Nonverbal communication: how significant is it?

[Frosty]

Your hatred for business shouldn't influence your perception of the body language quiz. Analogous, considering a math test invalid because the examples given were business examples.

You seem really defensive over this quiz. Did you make it?

Any quiz on the internet is going to have its problems, thats why pretty much anything that someone is going to want to test you on in any serious way either, costs money, is a million questions, or something you have to do in person. A 10 question quiz that I could go and find 10 more of in less than 10 minutes... just isnt likely to be without fault. Not exacty comprehensive

Its ok if your quiz has issues. Its really not the end of the world

 

[rav3n]

Hatred may or may not be an influence, and just because it shouldn't, doesn't mean that it won't. Dislike of something often does absolutely effect someones ability and skill at something. Emotions and opinions are powerful things. It also comes down to experience and exposure. Someone who doesn't want any part of business and has no experience is less likely to know these things. They haven't likely thought about them much, and aren't going to be perfect at it either.

But the questions swirled around body language and interpretation of such.

- - - Updated - - -

You seem really defensive over this quiz. Did you make it?

Any quiz on the internet is going to have its problems, thats why pretty much anything that someone is going to want to test you on in any serious way either, costs money, is a million questions, or something you have to do in person. A 10 question quiz that I could go and find 10 more of in less than 10 minutes... just isnt likely to be without fault. Not exacty comprehensive

Its ok if your quiz has issues. Its really not the end of the world

Wat? No. I'm not defensive of it. I find people's reasoning for hating on it, irrational.

 

[Frosty]

But the questions swirled around body language and interpretation of such.

- - - Updated - - -

Wat? No. I'm not defensive of it. I find people's reasoning for hating on it, irrational.

Well maybe Im miseading the situation- joke- but you definetly seem defensive.

People are criticizing it fairly impersonally. I usually wouldnt say anything about it but... otherwise I feel like this is going to be like another 10 pages of someone commenting about some quality of your quiz and then you demanding they ‘prove’ an opinion that they have.

Anyways. Like I said, I normally wouldnt say anythjng, but considering no one else had yet, I figured I just would as my parting ‘gift’ to this thread.

Disclaimer: I claimed to be decent at reading people- not situations. There is a difference. Im too tired to explain, but there is a difference. Anyways. I might be causing more trouble than Im worth- the not being wonderful at reading ‘situations’ so- thats why Im out. No personal offense meant to anyone

 

[rav3n]

Well maybe Im miseading the situation- joke- but you definetly seem defensive.

People are criticizing it fairly impersonally. I usually wouldnt say anything about it but... otherwise I feel like this is going to be like another 10 pages of someone commenting about some quality of your quiz and then you demanding they ‘prove’ an opinion that they have.

Anyways. Like I said, I normally wouldnt say anythjng, but considering no one else had yet, I figured I just would as my parting ‘gift’ to this thread.

This is my MO, looking for logical reasons.

 

[Obfuscate]

nonverbal communication is neither important or relevant...

i will cede that it displays a lesser amount of intentionally conveyed information... however, i find that i am sometimes forced to adopt elcor tactics to explain myself online...

so i sort of agree with the o.p. , though it appears to be dismissive...

 

[Metis]

Check out this ten question test, relative to your ability to read/enact body language. My results were 10/10 first try.

Are you fluent in body language? – quiz | Guardian Small Business Network | The Guardian

You got… 10/10
You are pretty shrewd at reading other people, and therefore probably good at ensuring your own body language is sending the right signals.​

Hey, I'm good at knowing which answers the test writer was looking for, and I didn't even need to observe the writer's body language.

10/10, but honestly I find these sorts of questions too reductionist. For several of them I knew what the answer should be, but disagreed with it to some extent because it's too simplified. For example, if someone pulls a double handshake (and I do not have an established rapport with them) I will not trust the much and keep a distant and critical eye. It's frequently not genuniely used. There is so much more nuance.

