NVC: Readings with Commentary

AutorShirley Weitz (ed.)
PealkiriNonverbal communication: readings with commentary
IlmunudNew York; London; Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1974
ViideWeitz, Shirley (Ed.) 1974. Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press.


Weitz, Shirley 1974a. Introduction. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 3-10.

Best sellers like Julius Fast's Body Language have safely established the study of nonverbal communication in the popular mind as a short cut to an understanding of human motivation and interaction. But, what is the more enduring place of nonverbal research in the behavioral sciences? When the fad passes and sensitivity groups are no longer in vogue, will interest in this area similarly fade? The opinion of this writer and many others in the field is an emphatic "no," because simultaneously with the emergence of "body language" as a popular pastime has come an avalanche of serious scientific work, on both the theoretical and the empirical levels. Indications are that nonverbal research will become an integral part of social psychological theories of interpersonal communication, person perception, and emotional expression, as well as contribute heavily to such applied fields as psychotherapy and integroup relations. Workers in fields allied to psychology, such as linguistics, anthropology, and communications, have also invested heavily in this research, and their different methodological and theoretical approaches have given a breath and variety to this field that is unusual in behavioral sciences. (Weitz 1974a: 3)
Tha last year alone has produced five major books in the area, devoted to theory and research of important investigators (Dittmann; Ekman, Friesen and Ellsworth; Hinde; Mehrabian; Scheflen, all 1972). The latest volume of the prestigious Nebraske Symposium on Motivation (Cole, 1972) has a major section on nonverbal communication, including articles by Ekman, Exline, and Mehrabian. Two textbooks entirely devoted to this area have been published (Eisenberg and Smith, 1971; Knapp, 1972), along with a reader emphasizing the communications aspect of nonverbal research (Bosmanijan, 1971). Semiotica, a new journal entirely devoted to research in nonverbal communication, has been created within the past five years. The Journal of Communication (Harrison and Knapp, 1972) has produced an entire issue on the subject. Hardly an issue of the Journal of Personality and SOcial Psychology goes by without two or three articles utilizing nonverbal or paralinguistic variables. (Weitz 1974a: 3-4)
Weitz thought that Semiotica was entirely dedicated to nonverbal communication :D

Weitz, Shirley 1974b. Facial expression and visual interaction. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 11-19.

A rather different contribution has been made by Allen Dittmann in his recent book, Interpersonal Messages of Emotion (1972). Dittman has developed a theory of emotional interaction based on the mathematical theory of communication (Shannon, 1948; Shannon and Weaver, 1949). By taking this point of view, Dittmann looks at many neglected areas of emotional communication. He considers individual and cultural differences in choice of channels for emotional messages, so, for example, some people and cultures may favor the voice rather than the face. He also thinks that channels change as a function of the age and depth of a social relationship. Two strangers may comunicate in the most universally understood channels: words, stereotyped facial expressions, and gestures. As the two get to know each other better, they use more subtle gradations of expressions and rely more on subcultural variations common to both or decoded by each member. Dittmann observes, "Many 'family resemblances,' by which we ordinarily mean genetic similarities of facial features or body build, are probably really based on family codes of expression" (Dittmann, 1972, p. 141). Dittman also considers the effects of noise on emotional communication. "Noise" in communications theory refers to interfering stimuli which are received along with the message. Noise can be random or nonrandom; interference between chanels is a related problem. Any code of emotional communication has to provide for a filtering mechanism to deal with such noise. One critical problem would be to discriminate emotional from similar nonemotional messages. (Weitz 1974b: 15-16)
This is the first time I've met any mention of this book by Dittmann. Could it be that the discussion on the role of culture in forming physical appearance mentioned in Flora Davis' Inside Intuition came from Dittmann's work?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt, Irenäus 1974. Similarities and Differences Between Cultures in Expressive Movements. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 20-33.

ELSEWHERE: http://tartu.ester.ee/record=b1238102~S1*est

Ekman, Paul, Wallace V. Friesen and Silvan S. Tomkins 1974. Facial Affect Scoring Technique: A First Validity Study. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 34-50.

ELSEWHERE: Ekman, Paul, Wallace F. Friesen and Silvan S. Tomkins 1971. Facial Affect Scoring Technique: A First Validity Study. Semiotica 3(1): 37-58.

