The Role of Non-verbal Communication - Essay Example

The Importance of Language, Paralanguage and Non-Verbal Communication in Various forms of Communication – A Practical Study Contents 3 Introduction 4 Theories in Non-Verbal Communication 6 Research Purpose & Aim 6 Hypotheses 7 Methodology 7 Design 7 Participants 7 Apparatus 8 Procedure 8 Results 8 Treatment of Results 9 Discussions 10 Conclusion 11 Bibliography 12 Appendix 1 13 Abstract This study examines the role of non-verbal communication, in pair interactions between males and females. The report is written around an observational study to ascertain which gender, male or female is likely to initiate touch in pair interactions. This study is done through the observation of five couples in a public space. This involved an evaluation of data that was compiled by observing these couples. The findings indicate that in most cases, males initiate pair interactions through touch. Women are less likely to initiate these interactions. Introduction Non-verbal communication (NVC) involves direct communication not exclusively relying on written or spoken words (Berry, 2010). Non-Verbal Communication (NVC) is a situation where the expression of the inner emotions of people are presented through the use of bodily descriptions and trends that shows the way people feel at a give point in time (Littlejohn & Foss, 2010). Paralanguage on the other hand involves non-verbal voice qualities, voice modifiers and independent utterances that are produced by various parts of the body to convey various understandable messages (Poyatos, 2012). Therefore, paralanguage involves the modification of voices as a means of presenting various forms of messages to other people. Language is the use of words in a given dialect to transmit information and present data and information to different people in order to convey meaning (Phifer, 2007). Language refers to conventional dialog and speech that is carried out to present information from one person to another in mutually intelligible dialect (Perkins, 2010). There are various forms of non-verbal communication and this includes the use of sign language and non-verbal communication (Rimondini, 2012). Other examples include the use of symbols and signs in digital and written communication. Haptics involves the use of non-verbal communication via touch and the expression of emotions through touch like hugs, handshakes and others (Wood, 2009). In standard interactions, there is often a blend between language, paralanguage and non-verbal communication. This is because the human being has the propensity to express his inner feelings, thoughts and ideas through words and actions. An example of non-verbal communication and complementing of language and paralanguage include a situation where a person leans over another person to read his newspaper in a London bus. The individual who owns the newspaper might say a word or two and change his posture in an offensive manner that will make the one leaning on him to feel bad. Another example of haptics can be found in the films and television shows like the popular American show Cheaters where recordings of how people touch in public to assert that they are having some kind of romantic relationship to the viewers and other people in the film. Non-verbal communication has some biological connotations and it involves various approaches that living things use to transfer information to each other (Wilson, 2011). Some elements of non-verbal communication involve the bearing of an animal’s teeth as a method of showing a sign of danger or upset. Another sign of non-verbal communication involves frowning and putting on a serious face amongst people. It is a sign that a person is not going to cooperate further in a discussion or the person has something that needs to be answered. There are numerous views that are presented in relation to how people acquire and utilize non-verbal communication. Some theories assert that people learn how to use these non-verbal communication systems whilst other theories indicate that people are born with the desire to communicate through non-verbal communication systems. The Ekman and Freisen theory of facial action coding indicates that emotions in a person causes facial movements and contractions that presents a clear message to people who are around them and induce actions (Ekman & Friesen, 1978). The biological theory indicates that the human genes are programmed in such a way that they seek to communicate their ideas and feelings as and when the need to communicate comes up and through this, the human nature causes people to come up with non-verbal cues to communicate (Wilson, 2011). The Darwinian theory indicate that people evolve and change and this is linked to the sociological theory (Wilson, 2011). On the other hand, the sociological theory indicates that people learn and acquire skills of using non-verbal communication as they learn from people in their environment (Littlejohn & Foss, 2010). Theories in Non-Verbal Communication Non-verbal communication is nurtured through the copying of other persons and trying to mimic their ways of talking and doing things (Littlejohn & Foss, 2010). Some authorities assert that non-verbal communication develop from the use of normal and natural actions like eye contacts, touching and personal acts and this develops over the years as people try to utilize these actions to prove points and also communicate ideas and views. Non-verbal communication and its utilization vary between males and females. There are numerous studies and theories that are that have been conducted in this area and it has come with different forms of findings. Henley identifies that in most male-female interactions, touch might be a sign of possession at the beginning of the relationship and as time goes on, women view touch as a way of expressing the continuous nature of the relationship (Henley, 1977). This indicates why men are more likely to touch women in their teens and early 20s and 30s. But in the 40s onwards, women are more likely to seek to touch their male partners. Further studies by Stier and Hall indicated that men are likely to initiate touch and women often respond to this touch, although they disagreed with Henley’s studies on many grounds (Stier & Hall, 1984). Research Purpose & Aim The purpose of this research is to conduct an observational study to investigate touching behaviour of male and female pair interactions in a social setting. The aim of the study is to examine who initiates touch in male-female interactions in the social space. Hypotheses A hypothesis is a tentative statement that is made by a researcher at the beginning of the research and it is tested for its truthfulness and falsity throughout the research (Kothari, 2009). In order to conduct this study, the paper will hypothesize on the basis of Henley and Stier & Hall’s assertions. Thus, the hypothesis is: H1: Men are more likely to initiate touch than women in social settings: H0: There is no statistically significant difference in touching behaviour between male and