I agree that it's a lot more nuanced.

 

[rav3n]

You got… 10/10
You are pretty shrewd at reading other people, and therefore probably good at ensuring your own body language is sending the right signals.​

Hey, I'm good at knowing which answers the test writer was looking for, and I didn't even need to observe the writer's body language.

And yes, I agree that it's a lot more nuanced.

I'll ask you the same question I asked Hard. How did you know what the test writer wanted from you?

 

[Metis]

I'll ask you the same question I asked Hard. How did you know what the test writer wanted from you?

Some of it I've heard before, and some of it I guessed based on what I assumed the writer's attitude was.

For example, on the first question, about the handshake: Personally, I lean more towards interpreting a "double handshake" as glad-handing, dominating, politicking, image-sculpting, and manipulative. Normally. On the other hand, if the person doing it is, for example, a small, soft-spoken woman who collects rabbits as a hobby (I'm using this as an example because I know this person), I'm more likely to interpret it as being one way that she tries to "connect" with people. I might feel a little smothered, and I might be concerned that I'll offend her somehow and run into some kind of quiet damnation from her, but I probably won't feel like that particular person is being a politician and trying to dominate while seeming likable, like I would in the first example I gave. It depends on how I read the other person's intentions and general character. It's based on experience. I don't know people who clasp my hand that way because of "trust", inasmuch as I've ever read it to be, but I knew that was the answer the quiz writer was going for. How did I know? Well, I really just assumed, and I assumed correctly. I thought that in the writer's eyes, the "dominance" answer would seem too "negative" or like too much of an assumption. I imagined that the writer would interpret the "dominance" answer as being a little paranoid or not being able to read intentions.

That's a little bit of a circular explanation, since it keeps coming back around to what I assumed, and to what I thought the writer would assume about me, etc. Maybe it clarifies my reason to some extent, though.

Some I'd already heard before, like the smiling & eye crinkles one and the "attempts to cover their mouth" one. I disagree with both of those, to some extent, though.

1) Smiling: A smile isn't fake just because you did it on purpose. It might not look as nice as a whole-face smile, but I frequently smile deliberately, yet stiffly, in an effort to convey my sincere good intentions. I'm not naturally smiley. I really love it when people take my effort at face value and seem to recognize that I'm smiling in order to convey friendliness or good will.

2) Covering your mouth and other parts of your face can mean that you feel shy, or that you're politely holding your tongue because you don't want to interrupt, or that you're bored or tired. You could make a case that some of those constitute "not telling the whole truth", but the implication is that this action conveys untrustworthiness, and in a real situation, there's more context, and it might (A) mean something else and/or (B) be read differently. It also might be read differently by different people, based on whether they can relate to that context or not, and how they relate. It also can be read differently by a single person, depending on mood and outlook at that time.

Also, with the "might not be telling the whole truth" question, one of the options was "they make steady eye contact". I've actually heard that this is sometimes considered an indicator of lying. I didn't think it was the answer the quiz writer was looking for, though, because the face-touching one is standard advice. I've heard both, but I went with the one that was more likely to be on the author's mind.

 

[Coriolis]

The quiz though is geared mostly towards "learned" things you could pick up on in a coursework on this sort of thing. I'm quite certain there are business firms that offer training seminars on this sorts of thing, and it would be backed at least in part by some research. If you follow that stuff too rigidly, it's liable to not be terribly helpful. Honestly, I think testing someone ability to understand non-verbal communication is dreadfully difficult. Too many variables, and you can't re-create all of the stuff that people come to rely on in the real world.

I suspect this is why I was able to guess 6/10 correctly. They are things I have been trained to do in a professional environment, either explicitly or implicitly by watching how my "elders and betters" behave. Many of them also serve to maintain appropriate distance, keep distractions down, and follow established patterns of etiquette. I am no fan of most of this for its own sake, but prefer to break protocol only when I have good reason and will gain something by it - or at least not lose anything worthwhile.

so i sort of agree with the o.p. , though it appears to be dismissive...