Buck, Ross W., Virginia J. Savin, Robert E. Miller and William F. Caul 1974. Communication of Affect Through Facial Expressions in Humans. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 51-64.

ELSEWHERE: Buck, Ross W. Savin, Virginia J. Miller, Robert E. Caul, William F. ; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 23(3), Sep, 1972. pp. 362-371.
OR psp-23-3-362.pdf

Exline, Ralph V. 1974. Visual Interaction: The Glances of Power and Preference. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 65-92.

ELSEWHERE: Exline, Ralph 1971. Visual Interaction: The Glances of Power and Preference. In Nebraska Symposium On Motivation, 19. Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press. pp. 163-206

Weitz, Shirley 1974c. Paralanguage. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 93-98.

We have slowly moved away from the strictly linguistic and cognitive analysis of language exemplified by the psycholinguists and have gone on to the social context of language usage considered by the sociolinguists. Allied with the sociolinguists and the paralinguists, the subject of our present chapted. What differentiates the psycholinguists and sociolinguists from the paralinguists is that the first two are concerned with the semantic aspects of speech, the words themselves, while the paralinguists are happy with the "leavings" of the psycho- and sociolinguists - the nonsemantic aspects of speech, everything but the wowrds themselves. At first glance, it may seem that they have concerned themselves out of a filed, but what else is left after the words are gone? Quite a bit, it seems. Paralinguists set great store on how something is said, not on what is said. The tone of voice, pacing of speech, and extralinguistic sounds (such as sighs) make up their area of concern. (Weitz 1974c: 94)

Davitz, Joel R. and Lois Jean Davitz 1974. The Communication of Feelings by Content-Free Speech. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 99-104.

ELSEWHERE: Davitz, Joel R. (ed.) 1964. The communication of emotional meaning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Scherer, Klaus R. 1974. Acoustic Concomitants of Emotional Dimensions: Judging Affect from Synthesized Tone Sequences. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 105-111.

An experiment with Moog synthesizers. Basically, Ctrl+F "Vocal Cues of Emotion" (here).

Milmoe, Susan, Robert Rosenthal, Howard T. Blane, Morris E. Chafetz and Irving Wolf 1974. The Doctor's Voice: Postdictor of Successful Referral of Alcoholic Patients. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 112-121.

ELSEWHERE: The doctor's voice: postdictor of successful referral of alcoholic patients.
Milmoe, S S; Rosenthal, R R; Blane, H T HTView Profile; Chafetz, M E ME; Wolf, I I; et al. Journal of abnormal psychology 72. 1 (February 1967): 78-84.
OR abn-72-1-78.pdf

Milmoe, Susan, Michael S. Novey, Jerome Kagan and Robert Rosenthal 1974. The Mother's Voice: Postdictor of Aspects of Her Baby's Behavior. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 122-125.

Discrepancies in anxiety (more filtered, less unfiltered) werre related to lack of expression of positive affect in boys at three different ages (for 8, 13, and 27 mo.: r's = -.67; p<.05; -.33; and -.60, respectively). (Milmoe, Novey, Kagan & Rosenthal 1974: 124)
Yeah, no.

Weitz, Shirley 1974d. Body movements and gestures. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 127-133.

