Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effects of nonverbal synchrony on message comprehension and persuasiveness

  • Published:
Journal of Nonverbal Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous research has not considered the effects of nonverbal synchronization by a speaker on message processing and acceptance by a listener. In this experiment, 178 subjects watched one of three versions of a message—high synchrony, minimal synchrony or dissynchrony—presented by one of two speakers. Receivers of the high synchrony message, which employed kinesic cues synchronized to the vocal/verbal stream, showed higher recall of the message and were more persuaded by it than receivers of the dissynchronous message, which had kinesic cues “out of sync” with the vocal/verbal stream. Results on three other dependent measures—credibility, distraction and counterarguing—were mixed but were generally consistent with the credibility-yielding and distraction-yielding formulations outlined.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Reference Notes

  • Burgoon, J. K., & Burgoon, M. The construction of more precise and efficient verbal ratings scales. Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University, 1979.

  • McCroskey, J. C., Jensen, T., & Valencia, C. Measurement of the credibility of peers and spouses. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Convention, Montreal, April, 1973.

  • Stacks, D. W. The effects on credibility, attraction and attitude of reward and distraction through violation of personal space expectations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, 1978.

  • Brandt, D. R., Dinkelacker, J., & Stoyanoff, N. An experimental investigation of the effects of listener propensity to counterargue and distraction on communication acceptance. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the Speech Communication Association, Washington, D.C., 1977.

References

  • Allen, R. R., Anderson, S., & Hough, J.Speech in American society. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. S., Baron, P. H., & Miller, N. The relation between distraction and persuasion.Psychological Bulletin, 1973,80, 310–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, S. W., Bavelas, A., & Braden, M. An index to measure contingency of English sentences.Language and Speech, 1961,4, 139–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boomer, D. S. Hesitation and grammatical encoding.Language and Speech, 1965,8, 148–158.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boomer, D. S. The phonemic clause: Speech unit in human communication. In A. Siegman & S. Feldstein (Eds.),Nonverbal behavior and communication. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, J. W. Some correlates of language intensity.Quarterly Journal of Speech, 1964,50, 415–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgoon, M., Cohen, M., Miller, M. D., & Montgomery, C. L. An empirical test of a model of resistance to persuasion.Human Communication Research, 1978,5, 27–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgoon, M., & King, L. B. The mediation of resistance to persuasion strategies by language variables and active-passive participation.Human Communication Research, 1974,1, 30–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgoon, M., & Miller, G. R. Prior attitude and language intensity as predictors of message style and attitude change following counter-attitudinal advocacy.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971,20, 246–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaiken, S. & Eagly, A. H. Communication modality as a determinant of message persuasiveness and message comprehensibility.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976,34, 605–614.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, C. E. & Ebbesen, E. B. Observational goals and schema activation: A theoretical framework for behavior perception.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1979,15, 305–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condon, W. S. An analysis of behavioral organization.Sign Language Studies, 1976,13, 285–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condon, W. S., & Brosin, H. W. Micro linguistic-kinesic events in schizophrenic behavior. In D. V. Siva Sankar (Ed.),Schizophrenia: Current concepts and research. Hicksville, N.Y.: PJD Publications, 1969, pp. 812–837.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condon, W. S., & Ogston, W. D. A segmentation of behavior.Journal of Psychiatric Research, 1967,5, 221–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, J. D. Asymmetries in processing auditory nonverbal stimuli?Psychological Bulletin, 1979,86, 1339–1349.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. Coefficient alpha and the interval structure of tests.Psychometrika, 1951,16, 297–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dittmann, A. T. The body movement-speech rhythm relationship as a cue to speech encoding. In A. Seigman & B. Pope (Eds.),Studies in dyadic communication. New York: Pergamon Press, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dittmann, A. T. & Llewellyn, L. G. The phonemic clause as a unit of speech decoding.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967,6, 341–349.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ditmann, A. T. & Llewellyn, L. G. Body movement and speech rhythm in social conversation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1969,11, 98–106.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H. Comprehensibility of persuasive arguments as a determinent of attitude change.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974,29, 758–773.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. The repertoire of nonverbal behavior.Semiotica, 1969,1, 49–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. