Chapter 8 Nonverbal Influence

1. Chapter 8Nonverbal Influence

2. Overview of nonverbal communication • Nonverbal communication is powerful 65-95% of emotional meaning is carried via nonverbal channels. When verbal and nonverbal channels contradict, people assign more weight to nonverbal cues. • Nonverbal influence can be subtle • Fisher, Rytting, & Heslin (1976): Library patrons who received an “accidental” touch were more likely to return books on time.

3. Importance of NonverbalCommunication • We use nonverbal communication to: • Shape impressions of ourselves • enhance attractiveness, credibility, status • Establish rapport, immediacy • touch, smiling, eye contact • Facilitate or inhibit attention • distraction to decrease attention • Model behavior (social proof) • Putting on a seatbelt • Signal expectations • eye contact to signal turn-taking • Violate others’ expectations • standing too close • talking too loud

4. The Direct Effects model of Immediacy • Andersen (1999): warm, involving, immediate behaviors enhance the persuasiveness of a message • It is easier to comply with those we like. • We tend to trust warm, friendly people.

5. Nonverbal Codes TYPES OF NONVERBAL COMM Page 5

6. Eye Contact • Eye contact conveys: • interest, attention • attraction, liking • warmth, immediacy • Eye contact usually enhances persuasion • “gaze produced greater compliance than gaze aversion in every one of the 12 studies” (Segrin, 1993p. 173)

7. Eye Contact • Panhandlers try to establish eye contact first. • Speakers who avoid eye contact are perceived as less credible. • The exception to the general rule • Kleinke found that an illegitimate request was more effective without eye contact.

8. Smiling • Smiling is an immediacy behavior. • Smiling conveys • warmth, attraction, liking, sincerity • Food servers who smile receive larger tips. • Job applicants who smile are rated more favorably. • Cheaters who smiled received more lenient treatment. • Excessive smiling may backfire. • May be perceived as phony • May be perceived as shallow

9. Mirroring • Mirroring involves matching or mimicking another’s behavior. • eye contact, posture, gestures • Mirroring conveys • similarity, empathy • Nonverbal mimicry facilitates persuasion. • Mirroring negative nonverbal cues may be counterproductive • frowning, scowling, closed posture

10. Kinesics • “Research shows that people who use gestures more freely are more persuasive, and that people remember gestures better than words” (Bernstein, 1994, p. 64-65). • Emblems have precise verbal meanings. • Peace sign • Shush • Shame on you • Come here • Zip it • Illustrators accompany speech. • “I love you this much…” • “Use just a pinch…”

11. Kinesics • Nonverbal communication in the courtroom: • Trial lawyers use gesture, movement, eye contact, clothing, and appearance cues to sway jurors (Cotler, 1993).

12. Kinesics • Adaptors are unintentional cues that signal negative feelings • Lip biting • Nail biting • Hand wringing • Hair twirling • Adaptors convey • boredom • nervousness • stress

13. Haptics (touch) The “Midas Touch”: Touch generally facilitates compliance gaining. • Food servers who used touch received larger tips (Crusco & Wetzel (1984), Hornick (1992). • Touch must be perceived as appropriate in location, duration, intensity. • A person asked a stranger to watch a big, unruly dog for 10 minutes while he/she went into a bank. • 55% of subjects who were touched consented. • 35% of subject who weren’t touched consented Gueguen & Fischer-Lokou (2002).

14. Haptics • Segrin’s meta-analysis revealed that: • Of 13 studies examined, “it can be concluded touch always produces as much, and in many cases more compliance than no touch, all other things being held equal” (p. 174) • Touch must be perceived as appropriate.

15. Proxemics • Geographical closeness increases liking, attraction. • Based on perceived similarity • Even in online settings • Personal space: Standing closer tends to facilitate compliance gaining Slide 15

16. Proxemics • Segrin’s meta-analysis of proximity studies revealed that “the effect for closer proximity was consistent. Close space produces greater compliance than distant space” (p. 173) • “close” distance was typically operationalized as 1-2 ft., “far” was usually 3-5 ft. Slide 16

17. Expectancy Violations Theory • Buller & Burgoon (1986) • People have expectations about what constitutes appropriate behavior in social situations • example: elevator etiquette • Violations of expectations are perceived positively or negatively, depending upon: • the status, reward power of the communicator • the range of interpretations that can be assigned to the violation • the perception/evaluation of the interpreted act Slide 17

18. Chronemics • Time spent waiting confers power, status • example: M.D.s and patients • example: Professors and students • Tardiness can negatively impact credibility • Burgoon et al (1989): late arrivers were considered more dynamic, but less competent, less sociable than those who were punctual • There are huge cultural differences in time-consciousness Slide 18

19. Western culture: M-time emphasizes precise schedules, promptness, time as a commodity “time is money” “New York minute” “Down time” “Limited Time Offer!” “Must Act Now” Other cultures: P-time cultures don’t value punctuality as highly, don’t emphasize precise schedules “island time” Sioux Indians have no spoken words for “late” or “tardy” Culture and Time

20. Time as a sales strategy • Urgency as a sales tactic • must act now, limited time offer, first come first serve • Time windows; shop early and save, super savings from 7am-10am • 1 hour photo, Lenscrafters, Jiffy Lube, drive through banks, etc. • Non-urgency as a sales strategy • 90 days same as cash • No No No sales • mega-bookstores that encouraging browsing, lingering

21. Artifacts • Material objects as an extension of the self • Uniforms and compliance gaining • Lawrence & Watson (1991): requests for contributions were greater when requesters wore uniforms • Bickman (1971): change left in a phone booth was returned to • well dressed people 77% of the time • poorly dressed people only 38% of the time • Clothing signifies status, authority

22. Clothing and status factors • Gueguen (2003) Shoppers were less likely to report a well-dressed shoplifter than a casually dressed or poorly dressed shoplifter. • Neatly dressed: suit & tie (90% did not report) • Neutral: Clean jeans, tee-shirt and jacket, moccasins (63% did not report) • Slovenly: Dirty jeans, torn jacket, sneakers (60% did not report) Slide 22

23. Clothing and status factors • Gueguen & Pichot (2001): pedestrians were more likely to “jaywalk” if a well-dressed person did so. • Control condition: 15.6% violations of do not walk signal • Well-dressed: 54.5% violations • Casually dressed: 17.9% violations • Poorly dressed: 9.3% violations

24. Attractiveness and Social Influence • Stewart (1980) studied the relationship between attractiveness and criminal sentencing • handsome defendants were twice as likely to avoid a jail sentence • Benson, Kerabenic, & Lerner (1976): both sexes were more likely to comply with a request for assistance if the requester was attractive. Which of these two people would you offer to help? Slide 24

25. Paralanguage Slide 25 • How you say it • Fluency facilitates persuasion • Pauses, gaps, diminish credibility • Speaking faster generally increases credibility • Speaking too fast may hinder comprehension • Pitch variation generally increases persuasiveness • Avoid a monotone delivery