Talk:Nonverbal communication

I was in the middle of fixing this, and as it's my first article, I'd like feedback on it so far, if possible. I have to go to the airport to pick up my girlfriend now, but I'll resume editing this tomorrow unless someone else completes it. Benji 22:42, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

ok, as for

American Sign Language : A standardized set of gestures that mimic/complement speech.

...this is wrong in a number of ways. first of all, please please please understand that ASL is it's its own language. They do not "mimic/complemen speech"; ASL is speech. It is not english words signed out, it isn't even english. It is not pantomimes or sherades. It has its own grammar quirks, unique aspects of syntax and many, many influences and origins. It is, in fact, its own language. There, now that that is out of my system, here is why I don't think ASL is nonverbal communication- I went to the great dictionary.com and found this definition:

ver·bal Audio pronunciation of "verbal" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (vûrbl) adj.

 1. Of, relating to, or associated with words: a detailed verbal description. 

Upon this foundation, I would very much say that sign language is 'verbal', as it uses words. Many sign languages, ASL, FSL etc, are complete and very indepth languages. On this basis I would say that sign language is 'verbal' and does not belong into the 'nonverbal' category. I got the following definition out of "The Nonverbal Communication Reader: Classic and Contemporary Readings".

  Nonverbal communication refers to communication effected by means other than words. 

Benji is completely correct, sign language is not nonverbal communication. Rauh 17:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

The scent of a person - is it foul, alluring or brisk? A waitress writing a smilie face on a check when giving it to the costumer - tips are statistically higher when women do this (but not men...). I would even say hand signals like holding out a hand to stop, wagging a finger or flipping someone the bird........but sign language is with words. While areas like personal proximity, eye dilation, even silience has their grounds in nonverbal communication, none of them are direct verbatium speech - which sign language is. Heck, typing this message to you right now...would you consider this nonverbal communication? Would writing someone a letter be considered nonverbal communication? Communication effected by means other than words... JoeSmack (talk) 07:20, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

Okay... From the above description of verbal, take a look at word. (from American Heritage Dictionary, Fourth Edition)

A sound or a combination of sounds, or its representation in writing or printing, that symbolizes and communicates a meaning and may consist of a single morpheme or of a combination of morphemes.

I would say that ASL doesn't use words, it uses signs, a concept independent of what a word is. If you look at the wikipedia entry for ASL, it makes a distinction between what a sign and a word are. As for these written words being considered nonverbal, I would agree with you, except that they're being used as a stand-in for spoken words. The distinction is a fine one, but present. I would argue that if it can't be said out loud, it's not a word, and that makes it nonverbal communication. Benji 22:20, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I urge everyone to consider that dictionaries are attempting to render the common usage of terms; they are not governing bodies that decide the meaning of technical terms, and as such are inadequate for resolving arguments about meaning.Truddick 05:10, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually i think written words aren't nonverbal communication, because yes, they are stand-ins for spoken words. if you don't consider signs words how about just stand-ins for spoken words?

We're getting too tripped up on definitions here. lets look at the big picture. say you're born deaf and instead of spoken speech you learn ASL. fast foward in twenty years. you think that there is anything that can't be articulated, explained or conveyed with ASL? it is a full and rich language, capable of describing anything. now lets look at nonverbal communication, any of the areas of nonverbal communication. can you grow up using silience as a means of language? clothing you wear? attractiveness? eye contact? fast foward in twenty years. using any of those things, can you describe Einstein's Theory of Relativity? Read a book to another with any of them?

The thing that seperates nonverbal communication from the pack is that it compliments language. it is the subtlety, the nuance that it acents language with. ASL is so much more than a sublety. so much more than a nuance. so much more than acenting a language. it just hurts me to see American Sign Language, with all it's culture and history, possibly be put in the same category of communication as eye dialation.

It's so much more than all that.

More? Well, yes, in most systems, it's more.

If you'll just look in most basic communication texts, they generally agree that nonverbal communication performs several functions.

Usually, nonverbal behavior communicates the socio-emotional dimension of the communication. In other words, it tells others how we're feeling, and it signals our relationship to them. However, the signals are often ambiguous; a trained actor can "lie" about emotions by exerting finely-practiced control over nonverbals.

However, often nonverbal behavior--according to those basic texts--substitutes or works in tandem with verbal. Consider these examples:

--If I hold up my hand flat, fingers pointed up, palm aimed at you, don't you know that it means "stop"? It means that regardless of the situation or the emotions present at the time. It's a purely denotative meaning. In this case, the nonverbal is what Ekman and Freisen would call an "emblem"--it has a precise symbolic meaning just like a word would have.

--If I say "the fish was this big" and hold my hands apart to show the length, then the nonverbal is working together with the words to convey a symbolic meaning. It's not like the "stop" example above because just holding my hands apart doesn't always mean the same thing; there must be words spoken to complete the meaning. However, again the meaning is denotative; it isn't conveying emotion or relationship.

I'd submit that Ekman and Freisen's definition of "emblem"--a nonverbal that replaces a verbal--would include American Sign Language. I appreciate ASL as a unique language, not a derivative of another. But I don't see it as insulting to say that it's a language composed of nonverbal symbols--those are not inferior in any way to verbal ones, all symbols are created equal. It's just a matter of definition; in verbal language, the smallest unit is the phoneme, which by definition (yes, a technical definition established by the board of the International Phonetic Association) is a vocal sound. The smallest unit of ASL, by contrast, is a kineme--which derives not from vocalization but from kinesics.

If we are going to insist that nonverbal behavior communicates only emotion and relationship, then we are by definition saying that the following are not nonverbal messages:
waving goodbye.
shaking hands.
saying "rrrr" to demonstrate the sound of the engine.
standing in line.
putting books on a desk to reserve it as one's space in class.
demonstrating how to break a wrist grip with a judo move.
wearing a uniform.
pointing out a direction.

If anyone here wants to advance a reasoned argument that the above are not examples of nonverbal communication, I'll be back to read your explanation. If not, then I hope we can agree on the following simple distinctions:
Verbal = communication using spoken words [Written: a way of representing a language using visual symbols] Nonverbal = all of the aspects of interpersonal messages that are not verbal

Then maybe we can get on with polishing this article--it needs some basic editing. [No disrespect for prior authors--I've started articles that needed as much or more] Truddick 05:42, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

---

Interesting that I found this page yesterday and was going to updated it. I'm glad other people are on the boat.

I am 100% sure that non-verbal communication is "communication that does not use SYMBOLS". Therefore sign-language is verbal communication. Non-verbal communication is divided into spontaneous and pseudo-spontaneous communication (I can provide references from Journal of Communication later). Spontaneous communication is all the things that we do with our bodys that send some information to another person, the most powerful and important one being EMOTIONAL communication, as a matter of fact, some say that all non-verbal communication is emotional (or at least affective). Pseudo-spontaneous communication is when people fake verbal communication. When you fake a smile, for example. In this case you are use a non-symbolic form of communication in a symbolic way (at least as far as the sender is concerned). If you are good at it, other people will pick it up as non-verbal. Any discussion into non-verbal communication will have to go into emotions and the communication of emotion (see The Communication of Emotion by Ross Buck).

This is just a small summary of how things that should be on this page and how they are structured. And we definetely need to have a definition up there. This is final's week so once I'm done with it I can gather some references and offer more specific info. Rauh 17:34, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Okay, this is getting good. Now, please what is the difference between a symbol and a word. Or, to cut to the fun part. Would you care to give us a bit of an explanation about the historical usage of the terms signfier and signified with relationship to the meanings of words and the differences between words and symbols?

types of NVC that should be added

Chronemics, Paralinguistics, Proxemics, Semiotics and touch should be added.

Emotional Communication - BIG ONE Rauh 17:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

removed from main article for further discussion

Artistic Expression

Numerous forms of art are nonverbal. Music can be nonverbal, though it is often mixed with a person or persons singing, making a form of mixed communication. Music tends to be less explicit in terms of the message conveyed than verbal communication.