You are welcome to criticise this point of view. In fact, that is a main purpose of this thread.

 

[Obfuscate]

You are welcome to criticise this point of view. In fact, that is a main purpose of this thread.

i am rarely critical without (percieved) cause... have i been injust in my limited criticism? if so, how?

 

[Coriolis]

i am rarely critical without (percieved) cause... have i been injust in my limited criticism? if so, how?

I am not objecting to criticism, I am inviting it. The cause for criticism here is simply the discussion, which I started in order to learn more about the topic. The OP contains my own POV. It is open for critique. Show me where I am wrong, or what I am overlooking. You mentioned something about it was dismissive. How so? What do you think I am dismissing, and why is it wrong to do so?

 

[rav3n]

Some of it I've heard before, and some of it I guessed based on what I assumed the writer's attitude was.

For example, on the first question, about the handshake: Personally, I lean more towards interpreting a "double handshake" as glad-handing, dominating, politicking, image-sculpting, and manipulative. Normally. On the other hand, if the person doing it is, for example, a small, soft-spoken woman who collects rabbits as a hobby (I'm using this as an example because I know this person), I'm more likely to interpret it as being one way that she tries to "connect" with people. I might feel a little smothered, and I might be concerned that I'll offend her somehow and run into some kind of quiet damnation from her, but I probably won't feel like that particular person is being a politician and trying to dominate while seeming likable, like I would in the first example I gave. It depends on how I read the other person's intentions and general character. It's based on experience. I don't know people who clasp my hand that way because of "trust", inasmuch as I've ever read it to be, but I knew that was the answer the quiz writer was going for. How did I know? Well, I really just assumed, and I assumed correctly. I thought that in the writer's eyes, the "dominance" answer would seem too "negative" or like too much of an assumption. I imagined that the writer would interpret the "dominance" answer as being a little paranoid or not being able to read intentions.

That's a little bit of a circular explanation, since it keeps coming back around to what I assumed, and to what I thought the writer would assume about me, etc. Maybe it clarifies my reason to some extent, though.

Some I'd already heard before, like the smiling & eye crinkles one and the "attempts to cover their mouth" one. I disagree with both of those, to some extent, though.

1) Smiling: A smile isn't fake just because you did it on purpose. It might not look as nice as a whole-face smile, but I frequently smile deliberately, yet stiffly, in an effort to convey my sincere good intentions. I'm not naturally smiley. I really love it when people take my effort at face value and seem to recognize that I'm smiling in order to convey friendliness or good will.

2) Covering your mouth and other parts of your face can mean that you feel shy, or that you're politely holding your tongue because you don't want to interrupt, or that you're bored or tired. You could make a case that some of those constitute "not telling the whole truth", but the implication is that this action conveys untrustworthiness, and in a real situation, there's more context, and it might (A) mean something else and/or (B) be read differently. It also might be read differently by different people, based on whether they can relate to that context or not, and how they relate. It also can be read differently by a single person, depending on mood and outlook at that time.

Also, with the "might not be telling the whole truth" question, one of the options was "they make steady eye contact". I've actually heard that this is sometimes considered an indicator of lying. I didn't think it was the answer the quiz writer was looking for, though, because the face-touching one is standard advice. I've heard both, but I went with the one that was more likely to be on the author's mind.

You're making my head explode because it boils down to assuming. But what's beneath the assumption which you're hopping all around the underlying source but not really going straight at it. Reading body language is instinctual and that's what really underpins a lot of assumptions of the 'right answers'.

 

[Metis]

You're making my head explode because it boils down to assuming. But what's beneath the assumption which you're hopping all around the underlying source but not really going straight at it. Reading body language is instinctual and that's what really underpins a lot of assumptions of the 'right answers'.