The most popularized aspect of nonverbal communication is undoubtedly the area of body movement and gestures. Books like Julius Fast's (1970) Body Language promise the reader that he can "penetrate the personal secrets, both of intimates and total strangers" by reading key body signs. Advice on love and business encounters is especially well covered. Nierenberg and Calero's (1971) How to Read A Person Like A Book tries to apply body movement research to business success. Fast (1970) does a competent job of summing up research in nonverbal communication for the layman, though one suspects his conclusions will be taken a bit too uncritically by the average reader. (Weitz 1974d: 127)
Uncritically, indeed.
Historically, the entry of Ray Birdwhistell and Paul Ekman to the study of body movement signaled the beginning of two important research traditions. Birdwhistell's tradition is more heavily represented in this section, with Scheflen, Dittmann, and Kendon having the same general view. Ekman is represented by contributions in two other sections, with articles on facial expression and deception. Both have shaped different research traditions in nonverbal communication in general, and body movement in particular. Duncan (1969) makes a similar distinction between the structural and the external variable approach.
Ray Birdwhistell first began his research in 1952, with the publication of Introduction to Kinesics and has continued for the ensuing twenty-odd years to be an active proponent and pioneer in body movement research. His 1970 book, Kinesics and Context, is a collection of his essays (of which, two are presented here, p. 134 and p. 144) and presents his point of view quite directly and persuasively. Adam Kendon (1972) has written a very fine book review of Kinesics and Context which may well serve as an introduction to Birdwhistell's work. (See also Dittmann, 1971.) An anthropologist by professional affiliation, Birdwhistell's influence has been felt most heavily in the nonexperimental areas of psychiatry and communications research. He favors a contextual approach to studying the entire communications situation and vigorously opposes the isolation and manipulation of variables favored by Ekman's group. Birdwhistell characteristically does an extremely detailed analysis of short film segments of interactive behavior, taken in naturalistic settings. One famous film clip, "The Cigarette Scene," about a woman having her cigarette lighted by a man, takes eighteen seconds on film time, but considerably longer than that to read the finely honed analysis of verbal and nonverbal components. Birdwhistell's method of analysis is based on the descriptive linguistic model. Kinemes are relatively large units of body movement, such as lateral head sweeps and eye lid closure. Kinemes combine to form kinemorphs, then kinemorphemic classes, complex kinemorphs, and complex kinemorphic constructions. Birdwhistell has isolated body, facial, and head kinemes and is also interested in integrating kinesic behavior into the general communicative stream, including verbal behavior. In fact, he does not see the verbal-nonverbal dichotomy as a valid one and is reported by Knapp (1972) to have said that "studying nonverbal communication is like studying noncardiac physiology"; the distinction simply does not exist in his system. (Weitz 1974d: 128-129)
The Birdwhistell holistic, nonexperimental tradition has its drawbacks as well as its virtues. On the negative side, kinesic analysis is very much like literary analysis, one can impose one's own structure on the material and never really be certain that this is the best fitting model or the "correct" one. Experiments can, of course, be stacked in favor of a model, though we are slower to ascknowledge the existence of this sort of bias than the other. On the more practical side, Birdwhistell's mode of analysis is extremely time-consuming and difficult for one not carefully trained and experienced in the notation system. The sampling of situations often seems haphazard and is limnited to few cases. However, since Birdwhistell is working within the linguistic model, he feels that there is a universal grammar of kinesics, as in language, so that any kinesic sample, like any speech sample, can provide reliable information about the deep structure of the language. On the positive side, Birdwhistell's insistence on a holistic approach to communication has much to offer psychology, a field already riddled by atomism. At some point, we will have to fit all the verbal and nonverbal pieces together, and it makes sense to have a gadfly to continually remind us of our ultimate aim. (Weitz 1974d: 130)

Birdwhistell, Ray L. 1974a. Toward Analyzing American Movement. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 134-143.

ELSEWHERE: Birdwhistell, Ray L. 1971. Kinesic and Context: Essays on Body-Motion Communication. Allen Lane The Penguin Press

Birdwhistell, Ray L. 1974b. Masculinity and Femininity as Display. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 144-149.

ELSEWHERE: Birdwhistell, Ray L. 1970. Kinesic and Context: Essays on Body-Motion Communication. Philadelphia : University of Pennsylvania Press

Kendon, Adam 1974. Movement Coordination in Social Interaction: Some Examples Described. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 150-168.

The phenomenon of movement mirroring, which has been observed in a number of isntances in TRD 009, appears to occur only between the speaker and the person he directly addresses. As in the T extract, so in the other instances examined, it occurs most conspicuously at the very beginning of an interchange. Other participants may move concurrently with the movements of speaker and listener, as the axis of interaction between them is set up, but their movements are either of quite a different form from those of the direct addressee, or else they have a different timing. By mirroring the movement of the speaker, the person directly addresses thus at once differentiates himself from the others present, and at the same time he heightens the bond that is being established between him and the speaker. For the speaker it can serve as visual confirmation that his speech is properly directed, and for the others present it can serve to clarify the way in which participants activities are being patterned. (Kendon 1974: 158)

Dittmann, Allen T. 1974. The Body Movement-Speech Rhythm Relationship as a Cue to Speech Encoding. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 169-181.