As images often have ideas attatched to them (such as the snake being a symbol of evil), paintings, photographs, and mixed media often use these symbols to communicate a message without stating it directly. The reason for indirect communication is the belief that the brain retains connections that it has made on its own better than those made for it. This may be the reason that the higher art forms are considered to be more emotionally and intellectually satisfying than the written or spoken word.

There are also signs from the person you are communicating with, what is their stance? are they relaxed or ready to pounce? how fast are they breathing? have they got their arms folded, how far away are they standing are they using eye contact? all these signs can help to make up your mind of their state of mind

         Why on earth would anyone remove artistic expression but leave CLOTHING in objective comunication?!  first fashion is art                    to.
         art has been a nonverbal form of communication for millions of years.  before any verbal language existed. 

if you dont like a section dont remove the whole thing. EDIT IT! you make no explination for removal either.75.31.235.93 15:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

This viewpoint constitutes one opinion. For example, an entirely contrary viewpoint can be seen in the music theories of noted 20th Century American Composer John Cage, who insisted that music was not at all communicative. I urge you to read some of his writing in order to realize that there is far from consensus on the communicative qualities of artistic expression. Note that, despite definite differences in scholarly definitions and theories, there is no significant dispute that nonverbal behavior is communicative. Truddick 05:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Interpersonal attitudes

This was recently added as a third paragraph of the lead section of the article. I moved it here for further discussion:

Most researchers generally agree that the verbal channel is used primarily for conveying information, while the non-verbal channel is used for negotiating interpersonal attitudes, and in some cases is used as a substitute for verbal messages. For example, a woman can give a man a ‘look to kill’; she will convey a very clear message to him without opening her mouth.

Perhaps we could have a citation that 'most researchers generally agree' to the above, because to me, it appears to contradict the first two paragraphs a little. I might be misunderstanding what was intended here — if so, can it be re-worded for clarity? Firstly, the fact that the woman in the example didn't open her mouth seems intended to indicate the message is nonverbal, but the second paragraph of the lead section clearly states that 'nonverbal' is not considered a synonym for 'non-spoken', among researchers in the field. Secondly, is the example intended to illustrate the point that "in some cases [nonverbal communication] is used as a substitute for verbal messages"? In what way is a "look to kill" a substitute for a verbal message? Thirdly, nonverbal communiction is clearly used to convey information, even when it is used 'for negotiating interpersonal attitudes'. Not to mention things like infographics! Hope we can clear this up. ntennis 01:44, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, until we have a citation for 'most researchers generally agree' we can add the tag. Yes, it can be re-worded for clarity. Be my guest to do it.

Yes, you get it right. In some cases nonverbal communication is used as a substitute for verbal messages. Sometimes, a simple look can be worth tousends of words. --Eliade 07:24, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, a look can be worth a thousand words, but I don't see any verbal message being substituted here. Rather, the "look to kill" is directly communicating a nonverbal message. ntennis 15:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi all. I can get the cites if you'd like, but "most researchers" is kind of hard to come up with.

Nonverbal communication suffers from the widely-distributed claim that if you understand it, you can just about read people's minds (Julius Fast, Body Language, back cover notes). The claim that 95% of communication is nonverbal is usually ascribed to Albert Mehrabian, but as David Lapakko clearly demonstrated, this is a distortion. Mehrabian stated that 95% of the emotionalcontent of any message is nonverbal. Some messages, Mehrabian noted, have almost no emotional content, and in those cases nearly 100% of the meaning is verbal. Just try to communicate "this is Darby Street and Mulberry Avenue is two blocks north" using 95% nonverbals!

I'd say that "most" researchers still labor under the oversimplified, over-reaching claims of Julius Fast and his ilk, and only those more aware specialists in communication and psychology might hold the more accurate opinion in their majorities. But there's no proof either way. Truddick 05:02, 8 October 2006 (UTC)