Press "Enter" to skip to content

Nonverbal communication

Chronemics

In a study by Kalman et al. (2013) the findings tend to support the social information processing theory through indication how the online Chronemics offer cues to essential situational and personal information. Ravid et al. (2006) found that quick response is a way of signaling care, immediacy, and closeness.

Vocalic

Hinkle (2009) found that a supervisor vocalic is linked significantly to the liking of subordinates for their supervisors. According to Pearce (2009), vocal cues are considered as a conspicuous element in the appeal or the lack of appeal of the speaker for their audience.

Proxemics

The Proxemic imaging may detect the combination of the approach and the avoidance behavior in face-to-face interaction (Singer & McCall 2015). Proxemic Behavior can be automatic and less conscious than more explicit and deliberative response (Dotsch & Wigboldus 2008).

Haptics

Milleville-Pennel et al. (2011) claim that haptic interaction does influence the verbal communication of people when they are sharing haptic information. Haptic communication increases a feeling of co-presence in a virtual environment.

Kinesics

The kinetic cues people normally receive and send, help us in understanding what we are sharing nonverbally (Jonsson et al. 2009). It is advised that teachers should consider using kinesics since it is effective in instruction efficacy (Camerino et al. 2013).

Oculesics

According to Nolen (1995), eye contact and smile may be useful methods of relieving tension during serious situations. In the pupil of a human eye, it tends to respond in different ways to different situations (Hess 1975).

Gestures

According to Beilock & Meadow (2010), the gestures that people make do influence the way they think. Graham & Heywood (1975) purports that the lack of gestures may affect the speech production.

Reference

Beilock, S & Meadow, S (2010). Action’s influence on thought perspectives on psychological science 5(6)

Castañer, M., Torrents, C., Anguera, T., & Jonsson, G. (2009). Identifying and analyzing motor skill responses in body movement and dance. Behavioral Research Methods 41(3), 857–867

Dotsch R, & Wigboldus H (2008) Virtual prejudice. Journal of experimental social psychology 44: 1194–1198

Dumas, C Chellali, A & Milleville-Pennel, I (2011). Influences of haptic communication on shared manual task Interacting with Computers 23 (4)

Graham, A & Heywood, S (1975). The effects of elimination of hand gestures and verbal codability on speech performance. European Journal of social Psychology

Hess, H. (1975). The role of pupil size in communication. Scientific America  233, 110-119.

Hinkle, L (2009). Perceptions of supervisor nonverbal immediacy, vocalics, and subordinate liking. Communication research reports 18(2)

Jonsson, G Anguera, T Castaner, M & Camerino, O (2013). Kinesics and Proxemics communication of experts Qual Quant 47

Nolen, W (1995). Reading people Institute of Internal Auditors

Pearce, B (2009). The effect of vocal cues on credibility and attitude change. Western Speech 35 (3)

Raban, D Kalman, Y Rafaeli, S & Ravid, G (2006). Pauses and Response Latencies. Journal of computer-mediated communication 12(1)

Scissors, L Gerfle, D Gill, A & Kalman, Y (2013). Online chronemics convey social information. Computers in Human Behavior 29

Singer, T & McCall, C (2015).Facing Off with Unfair Others PLOS ONE 10(2)

Yee, N Merget, D, Koslow, D & Brave, S (2007). Virtual interpersonal touch Human-Computer Interaction 22

Carolyn Morgan is the author of this paper. A senior editor at MeldaResearch.Com in research paper writing services if you need a similar paper you can place your order from Top American Writing Services.

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: