Behavior and Communication and Measure of Individual Differences - Essay Example

Interpersonal communication researchers have determined that the attitudinal meaning of every message comes from confounding 93 percent non-verbal cues and merely 7 percent words. In this research, two dyadic interactions were observed and given interpretations based on Albert Mehrabian’s three dimensions: immediacy, status or potency, and responsiveness. In brief explanation of these three dimensions, people are drawn toward people and things they prefer, evaluate highly and like, and equally, move away from or avoid things and people they evaluate negatively or dislike. Status or potency signifies a controlling as against a submissive or dependent attitude; and responsiveness represents the extent of reaction to and awareness of another (Mehrabian, 1971). First Observation The first example of dyadic interaction involves an American man and an American woman having late lunch in a posh Italian restaurant. It was around 1:30 in a hot and sunny afternoon. The woman, who is in her late twenties, was in semi-business attire with the blazer taken off, her hair freely hanging past her shoulders, and with an obviously well-cared for skin probably by a dermatologist. She appeared to be a regular working-class woman, with perhaps extra funds for regular visits to a dermatologist. She was not wearing any jewelry aside from the dress watch on her left wrist. The man, also in a business suit, was in his late sixties. His hair was exquisitely slicked back and his jewelry spoke of wealth. He was driving a latest edition, bottle-green Jaguar before he came inside the restaurant. The woman arrived a few minutes before him in a cab. The man, unlike the woman, kept the blazer of his suit on. It seems that he seldom walks out in the streets and probably just stays in his well air-conditioned office since the hot weather did not appear to affect him. They immediately ordered food. Non-verbal Communication 3 Immediacy While the two were talking, they smile constantly at each other, and their gazes are intent on one another. While talking, they both lean toward each other every now and then. The man appeared relaxed, hands openly gesturing every once in a while talking. He constantly touched and held the woman’s hand all throughout the interaction. However, he appeared to swallow more than usual and his Adam’s apple had a conspicuous up-and-down motion. The woman, on the other hand, though smiling constantly, apparently appeared tense, and blinked more than normal and her eyes darted around her every now and then. The posture is rigid and she crosses and uncrosses her legs frequently. What can be deduced here is that the two persons obviously like each other, and the conversation they are having is pleasant. The signs of constant smiling, mutual eye contact, touching, and leaning toward each other denote “like”. However, there are obvious signs of stress and anxiety like the frequent movement of the man’s Adam’s apple and the woman’s rigid posture and eye movements (Mehrabian, 1971). Status or Potency The woman’s rigid posture and the constant lowering of her head denote a submissive attitude. Her slight hand movements whenever she talked also signify the same. On the other hand, the man’s open arm gestures, upward head movements, and erect posture signify dominance (Mehrabian & Hines, 1978). It can also be observed that the man controlled a bigger part of the conversation since it was observed that he did most of the talking while the woman listened, and gave animated reactions to whatever the man said. The intent gaze the man gave the woman every now and then was given a more submissive reaction by the woman --- a slight smile with a lowering of the head (Mehrabian, 1971). Non-verbal Communication 4 Responsiveness The quick hand gestures and head movements of both the man and the woman signify intense emotion (Mehrabian & Hines, 1978). It was also observed that both of them ate quickly, with constant peeks at their watches. During the course of the interaction, it was observed that the man, at times, leaned forward with an intent facial expression and quick mouth movements (appeared as fast talk). This also denotes intense, quick, and active emotions. The woman, on the other hand, though did not control most of the conversation, usually replied or reacted with sure and quick head movements and hand gestures. This implies that the woman, though in a more submissive position in the interaction, also expresses intense emotions. Overall, the interaction between the two is active (Siegman & Feldstein, 1987). Other observations The amusing part of the observation is when the two of them finished their meals, the man billed out and both of them walked out of the restaurant holding hands, somewhat in a discreet fashion, and separated as soon as they got out in the sidewalk. The man headed straight to his car where the driver is waiting, and the woman went inside a drugstore. What is controversial is that they both did not even look back to see where the other is headed to. The man took casual steps toward his car, while the woman walked hurriedly toward the store. Conclusion As a conclusion, it can be said that the man and the woman have an intimate relationship. The close proximity between the two bodies of the communicating persons, the constant leaning forward of both parties towards each other, the regular touching of hands, and long intent gazes all signify an intimate relationship (Mehrabian, 1971). However, one would definitely observe Non-verbal Communication 5 