the modern struggle in a society that is becoming colored more and more, according to the Census 2000 report. (Chapter six focuses on the unique influences on the identities of people of color in the United States)
The study of aging, as opposed to the idea of ageism, is about changes in the ways that humans symbolize themselves over a the lifetime. Although biological and genetic factors are influences on the aging processes, they do not determine aging in an absolute sense. Biology influences but does not determine how people age. Stage theorists emphasize the ways that humans are influenced at various stages in their lives. Stages are not fixed and individuals vary greatly among themselves in the ways that they age. Successful aging, a concept that is emerging in modern research, is described in positive ways (Baltes & Willis, 1982; Baltes & Baltes, 1990).
Some aspects of aging do not seem to be under human control, such as the loss of acuity in vision, or the ability to see the color blue. Yet, with technological changes and new medical techniques, the shift from the deficit concepts associated with aging have changed to positive concepts about aging. Present day models of the aging process reveal that aging need not be deleterious! The new paradigms emphasize the role of the aging person, as an active, dynamic person, acting on his or her own behalf to sustain a successful life style. (Chapter Seven deals with aging and nonverbal communication).
People in highly developed technical societies live in environments that are highly saturated by the media. Television in particular deeply influences members of these societies. Technological change is profoundly altering the social landscape of advanced countries (Adoni & Mane, 1984).
Framing the New Media Environment
It appears that print and broadcast media are merging; that there is media abundance, rather than media scarcity. It is now possible to tailor media content to specific, targeted audiences. Interactive media is taking the place of one-way media.
The Information Superhighway is controlled in the main by large corporations or businesses, who use it for their own purposes. At the same time, individuals can construct their own websites.
The internet appears to provide unlimited channels to communicate; it can be used to build communities, to create commerce and for a variety of activities that tend to blur the lines between providers and consumers(Severin & Tankard, 1997).
Mediation in modern societies is a powerful influence on nonverbal communication. The inventor of the internet referred to his invention as a world brain, indicating that the internet functions almost like a neurological net spanning the globe. Other technologies, such as the telephone, e-mail, television, movies and modern satellites have become so common in daily life that they form an embedded social web of which people are largely unconscious (Herring, 1996). National boundaries are changed and traditional cultures are influenced, adapting to new technologies. The new technologies are producing new, symbolic boundaries, new networked, global communities.
Oral culture retains nonverbal, face-to-face situations, employing the full range of the human sensorium; but, as sophisticated communicative technologies emerge, the face-to-face character of oral culture disappears (Ong, 1982). In short, the technological context influences nonverbal communication, both in assumption and practice.
The computer and television have most dramatically altered the social landscape, with more than half of American households owning computers and more than ninety percent having television sets, many owning more than one. Embedded now in the social landscape, television and the computer have dramatically altered how humans perceive things and how they make sense of their worlds. Human nonverbal communication is dramatically affected. (See Chapter Eight for a more complete discussion of this topic).
Chapters Nine and Ten deal with the SI research perspective, with issues and problems that arise from that perspective. Although the SI perspective is used in this text, it is broad enough to include research from many disciplines, as noted above. Much of the research cited here is, in fact, taken from research that has been incorporated from other research models. There is, however, a distinctive and large body of research to be found within the SI perspective, an approach that contains many different points of view.
Although this book is designed primarily to provide a way to integrate the study of nonverbal communication, it may be useful to people who wish to enhance their skills. People are not born with skills; they must learn how to become skillful, to become good performers on the various social stages they occupy. They are found at various stages of this growth process.
Chapter Ten is devoted to an analysis of problems that interfere with the development of skill. It contains self-assessment tools to help learners become more proficient and insightful about human nonverbal communication. In addition, at the end of each chapter in the book, readers will find questions designed to promote thought and discussion.
In this chapter, the author has delineated the major aspects of the field of study called nonverbal communication. These aspects, or concepts, will be woven into the following chapters where they best fit. They are offered here to provide a broad overview of the field for the reader, setting up the following chapters. Clearly, context, gender, age and ethnicity deeply influence human nonverbal communication; in turn, they they are influenced by nonverbal communication. It is an interactive process. Human identity is forged from these interactive behaviors.
Modern technologies embed themselves in societies and alter human behaviors, often dramatically. By providing a flexible and dynamic system, symbolic interactionism is an effective interpretive tool, useful to practitioner and scholar alike.
People can create skills to better understand nonverbal behaviors. By using the self-assessment tools in chapter ten, readers can enhance their understandings and become more aware of their place in interactive settings. In Chapter Two, an analysis of the influence of cultural processes on nonverbal communication takes center stage.
Questions for Thought and Discussion
Charon, J. M. (1995). Symbolic Interactionism: An Interpretation, an Integration. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
DeVito, J. A., & Hecht, M. L. (1990). The Nonverbal Communication Reader. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.
Vlahos, O. (1979). Body, the Ultimate Symbol: Meanings of the Human Body Through Time and Place. New York: J. B. Lippincott
Wood, J. T. (1992). Spinning the Symbolic Web: Human Communication and Symbolic Interaction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
| Previous: Preface | Table of Contents | Next: Chapter 2 |