Emotional expression has been my research interest for some time, and most of my empirical work on body movements has been done in the context of research on interview behavior. The method of studying these movements has been to count their frequency rather than to try to determine their individual meanings. The work can thus most properly be referred to as research in nervousness or didgetiness. (Dittmann 1974: 169)
The trouble with counting litle nervous movements in interviews is that the people are talking while they are fidgeting, and talking casts a shadow over everything else a person does at the same time. Everybody knows this at some level, so it is not a point worth belaboring. What is not known is how much this shadow affects different activities - difgeting in this case - and this is what we started out to learn. Maybe these little movements are so bound up with the act of talking that there is no point to trying to use them as measures to get at other things, like changing emotional states. (Dittmann 1974: 169)
and ah (pause) we would print
(pause) ah (pause) by the offset process
(pause) which isn't with a press
it's a (pause) photographic process
We call "fluent clause" one which has no non-fluencies within it. Juncture pauses are not counted as non-fluencies, so the third clause in our example is the only fluent one. Hesitation pauses, the ones other than juncture pauses, both filled and unfilled, are considered non-fluencies. A filled pause is usually an "ah," and it may be accompanied by additional non-phonation, as they are in our first two clauses above. Other non-fluencies are false starts, retraces and the like, but hesitation pauses are by far the most frequent. (Dittmann 1974: 171)

Scheflen, Albert E. 1974. Quasi-Courtship Behavior in Psychotherapy. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 182-198.

[182] One of these regular structures that invariably appeared in psychotherapy included behaviors like those found in American courtship. The ethics of psychotherapy have traditionally proscribed sexual behavior, and most of the therapists we studied were unaware that they behaved in ways which could be identified as sexual in therapy sessions. When we interviewed them about it, they spoke defensively, saying that if indeed they showed such actions they did not intend to; they must have unresolved personal problems or untoward countertransference reactions. So at first we thought that these little-known elements of courtshiplike behavior were undesirable contaminants of psychotherapy. But there were reasons to as[183]sume that this was no the case. First of all, some few therapists were quite aware of such behaviors and considered them a necessary part of their technique. Second, we saw these behaviors in all the psychotherapies we examined and in nearly all other interactions as well. Behavior this universal could not be written off as untoward or incidental.
So it seemed likely that our subject-therapists were mistaken in their surmises that courtinglike activities were merely undisciplined evidences of acting-out. We have found in talking to subjects about other covert kinesic activities that they do not know they are performing them, or they have culture-bound myths about the meaning of such activities. And we also know from experience that psychotherapists' conceptions of what they do are very different from those of research observers who study what they do. The point is evident. If we are to study poorly known and poorly understood human behaviors, we are going to have to be dissatisfied with preconceptions and free associations about their meanings and instead observe them systematically in the context in which they occur in order to derive their actual functions in an interaction.