female couples when observed in a social setting. H1 is the alternative hypothesis and the H0 is the null hypothesis. This will form the basis for the study and the rest of the research. Methodology The methodology involves the processes of collecting and analysing information to draw a conclusion that meets the aims of the research (Kothari, 2009). Design The fieldwork will involve an observation of couples in a setting where they are likely to touch and conduct various forms of haptics as a means of expressing themselves. This will involve a particular focus on the initiation, response to the initiation and sustenance of the interaction. Participants The participants will be drawn randomly from the society and they will be observed by the researcher who will document their actions in a public space. A total of five different couples will be observed in the study. The sample involves people taken from different aspects of unmarried persons in this city. And it includes persons aged between 15 and 50. Based on the circumstances of this observation, there was the need to choose the sample randomly since the respondents were to be studied in their natural setting. Samples were chosen in relation to their visiting of a park in the city in order to be observed. Apparatus The research apparatus is a chart that will be filled based on the actions and activities of the couples. It records the level of interest shown by the various body postures of the males and females. This is recorded on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being a situation where a participant shows no signs and 5 being a pervasive and overt sign of initiation of a touching episode. And this is documented in a way that will show their roles in the initiation of touch. This is presented in Appendix 1 below. Procedure Each of the five couples to be observed in the study are viewed from when they enter the location to the time they leave. This will include an analysis of how they behave when they settle down to the time they initiate haptics. This is documented in the apparatus and later critiqued to deduce conclusions on which of the genders engage in various activities. The findings are summed up and analysed with a Chi Squared chart for critical evaluations. Results The field work was conducted over a day and this included the observation of five different couples in a park. The respondents were observed by the researcher and their actions from the time they got to the public space to the end of their time at the point. The respondents were mainly persons aged between 15 and 50 and they spent between 10 and 30 minutes at the park. The findings are presented below and this provides a basis for the presentation of raw data that is presented for the analysis. Haptic Type Male Female Couple Number 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Head and Face 3 5 4 5 5 22 1 3 2 1 1 8 Shoulders 3 2 4 5 2 16 2 1 3 4 1 11 Hand 4 3 5 5 4 21 1 1 1 2 1 6 Arms 4 3 4 4 3 18 2 2 1 1 2 8 Facials and Actions 14 13 17 19 14 87 6 7 7 8 5 33 Back 5 4 5 3 5 22 2 3 3 2 1 11 Chest 4 5 4 4 4 21 3 3 2 1 3 12 Leg/Thighs 4 5 4 3 5 21 1 3 1 2 1 8 Knees 5 5 4 5 4 23 2 1 2 4 1 10 Body and Posture 18 19 17 15 18 87 8 10 8 9 6 41 Table 1: Results of the Study of Touching Behaviour of Couples Treatment of Results The findings were tested through the Chi Square test which is used to validate relationships between variables and draw inferences. The results are indicated below: Figure 1: Chi Square Preliminary Analysis Figure 2: Chi Square Calculations The finding indicated that the relationship is somewhat weak and this means that the null hypothesis cannot be accepted. This indicates that the alternative hypothesis in the study is strong and must be accepted. Discussions The main theories indicate that non-verbal communication is somewhat biological in nature and expresses feelings in a natural manner (Wilson, 2011). Henley also identified that men initiate touch in pair interactions as a sign of possession (Henley, 1977). Finally, Stier and Hall stated that women are likely to respond to touch and this forms the basis of the alternative hypothesis. From the study, it has been identified that in most case, men’s bodily action is responsible for the initiation of pair haptics. This includes the movement of the head and face, hand and chests in which the observations indicated that men had a greater tendency to initiate touch. Concerning shoulders, back, arms and other parts of the body, it is apparent that men started and initiated most of these actions. Female initiations are weak. This is because females are less likely to show expressions or actions that suggest they want to initiate a touching episode. Their body posture also tends to suggest a less likely trend to involve in some kind of touching interaction. Conclusion The study indicates that in terms of non-verbal communication relating to touch and haptics, men are often the initiators of the actions through their body language. Females are less likely to initiate these hapatics. This study confirms the alternative hypothesis which asserts that “Men often likely to initiate touch in pair interactions in public whilst women are less likely to initiate such activities”. Bibliography Berry, D. (2010). Health Communication: Theory and Practice. London: McGrawHill. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. (1978). Facial Action Coding System: A Technique for the Measurement of Facial Movement. . Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press. Henley, N. M. (1977). Body Politics; Power, Sex and Non-Verbal Communication. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kothari, C. R. (2009). Research Methodology. Delhi: New Age Publishing. Littlejohn, S. W., & Foss, K. A. (2010). Theories of Human Communication . Mason, OH: Cengage. Perkins, P. S. (2010). The Art and Science of Communication. London: Wiley. Phifer, E. (2007). Boosting the Minds Eye: Visualizing for Social and Emotional Intelligence. New York: Universal Publishing. Poyatos, F. (2012). Textual Translation and Live Translation. New York: John Benjamins Publishing. Rimondini, M. (2012). Communication in Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. London: Springer. Stier, D. S., & Hall, J. A. (1984). Gender differences in touch: An empirical and theoretical review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 47(2), Aug , 440-459. Wilson, E. O. (2011). Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Boston, MA: Yale University Press. Wood, J. (2009). Interpersonal Communication: Everyday Encounters. Mason, OH: Cengage. Zimmerman, C., & Uecke, R. A. (2012). Asserting Yourself At Work. New York: AMACOM. Appendix 1 Data Collection Apparatus Haptic Type Male Female Couple Number 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Head and Face Shoulders Hand Arms Facials and Actions Back Chest Leg/Thighs Knees Body and Posture 1- No evidence of initiation 2- Little evidence of initiation 3- Some evidence of initiation 4- Strong signs of initiation 5- Absolute and overt signs of initiation Read More