Reading body language, I come up with a different answer for the "double handshake" question than I come up with when I read into what the author of the quiz was likely thinking. I didn't choose the so-called "right answers" on the quiz because I instinctively agreed with the author. I chose them because, yes, I made assumptions, in the form of extrapolations from past experience, to form my best guesses at what the author had been thinking.

Reading body language involves instinct, experience, intellectual and emotional interpretation, and even hearsay. One or a few of those factors can weigh more heavily in some situations than in other situations.

I already said that I make a lot of assumptions. If I didn't, I would be bogged down in overthinking everything. Life needs to be lived, regardless of the fact that no one can provide a solid basis for what it means or what its goals should be.

 

[rav3n]

Reading body language, I come up with a different answer for the "double handshake" question than I come up with when I read into what the author of the quiz was likely thinking. I didn't choose the so-called "right answers" on the quiz because I instinctively agreed with the author. I chose them because, yes, I made assumptions, in the form of extrapolations from past experience, to form my best guesses at what the author had been thinking.

Reading body language involves instinct, experience, intellectual and emotional interpretation, and even hearsay. One or a few of those factors can weigh more heavily in some situations than in other situations.

I already said that I make a lot of assumptions. If I didn't, I would be bogged down in overthinking everything. Life needs to be lived, regardless of the fact that no one can provide a solid basis for what it means or what its goals should be.

How would you know what the writer of the article might be thinking, considering how all you have is a blurb and a questionnaire to gauge by where you have zero knowledge of the article writer and their state of mind, at the point where they created each question?

 

[rav3n]

And I'm going to drop Obama's 2004 speech into this thread for people to read his body language. Even though some of his gestures were consciously delivered, particularly some of the punctuation, as a generality, his body language meshed with his words. Obama sincerely believed what he stated, the twin messages of hope and unity.

 

[Obfuscate]

I am not objecting to criticism, I am inviting it. The cause for criticism here is simply the discussion, which I started in order to learn more about the topic. The OP contains my own POV. It is open for critique. Show me where I am wrong, or what I am overlooking. You mentioned something about it was dismissive. How so? What do you think I am dismissing, and why is it wrong to do so?

there is a tone in how i worded that earlier that i don't care for... i think i was just in an off mood, and i honestly dislike how it expressed itself... that aside... hmmmm...

it feels (feels being the opperative word) dismissive because while you take time to really lay out a solid framework for your conclusion it goes against people's reported experiences... it isn't a bad post by any means, and i like that you took the time to write it out...buttt....

well that's the thing... i don't have more than a gut impulse that it is incomplete...i don't have any solid reason for that reaction but it's strong... i am a very expressive person when i am fully engaged in a conversation... my whole body becomes an extension of my message... i talk with my hands, eyes, mouth, how i lean or don't... i think there is a poetry of kinds in the interplay of words and action... deeming either half as redundent/extraneous is inherently wrong... somehow... i read that language, i speak that language, and someone else's capabilty/willingness to do so doesn't change my experience...

anyhow... my initial response was lazy and sarcastic... there was no reason for me to be that way...and all of this is about how your post made me feel, and less about the content...

 

[rav3n]

And another test where my results were 87/100 which isn't a big deal, albeit the test considers this score to be highly skilled. There are very likely others who will exceed this score on TypoC.

Body Language Test

And again, if you don't score reasonably well on this test, it's not a good idea to rely on your ability to read body language in order to decision make/conclude.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

(It's taken a couple of days to articulate this response).

This may be because I'm e5, but there's little more annoying to me than someone who thinks they can 'read' me or someone who inserts meaning 'between the lines' and is horribly wrong about what they're inserting. I have an exceptionally short fuse about it. I mean, actually, it's not when people are horribly wrong about what they're inserting so much as if I get dragged into any exhausting melodrama because of it. If someone is horribly wrong and they ask me about it, and the whole thing passes without incident, then it's not really a problem. But oftentimes people react strongly to their own incorrect assumptions, and for a lot of people - once that horse is out of the gate, there's no putting him back in. And so, the biggest consequence of when I'm wrong is knowing I imposed that kind of loathsome hell on another person.

