Skip to main content
Log in

The Verbal and Nonverbal Correlates of the Five Flirting Styles

Journal of Nonverbal Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present investigation identifies the nonverbal and verbal behaviors associated with the five flirting styles (i.e., physical, traditional, sincere, polite, playful) (Hall et al. in Commun Q 58:365–393, 2010). Fifty-one pairs (N = 102) of opposite-sex heterosexual strangers interacted for 10–12 min and then reported their physical attraction to their conversational partner. Four independent coders coded 36 nonverbal and verbal behaviors. The residual variance of the interaction term between each flirting style and physical attraction was calculated, accounting for variance associated with the other styles. These five residual terms were separately correlated with the coded verbal and nonverbal behaviors. Each flirting style was correlated with behaviors linked to the conceptualization of that style: more conversational fluency for physical flirts, more demure behaviors for traditional female flirts and more assertive and open behaviors by traditional male flirts, less fidgeting, teasing, and distraction and more smiling for sincere flirts, more reserved and distancing behavior by polite flirts, and more obviously engaging and flirtatious behaviors by playful flirts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abbey, A. (1982). Sex differences in attributions for friendly behavior: Do males misperceive females’ friendliness? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 830–838. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.42.5.830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abbey, A., & Melby, C. (1986). The effect of nonverbal cues on gender differences in the perceptions of sexual intent. Sex Roles, 15, 283–298. doi:10.1007/BF00288318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anolli, L., & Ciceri, R. (2002). Analysis of the vocal profiles of male seduction: From exhibition to self-disclosure. Journal of General Psychology, 129, 149–169. doi:10.1080/00221300209603135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Birdwhistell, R. L. (1970). Kinesics and context. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brumbaugh, C. C., & Fraley, R. C. (2010). Adult attachment and dating strategies: How do insecure people attract mates? Personal Relationships, 17, 599–614. doi:10.1111/j/1475-6811.2010.01304.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C. L., Shaver, P. R., & Abrahams, M. F. (1999). Strategic behaviors in romantic relationship initiation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 709–722. doi:10.1177/0146167299025006006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clore, G., Wiggins, N. H., & Itkin, S. (1975). Judging attraction from nonverbal behavior: The gain phenomena. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 491–497. doi:10.1037/h0076847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dindia, K., & Timmerman, L. (2003). Accomplishing romantic relationships. In J. O. Greene & B. R. Burleson (Eds.), Handbook of communication and social interaction skills (pp. 685–722). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eaton, A. A., & Rose, S. (2011). Has dating become more egalitarian? A 35 year review using sex roles. Sex Roles, 64, 843–862. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-9957-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fichten, C. S., Tagalakis, V., Judd, D., Wright, J., & Amsel, R. (1992). Verbal and nonverbal communication cues in daily conversation and dating. Journal of Social Psychology, 132, 751–769. doi:10.1080/00224545.1992.9712105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, M., & Cox, A. (2011). Four strategies used during intrasexual competition for mates. Personal Relationships, 18, 20–38. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01307.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Givens, D. (1978). The nonverbal basis of attraction: Flirtation, courtship, and seduction. Psychiatry, 41, 346–359.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grammer, K. (1990). Strangers meet: Laughter and nonverbal signs of interest in opposite-sex encounters. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 14, 209–236. doi:10.1007/BF00989317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grammer, K., Honda, M., Juette, A., & Schmitt, A. (1999). Fuzziness of nonverbal courtship communication unblurred by motion energy detection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 487–508. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.77.3.487.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grammer, K., Kruck, K., Juette, A., & Fink, B. (2000). Nonverbal behavior as courtship signals: The role of control and choice in selecting partners. Evolution and Human Behavior, 21, 371–390. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(00)00053-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gueguen, N. (2008). The effect of a woman’s smile on men’s courtship behavior. Social Behavior and Personality, 36, 1233–1236. doi:10.2224/sbp.2008.36.9.1233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. A. (2013). The five flirting styles: Use the science of flirting to attract the love you really want. Don Mills, Ontario, CA: Harlequin Nonfiction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. A., Carter, S., Cody, M. J., & Albright, J. M. (2010). Individual differences in the communication of romantic interest: Development of the flirting styles inventory. Communication Quarterly, 58, 365–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. A., Cody, M. J., Jackson, G., & Flesh, J. O. (2008). Beauty and the flirt: Attractiveness and opening lines in date initiation. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Conference in Montreal, Canada. http://hdl.handle.net/1808/9917.

  • Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 77–89. doi:10.1080/19312450709336664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henningsen, D. D. (2004). Flirting with meaning: An examination of miscommunication in flirting interactions. Sex Roles, 50, 481–489. doi:10.1023/B:SERS.0000023068.49352.4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henningsen, D. D., Braz, M. E., & Davies, E. (2008). Why do we flirt? Flirting motivations and sex differences in working and social contexts. Journal of Business Communication, 45, 483–502. doi:10.1177/0021943608319390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koeppel, L. B., Montagne-Miller, Y., O’Hair, D., & Cody, M. J. (1993). Friendly? Flirting? Wrong? In P. J. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Interpersonal communication: Evolving interpersonal relationships (pp. 13–32). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Little, T. D., Bovaird, J. A., & Widaman, K. F. (2006). On the merits of orthogonalizing powered and product terms: Implications for modeling interactions among latent variables. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 497–519. doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1304_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McBain, K. A., Hewitt, L., Maher, T., Sercombe, M., Sypher, S., & Tirendi, G. (2013). Is this seat taken? The importance of context during the initiation of romantic communication. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3, 79–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCroskey, J. C., & McCain, T. A. (1974). The measurement of interpersonal attraction. Speech Monographs, 41, 261–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. M. (1985). Nonverbal courtship patters in women: Context and consequences. Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 237–247. doi:10.1016/0162-3095(85)90016-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. M. (2010). Human nonverbal courtship behavior—A brief historical review. Journal of Sex Research, 47, 171–180. doi:10.1080/00224490903402520.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M., & Butler, D. (1989). Predictive aspects of nonverbal courtship behavior in women. Semiotica, 3, 205–215. doi:10.1515/semi.1989.76.3-4.205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, D. (1971). Intimate behavior. New York, NY: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, R. W. (1983). Communicator style: Theory, applications, and measures. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Farrell, K. J., Rosenthal, E. V., & O’Neal, E. C. (2003). Relationship satisfaction and responsiveness to nonmates’ flirtation: Testing an evolutionary explanation. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 20, 663–674. doi:10.1177/02654075030205005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penke, L., & Asendorpf, J. B. (2008). Beyond global sociosexual orientations: A more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1113–1135. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.95.5.1113.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Perper, T. (1985). Sex signals: The biology of love. Philadelphia: ISI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renninger, L. A., Wade, T. J., & Grammer, K. (2004). Getting that female glance: patterns and consequences of male nonverbal behavior in courtship contexts. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 416–431. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.08.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheflen, A. E. (1965). Quasi-courtship behavior in psychotherapy. Psychiatry, 28, 245–257.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. P. (2005). Fundamentals of human mating strategies. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The evolutionary psychology handbook (pp. 258–291). New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shotland, R. L., & Craig, J. M. (1988). Can men and women differentiate between friendly and sexually interested behavior? Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 66–73. doi:10.2307/2786985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, J. A., Gangestad, S. W., & Biek, M. (1993). Personality and nonverbal social behavior: An ethological perspective of relationship initiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 434–461. doi:10.1006/jesp.1993.1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trost, M. R., & Alberts, J. K. (2006). How men and women communicate attraction: An evolutionary view. In K. Dindia & D. J. Canary (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication (2nd ed., pp. 317–336). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to study coordinators and coders: Seth Brooks, Arianne Fuchsberger, Courtney Holle, Robin Latham, Trevor Perry. This research was supported by the University of Kansas General Research Fund (GRF Award No. 2301662).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey A. Hall.

Appendix

Appendix

Category

Description

How coded

Head

Rest head

Rest head in hand or on back of chair

Count

Nodding

Moving head in an up or down direction in order to express/signal agreement or interest in what the other participant is saying

Count

Shaking head

Moving head side to side to express/signal disagreement or lack of interest in what the other participant is saying

Count

Stroking, flipping, playing with hair

Pulling hair in a downward/through motion

Count

Tussling, smoothing, or fixing hair

Moving hair out of face

Twirling

Any flip motion

Putting hair up or taking hair down

Mouth/face

Lips

Bringing lips into mouth

Count

Licking lips

Biting lip

Smiling

Moving sides of mouth in an upward direction

Count

Mouth manipulations

Open mouth—dropped jaw

Count

Pouting

Mouth movements for expressiveness (clenching, licking, or exposing teeth, wincing, “o” face)

Thoughtful mouth—downturned

Expressiveness of face

Eye brown flashes

Count

Raising eyebrows

Big eyes, squinting eyes, mock anger

Overemphasizing facial expressions

Exaggerated smile—open mouth smile

Voice

Laughter

Laughing in response to the other participant

Count

Nervous laughter

Giggling—a light laugh in a nervous affected or silly manner

Signaling laughter (“ha” before, during, or after talk)

Vocal expressiveness

Quick rate of speech

1 = Slow, monotone

Voice animated and excited

5 = Animated, excited

Lots of variation in tone or pitch

(Overall rating for minute)

 