the strain in their relationship. There is nervousness and anxiety in the meeting. It was apparent in the conspicuous up-and-down motion of the man’s Adam’s apple, the woman’s rigid posture, her eyes that darted around her in a nervous manner, and the constant movement of her legs(Siegman & Feldstein, 1987). From these observations, it can be deduced that the two met in secret or would like to keep the meeting a secret. It can also be inferred that the man is the dominant person in the interaction. The posture, head movements, open arm gestures, and the obvious control of the conversation show dominance. The bowing of head by the woman signifies submissiveness (Mehrabian & Hines, 1978). This fact is coupled by the obvious difference in the two persons’ social status. Though the woman does not appear poverty-stricken, the man spoke of extreme wealth. It is possible the man is the benefactor and the woman is the beneficiary, which also further explains their dominant and submissive position, respectively, in the interaction. The intense interaction between the two is signified by quick hand gestures and head movements by both parties. The constant leaning forward of the man with quick movements of his mouth and occasional arm gestures imply that he is saying something important and he wants to give it emphasis (Siegman & Feldstein, 1987). The type of relationship that these two have was given stronger proof when the two went out of the restaurant. The woman’s fast-paced walk implies rigidity of emotions (Mehrabian, 1971). When the two did not even look back to see where each one was headed to, and when the man did not even offer a ride to the woman, it shows that the relationship is secret, and the two want to keep it as such. Non-verbal Communication 6 Second Observation The second dyadic interaction that was observed was between two young men, an American and Japanese. It was a few hours before midnight in a dark alley outside a dingy bar. Both men appeared to be in their early twenties, donned in rugged clothes. The American was tall and skinny and had ruffled hair. The Japanese appeared tidier but was also tall and skinny. The interaction between the two was short, but long enough for an observer to know the kind of conversation that ensued. Immediacy The Japanese guy did most of the talking. He seldom looked the American guy in the eye. He obviously tried to keep an adequate distance between the two of them. His hands were kept inside his pockets. The American guy had his head turned sideways, with what appeared to be a constant grimace on his face. He seldom talked, but the tensing of his jaw and the thinning of his lips were obvious to any onlooker. One hand was positioned on his hips. One instant observation is that the two dislike the type of conversation that they have. The Japanese’s “gesture” of not looking directly into the eye of the American denotes respect. Japanese, being an Asian, also values the space between him and the other person. Still, the Japanese kept his hands inside his pockets, which signifies insecurity. On the other hand, the American’s “gesture” of not looking directly into the eye of the Japanese denotes rudeness. The constant grimace on his face also tells the observer that he is irritated with whatever it is that the Japanese is telling him (Siegman & Feldstein, 1987). Non-verbal Communication 7 Status or Potency The American’s hands-on-hips pose denotes dominance. He obviously controls the situation although he does less of the talking. The Japanese had his back hunched a little and kept his hands inside his pockets. The earnest expression on his face as he looks at the American every once in a while is an obvious sign of submissiveness (Mehrabian & Hines, 1978). Responsiveness The American’s interaction with the Japanese appears inactive since he seldom says anything. However, the emotions showed on his face conveyed everything he wanted to say to the Japanese. It can be said that the type of interaction he did was combined dominant-passive. On the other hand, the Japanese did all the talking but he appeared “pleading” to the other guy. The emotions that showed on his face can be considered passive. Therefore one can say that his interaction is combined passive-active (Siegman & Feldstein, 1987). Conclusion Upon observing the two people, one can definitely say that the Japanese is asking the American guy to “believe” perhaps, or agree with, whatever he is saying. It is possible that he owed the American guy something, and he is not able to come up with whatever it is he has to pay the American. The American guy was obviously irked all throughout the interaction, signified by his open rudeness to the other person (for Americans, not looking directly in the eye connotes rudeness) therefore it can be concluded that he did not agree with the Japanese guy, or possibly he did not believe what he heard (Siegman & Feldstein, 1987). It is tough to really know what the main issue between the two people is, but one thing is for sure, the two interacting people are not agreeing with each other. There is obvious conflict in the interaction. List of References Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent messages. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth Pub. Mehrabian, A., & Hines, M. (1978). A Questionnaire Measure of Individual Differences in Dominance-Submissiveness. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 38 (2), 479- 84. Siegman, A. W., & Feldstein, S. (1987). Nonverbal behavior and communication. Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum. Read More