This is my perspective as well. How is that not what you are doing here? I wouldn't call it horribly wrong, but you are definitely overlaying more than I have explicitly stated.

For one, "horribly wrong" is an important distinction to me, but an even bigger distinction is that - as I stated already in the paragraph quoted - it isn't so much a person getting something wrong as it is the fire-breathing angry reaction they impose on me as a result. Even if it's a passive-aggressive angry reaction. If there's a very palpable anger directed at me as a consequence and I am pulled into some kind of melodrama that takes an excessive amount of work (on my end) to clear up, that's when I have a very short fuse about it. Especially if the horse is so far out of the gate that they can't begin to back up and hear where their understanding veered way off from my words (or whatever perceivable cue that set it off).

Secondly, a modicum of someone piecing things together 'between the lines' is actually just normal communication. As I already stated somewhere in this thread: I actually find it almost as exhausting to deal with someone who can't piece any meaning 'between the lines' as someone who pieces too much. There's a sweet spot in the middle, and therein are the people with whom I tend to become better friends.

And so, in answer to your question about how I know I'm not doing the very thing I describe: (1) I'm not breathing fire at you or expecting you to regulate the emotion that may surface as a result of reading between the lines of what you've written; and (2) while you may be offended or annoyed at my impression that you consider a certain amount of nonverbal communication "irrational leaps", I actually feel relatively confident that if I were to post the exact words you have used in past conversation with me (which I can't, because as I already stated it's in private feedback/forum improvement committee) then quite a few people would understand how I arrived at that impression (i.e. by normative standards of communication, it's not an unreasonable conclusion). I'm not saying the impression is correct - in fact, I want to preemptively emphasize I am not saying my impression is correct. The point I'm trying to make is that there's a modicum of 'between the lines' that happens in everyday conversation. If the communication issues I have with you were anywhere near a regular occurrence for me, then I'd adjust my between-the-lines-ometer.

As for the difference between the concrete and the abstract, like many people, when it comes down to real world and especially RL situations, I rely on what has worked for me in the past, at least until I learn new approaches that are similarly effective. For me, this involves pretty much taking things at face value, since even when I might suspect people don't mean what they say (1) my confidence level in this conclusion is low, and (2) even if I am correct, I cannot accurately surmise their true meaning.

I suspect you misunderstood what I meant by my distinction between real and abstract. I'm not asking how you avoid making "irrational leaps" in the concrete. I'm saying that I've gotten the distinct impression, many times, that you perceive my assessments as being "irrational leaps" in actual conversations with me.

Am I correct in thinking that? Because if I am, then you are indeed included in that original statement I made about people perceiving a certain amount of reading 'between the lines' as making irrational leaps. If I'm incorrect in thinking that you have perceived more than a couple of my assessments of this type as "irrational leaps", then clearly I'm mistaken.

 

[Metis]

How would you know what the writer of the article might be thinking, considering how all you have is a blurb and a questionnaire to gauge by where you have zero knowledge of the article writer and their state of mind, at the point where they created each question?

There was a blurb? I didn't read the blurb.

I already explained my process that resulted in a 10/10 score on the quiz. And yes, it was on the first try.

I don't know what additional explanation I can provide. Just seat me in the corner away from the other students for the Final if you think I cheated on the Midterm.

 

[rav3n]

There was a blurb? I didn't read the blurb.

I already explained my process that resulted in a 10/10 score on the quiz. And yes, it was on the first try.

I don't know what additional explanation I can provide. Just seat me in the corner away from the other students for the Final if you think I cheated on the Midterm.

I don't think you cheated since it's not possible to cheat. But you're not giving enough weight towards the instinctual understanding of body language, circling around, above, beneath with wild guesses, as to why you knew what answers to give.