Pitch/tone

5 = Higher pitch, more feminine tone,

5 = High pitch

1 = Low pitch, more masculine tone, lower voice (Overall rating for minute)

3 = Androgynous

1 = Low pitch

Torso/body

Leaning toward other participant

Forward angled motion from the hip, moving from an erect or closed off position to a open or angled position in the direction of the other participant

1 = Leans back/away from other

Upper body upright toward the other participant

(Overall rating for minute)

3 = Up-right, or leans in occasionally

5 = Leans forward nearly whole time

Arms cross, open torso

Full exposure to breast/chest and stomach area (arms not crossed)

1 = Arms crossed nearly whole time

Arms crossed around chest, stomach (overall rating for minute)

3 = One arm crossed, Hands in lap, or half open and half crossed over minute

5 = Open, full exposure near whole time

Move closer together

Attempt to move chair closer to other person

Count

Scooting body forward in seat

Breast presentation/protrusion

Lifting or expanding chest/breast area by extending lower back upward toward other person, or by pulling arms away from other person

Count

In combination with leaning forward, pressing breasts together with upper torso

Fall in chair

Letting body fall into chair either backward or sideways

Count

Bending at torso or throwing head back or to the side

Touch

Most likely in greeting or departure

Count

Count for minute

Hands

Palming

Open wrist and palm of the hand

Count

Turning motion toward open toward other person—full motion

Hand movements

Using hands to emphasize a point or to help express what they are saying verbally

Count

Any hand movement gets counted

Usually this accompanies speech

Self touching

Hands running along any part of the body

Count

Any time a body part is moving along another body part in pointed/noticeable way

Itching body, head, or face

(Not hair touch)

Artifact adjustments

Resituating clothing

Count

Eyewear adjustment

Rolling up sleeves or pant legs or skirts

Adjusting clothing in a way that reveals more skin

Playing with objects

Wringing or messing with hands—rings, watches, bracelets, nails, etc.

Count

Playing with buttons, zippers, strings

Fiddling with other objects

(Not the card)

Card manipulation

Folding, turning, flipping, bending, waving card

1 = Not at all

Using card to enhance message or illustrate a point

3 = Some card

Pointing to or holding out card when talking about the question on the card

5 = Constant card fidgeting

Cover face with hands

Cover mouth with hand

Count

Put one or two hands on cheeks or chin

Stroking chin or facial hair

Eyes

Flirtatious glances

Eyebrow flash with a smile (coy smile)

Count

Half-smile and lowered eyes

Winking

Sideways smile/look

Gazing

To look steadily or intently at the other versus looking down and away

(Overall rating for minute)

1 = Looking away/down nearly whole time

3 = Half look at and half look down/away

5 = Steady, intent gaze at other

Coy gaze

Brief look followed by look away—a gaze implying shyness or modesty but intended to be alluring

Count

Legs

Erect and open posture—legs

Count every time legs cross or uncross

Count

Either one foot on one thigh, crossing at the ankles, or crossing at knee

Conversation

Asking questions

Asking the other for advice, opinions, or inputs when answering the question

Count

Requesting reassurance on the answers they are giving based on the card questions or interpreting the question (is this what it is asking?)

Asking questions that are not on the card

Affirming

Affirming (yes, that is interesting, oh?)

Count

Encouraging responses—really? Sure!

General agreement or support

Teasing

To make fun of or tease the other person in a good-natured or light-hearted way

Count

To attempt to provoke in a playful way

Self-deprecating remarks

Positive and emphasized sarcasm about self—followed a noticeable friendly comment

Count

Self-disparaging comment followed by smiling or laughter

Not caring or not knowing is not self-deprecating

Conversational fluency

Choppy, with lots of interruptions, and long pauses or very smooth conversation with few overlapping and little pause between talk

(Overall rating for minute)

1 = Lots of hesitation, short responses, overlapping, or uncomfortable silence

3 = Normal conversation/appropriate conversation

5 = Very smooth and fluent conversation; Conversation you might see between close friends, Enjoyment obvious

Depth of disclosure

Yes, no or very short responses to questions versus more personal information

(Overall rating for minute)

1 = Short, curt, and non-detailed responses

5 = Long, detailed responses, with personal disclosure

Amount of talk

How much did the subject talk versus the other person

1 = Other person

1 = Other person talked nearly whole time

3 = 50/50

5 = The subject talked nearly the whole time

5 = Subject talked

Self-promotion

No self-promotion, even modesty when good accomplishments noted

Count

Provide lots of details about accomplishments, achievements, or good things about self

(Overall rating for minute)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hall, J.A., Xing, C. The Verbal and Nonverbal Correlates of the Five Flirting Styles. J Nonverbal Behav 39, 41–68 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-014-0199-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-014-0199-8

Keywords

Navigation