Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 176–190 | Cite as

The effect of postural lean and body congruence on the judgment of psychotherapeutic rapport

  • Deborah L. Trout
  • Howard M. Rosenfeld
Article

Abstract

Naturalistic studies have implicated both forward postural lean and interpersonally congruent limb configurations as nonverbal indices of social rapport, although both variables have been confounded with verbal and other nonverbal concomitants. In the present study direction of postural lean and congruence of body positions were systematically manipulated in each of six 40-second videotaped segments of simulated client-therapist interactions. Participating in the study were 30 male and 30 female undergraduate students, each of whom viewed one of six orders of the segments and rated the level of rapport in each interaction. A 2 × 3 × 2 × 6 analysis of variance on factors of Congruence, Lean, Sex, and Order revealed main effects of the Lean and Congruence variables (p<.001 andp<.05, respectively), and no significant main effects of Sex or Order. Both congruent limbs and forward-leaning postures on the part of the therapist and client were significant contributors to attributions of rapport.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Buchheimer, A. The development of ideas about empathy.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1963,10, 61–70.Google Scholar
  2. Charny, E. J. Psychosomatic manifestations of rapport in psychotherapy.Psychosomatic Medicine, 1966,28, 305–315.Google Scholar
  3. Condon, W. S. An analysis of behavioral organization. In S. Weitz (Ed.),Nonverbal communication: Readings with commentary, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  4. DePaulo, B., Rosenthal, R., Eisenstat, R. et al. Decoding discrepant nonverbal cues.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1978,36, 313–323.Google Scholar
  5. Dittman, A. T.Interpersonal messages of emotion. New York: Springer, 1972.Google Scholar
  6. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. Nonverbal behavior in psychotherapy research. In J. Shlien (Ed.),Research in psychotherapy. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1968.Google Scholar
  7. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. Nonverbal leakage and clues to deception.Psychiatry, 1969,32, 88–106. (a)Google Scholar
  8. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage, and coding.Semiotica, 1969,1, 49–98. (b)Google Scholar
  9. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. Detecting deception from the body or face.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974,29, 288–298.Google Scholar
  10. Fiedler, F. E. A comparative investigation of early therapeutic relationships created by experts and non-experts of the psychoanalytic, non-directive, and Adlerian schools.Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1950,14, 436–445. (a)Google Scholar
  11. Fiedler, F. E. The concept of an ideal therapeutic relationship.Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1950,14, 239–245. (b)Google Scholar
  12. Genthner, R., & Moughan, J. Introverts' and extraverts' responses to nonverbal attending behavior.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1977,24, 144–146.Google Scholar
  13. Giles, H., & Powesland, P. F.Speech style and social evaluation. New York: Academic Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  14. Hall, E. T. Proxemics.Current Anthropology, 1968,9, 83–95, 106–108.Google Scholar
  15. Hasse, R. F., & Tepper, D. T. Nonverbal components of empathic communication.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1972,19, 417–424.Google Scholar
  16. Jones, E. E., and Nisbett, R. E. The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. Morristown, New Jersey: General Learning Press, 1971.Google Scholar
  17. Karger, K. The relationship of nonverbal counselor behavior to client and rater perceptions of empathy. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1974.)Dissertation Abstracts International, 1975,35, 4160A-4161A. (University Microfilms No. 74-19, 921.)Google Scholar
  18. Kendon, A. Movement coordination in social interaction.Acta Psychologica, 1970,32, 100–125.Google Scholar
  19. LaFrance, M. Nonverbal Synchrony and rapport: analysis by the cross-lag panel technique.Social Psychology Quarterly, 1979,42, 66–70.Google Scholar
  20. LaFrance, M., & Broadbent, M. Group rapport: Posture sharing as a nonverbal indicator.Group and Organization Studies, 1976,1, 328–333.Google Scholar
  21. Mehrabian, A. Inference of attitudes from the posture, orientation, and distance of a communicator.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1968,32 296–308. (a)Google Scholar
  22. Mehrabian, A. Relationship of attitude to seated posture, orientation, and distance.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1968,10, 26–30. (b)Google Scholar
  23. Mehrabian, A. Significance of posture and position in the communication of attitudes and status relationships.Psychological Bulletin, 1969,71, 359–372.Google Scholar
  24. Mehrabian, A.Silent messages. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 1971.Google Scholar
  25. Mehrabian, A.Nonverbal communication. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, 1972.Google Scholar
  26. Reece, M., & Whitman, N. Warmth and expressive movements.Psychological Reports, 1961,8, 76.Google Scholar
  27. Reece, M., & Whitman, N. Expressive movements, warmth, and verbal reinforcement.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962,64, 234–236.Google Scholar
  28. Rosenfeld, H. M. Instrumental affiliative functions of facial and gestural expressions.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1966,4, 65–72.Google Scholar
  29. Rosenfeld, H. M. Nonverbal reciprocation of approval: An experimental analysis.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1967,3, 102–111.Google Scholar
  30. Rosenfeld, H. M. Whither interactional synchrony? In K. Bloom (Ed.),Prospective issues in infant research. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, in press.Google Scholar
  31. Rosenfeld, H. M., & Hancks, M. The nonverbal context of verbal listener responses. In M. R. Key (Ed.),The relationship of verbal and nonverbal communication. The Hague: Mouton, in press.Google Scholar
  32. Scheflen, A. E. Communication and regulation in psychotherapy.Psychiatry, 1963,26, 126–136.Google Scholar
  33. Scheflen, A. E. The significance of posture in communication systems.Psychiatry, 1964,27, 316–331.Google Scholar
  34. Scheflen, A. E. Natural history method in psychotherapy: Communicational research. In L. A. Gottschaulk & A. H. Auerbach (Eds.),Methods of research in psychotherapy. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.Google Scholar
  35. Scheflen, A. E.Communicational structure: Analysis of a psychotherapy transaction. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
  36. Scheflen, A. E.How behavior means. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press-Doubleday, 1974.Google Scholar
  37. Scheflen, A. E., & Scheflen, A.Body language and the social order: Communication as behavioral control. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972.Google Scholar
  38. Tepper, D. T. The communication of counselor empathy, respect, and genuineness through verbal and nonverbal channels. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, 1972.)Dissertation Abstracts International, 1973,33, 4858A. (University Microfilms No. 73-6710.)Google Scholar
  39. Waldron, J. Judgment of like-dislike from facial expression and body posture.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1975,41, 700–804.Google Scholar
  40. Walker, H. M., & Lev, J.Statistical inference. New York: Holt, 1953.Google Scholar
  41. Wike, E. L.Data analysis. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, 1971.Google Scholar
  42. Winer, B. J. Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Deborah L. Trout
    • 1
  • Howard M. Rosenfeld
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of KansasLawrence

Personalised recommendations