The method of research
Recent developments in the behavioral and biological sciences have provided a method for doing this. From general systems theory we have gotten a model for conceptualizing the organization of living systems. Components are organized into units which, in turn, are part of larger systems. Even more recently it has become evident that behavior is integrated analogously; that is, standard units are integrated into larger units which, in turn, make up still larger units.
Such an arrangement of behavioral units in a hierarchy of levels has been applied to animal behavior by the ethologists. It has been held by gestalt theorists that human behavior is perceived in gestalten. In the last generation methods have been worked out in structural linguistics for determining the units of speech behavior and their arrangement in larger units, analogous to the hierarchies of levels of material systems. And in both the American and British schools of anthropology the realization has been growing that all behavior - not only speech - is patterned this way. So we no know why the gestalt theorists could find that people perceive units, not merely qualities of behavior; for these units are coded in a cultural and institutional tradition, and each generation learns them by conscious and unconscious processes.
These strands of development were formalized as a method of research at Palo alto in 1956 by Gregory Bateson, Ray Birdwhistell, Henry Brosin, Frieda Fromm-Reichmann, Charles Hockett, and Norman McQuown, and since then have been developed further by Ray Birdwhistell and the author. This approach to human behavior is known as "context analysis." Its principles and procedures have been described in other publications by Birdwhistell and myself. While I shall not detail the approach in this paper, it is this method that I applied to understanding the quasi-courting behaviors to be described here.
Briefly, the main elements of behavior are examined to their structural configurations as they appear in a stream of behavior. (This practice is very different from the usual approach in the psychological sciences, where this or that a priori decision made about what elements of behavior will [184] be selected or which qualities will be abstracted for study as variables.) Then, when a unit has been identified, each recurrence of it is examined in the contexts in which it occurs. By contrasting what happens when it does and does not occur, its function in the larger systems - and, therefore, its significance or meaning - is derived. This method differs from the practice of using free associations or judges to determine by intuition the meaning of the various behaviors in an interaction. It should be noted that I did not successfully derive the meanings of the sexual-like activities by asking psychotherapists why they perform them. As it happened, they did not know why, and when they speculated as to the reasons, their speculations did not fit the observable findings. It should also be noted that I did not count these behaviors or measure them. For I am interested in their meaning, and the rule of levels is that the meaning of an event is in its relationship to the larger picture, not in the qualities of the event itself. Finally, I did not correlate these activities with other activities, for it would not be sufficiently informative to know merely that two events occurred simultaneously. I must know, to derive meaning, exactly how each behavioral unit fits in relation to the others in the larger system. So I shall not present charts and statics, but only simple descriptions, and later abstractions not unlike those that every clinician makes. The advantage is that I can retrace my steps and tell exactly how each is derived. In other words, context analysis makes explicit (and precise) processes that are implicit in intuitive clinical observations.

Courtship behavior occur after a participant has come into a specific state of readiness. People in high courtshipp readiness are often unaware of it and, conversely, subjects who think they "feel" very sexually active often do not evidence courtship rediness at all. Courtship readiness is most clearly evidenced by a state of high muscle tonus. Sagging disappears, jowling and bagginess around the eyes decreases, the torso becomes more erect, and pot-bellied slumping disappears or [185] decreases. The legs are brought into tighter tonus, a condition seen in "cheesecake" and associated with the professional model or athlete. The eyes seem to be brighter. Some women believe their hair changes. Skin color varies from flush to pallor - possibly depending upon the degree of anxiety. It is possible that changes in water retention and odor occur.
Preening often accompanies these organismic changes, sometimes only as token behaviors. Women may stroke their hair, or glance at their makup in the mirror, or sketchily rearrange their clothing. Men usually comb or stroke their hair, button and readjust their coats, or pull up their socks.

[186] Other activities also appear to invite reciprocation in courtship. In addition to complementary or invitational statements and soft or drawling paralanguage, characteristic body motions are seen. Flirtatious glances, gaze-holding, demure gestures, head-cocking, rolling of the pelvis, and other motions are well known. In women, crossing the legs, slightly exposing the thigh, placing a hand on the hip, and exhibiting the wrist or palm are also invitational. Protruding the breast and slow stroking motions of the fingers on the thigh or wrist also are common.

Qualifiers of courting behavior

Partners in a quasi-courtship may make references to the inappropriateness of the situation for sexuality by reminding each other that other people are present or by reminders of taboos or ethical considerations. They [187] may also remind each other that they are together to conduct the business at hand. In psychotherapy, the patient may be encouraged to feel her sexual feelings fully, yet be cautioned, by reference to the context, not to act them out. More often than not, such references are nonverbal. A gesture or movement of the eyes or head toward the setting or toward others is as effective as any verbal statement of inappropriateness.

After the earliest steps in a courtship the partners move into vis-á-vis relationship of posture and adopt as intimate mode of conversation, excluding others from their relationship. In quasi-courtship this relationship of postures is incomplete. The participants may face each other, but turn their bodies so that they face partly away from each other, or they may extend their arms so as to encompass others. Or they may cast about the room with their eyes or project their voices so as to be clearly audible to third parties. When no third parties are present, quasi-courting people may face, look at, or project to unseen third parties.

The behaviors may be modified so as to leave out characteristic courting elements. This is done by failing to complete typical courting actions or by conducting them only in certain communicative modalities so that the gestalt required for a courting unit is not completed. For example, in courtship a man may lean forward, touch his partner, soften his facial expression, and, in soft paralanguage, verbalize his love. In quasi-courtship he may say the words while leaning slightly away from her, smile only by retracting the corners of his lips without crinkling his eyes, and use a matter-of-fact tone of voice.

Participants in quasi-courting may try to reduce ambiguity and indicate noncourtship by lexical disclaimers. They may reassure the partners and others that their interest is not sexual. They may seem to court [188] while talking about their love for another partner, or they may intellectualize the flirtation ina discussion of great books.

Sometimes in an interaction where seduction is inappropriate, the courtship elements appear without the above qualifiers. But instead, the elements are performed in a bizarre, histrionic manner, which seems improper to middle-class eyes, and which can appear to be burlesque of courtship. When I first saw this in schizophrenic patients I thought such actions were psychotic. But broader observation shows this variant to be characteristic of teen-agers and men and women of the lower social class. The bizarre pattern is used by those who do not use the other qualifiers. If, indeed, this is a class difference, then my choice of word "bizarre" represents a middle-class value judgment. It is logical that quasi-courting forms might differ between the classes, since their dating and courtship patterns are known to differ markedly.
  • See, for example: Morris W. Brody, Observations on "Direct Analysis"; New York, Vantage, 1959.
  • W. Ross Ashby, "General Systems Theory as a New Discipline," General Systems (1958) 3: 1-6. Ludwig von Bertalanffy, "An Outline of General Systems Theory," British J. Philosophy of Science (1950) 1:134. Bertalanffy, Problems of Life; New York, Harper, 1960.
  • Konrad Lorenx, King Solomon's Ring; New York, Crowell, 1952. Peter H. Klopfer, Behavioral Aspects of Ecology; Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, 1962.
  • Kurt Koffka, Principles of Gestalt Psychology; New York, Harcourt, 1935.
  • Henry A. Gleason, An Introduction to Descriptive Linguistics; New York, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1955. Charles F. Hockett, A Course in Modern Linguistics; New York, Macmillan, 1958.
  • Ruth Benedict, Patterns of Culture; New York, Mentor Books, 1946.
  • E. E. Evans-Pritchard, Social Anthropology; London, Cohen and West, 1951.
  • Gregory Bateson, "Tehe Message. 'This Is Play,'" in Group Processes, Vol. 2, edited by Bertram Schaffner; New York, Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation, 1956.

Weitz, Shirley 1974e. Spatial behavior. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 199-204.

Two major research traditions have been concerned with the social psychological use of space. Proxemics, introduced in Edward Hall's work, The Hidden Dimension (1966), is clearly linked to anthropology. The meaning and use of space in different cultures is a primary focus of study, and naturalistic methods of observation are generally used. Some thought is also given to the psychological significance of spacing, but that approach is more characteristic of the other school of thought, what we will call, personal space, discussed in a book by Robert Sommer (1969). This research tradition chiefly deals with the meaning of space to the individual in terms of the effects of crowding, territoriality, architectural design, and so on, and is only peripherally concerned with intercultural variations. Controlled laboratory and field studies are used, in contrast to proxemics, which mainly relies on observational studies. The difference between proxemic and personal space research is anaolgous to that between the structural and experimental appraoch to body movement, discussed in Part 3.
However, there is considerable overlap between studies of proxemics and personal space, and the division between them is a very permeable one. Generally, when spatial behavior is studied within the purview of anthropology it is known as proxemics; when it comes under scrutiny by experimental social psychology and sociology, it is known as personal space. (Weitz 1974e: 199)
The logica end of proxemics is touching. Once two people touch they have eliminated the space between them, and this act usually signifies that a special type of relationship exists between them. Studies of touching, or tactile behavior as it is more formally known, have appeared infrequently in the literature. Frank (1957) summarized some of the psychiatric and anthropologicla literature on the sobject, as does Montagu's (1971) more recent popular book. (Weitz 1974e: 203)
Frank, L. K., "Tactile communication," Genetic Psychology Monographs, 1957, 56, 209-55.

Hall, Edward T. 1974. Proxemics. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 205-229.

Edward T. Hall, Ray L. Birdwhistell, Bernhard Bock, Paul Bohannan, A. Richard Diebold, Jr., Marshall Durbin, Munro S. Edmonson, J. L. Fischer, Dell Hymes, Solon T. Kimball, Weston La Barre, Frank Lynch S. J., J. E. McClellan, Donald S. Marshall, G. B. Milner, Harvey B. Sarles, George L Trager, Andrew P. Vayda
Current Anthropology, Vol. 9, No. 2/3 (Apr. - Jun., 1968), pp. 83-108
OR 2740724.pdf

Watson, O. Michael 1974. Conflicts and Directions in Proxemic Research. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 230-241.

ELSEWHERE: The Journal of Communication, Vol. 22 (4), December 1972.

Sommer, Robert 1974. Small Group Ecology. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 242-251.

Psychological Bulletin, Vol 67(2), Feb 1967, 145-152.
OR bul-67-2-145.pdf

Sommer, Robert and Franklin D. Becker 1974. Territorial Defense and the Good Neighbor. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 252-262.

ELSEWHERE: Territorial defense and the good neighbor.
Sommer, Robert Becker, Franklin D. ; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 11(2), Feb, 1969. pp. 85-92. [Journal Article]
OR psp-11-2-85.pdf

Weitz, Shirley 1974f. Multichannel communication. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 263-268.

Finally, Smith's article (p. 331) takes the broadest view yet of nonverbal communication by placing it in an evolutionary perspective. Smith sees a gradual overtaking of kinesics and paralinguistic communication by language in man but asserts that the more primitive forms of communication still persist and are important sources of intraspecific messages. The new science of semiotics (Sebeok, Hayes, and Bateson, 1964; Sebeok and Ramsey, 1969) takes as its subject matter, "patterned communication in all modalities," and its concern ranges from animal communication to linguistic analysis. According to Sebeok, human semiotic systems consist of two varieties: (1) anthroposemiotic systems, chiefly language communication, unique to man, and (2) zoosemiotic systems, paralinguistic and nonverbal behavior, characteristic of other animals as well as man. Linguistics is the science concerned with the first area, nonverbal communication with the second. Semiotics urges an ultimate joining of the two concerns, an aim shared by such researchers as Birdwhistell, whose work was discussed earlier in the section on body movement. The founders of the semiotic movement publish their own journal, Semiotica, from which the Smith article, as well as the earlier Ekman, Friesen, and Tomkins piece (p. 34) are taken. (Weitz 1974f: 266)
Sebeok, T. A., Hayes, A. S., and Bateson, M. C., eds., Approaches to Semiotics: Transactions of the Indiana University Conference on paralinguistics and Kinesics, Mouton Publishers, The Hague, 1964. and Sebeok, T. A., and Ramsey, A., Approaches to Animal Communication, Mouton, The Hague, 1969.

Ekman, Paul and Wallace V. Friesen 1974. Nonverbal Leakage and Clues to Deception. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 169-190.

ELSEWHERE: Nonverbal leakage and clues to deception.
Ekman, Paul; Friesen, Wallace V.
Psychiatry: Journal for the Study of Interpersonal Processes, Vol 32(1), 1969, 88-106.
OR 689341.pdf

Mehrabian, Albert and Sudan R. Ferris 1974. Inference of Attitudes from Nonverbal Communication in Two Channels. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 191-197.

ELSEWHERE: MEHRABIAN, ALBERT FERRIS, SUSAN R. ; Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol 31(3), Jun, 1967. pp. 248-252. [Journal Article]
OR ccp-31-3-248.pdf

Duncan, Starkey Jr. 1974. Some Signals and Rules for Taking Speaking Turns in Conversations. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 198-311.

ELSEWHERE: Duncan, Starkey ; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 23(2), Aug, 1972. pp. 283-292.
OR psp-23-2-283.pdf

Mehrabian, Albert and Scheldon Ksionzky 1974. Some Determinants of Social Interaction. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 312-330.

ELSEWHERE: Some Determiners of Social Interaction
Albert Mehrabian and Sheldon Ksionzky
Sociometry , Vol. 35, No. 4 (Dec., 1972), pp. 588-609
OR 2786535.pdf

Smith, W. John 1974. Displays and Messages in Intraspecific Communication. In: Weitz, Shirley (ed.), Nonverbal communication: readings with commentary. New York (etc.): Oxford University Press, 331-340.

ELSEWHERE: Smith, John W. 1969. Displays and Messages in Intraspecific Communication. Semiotica 1(1): 357-369.
OR semi.1969.1.4.357.pdf


Post a Comment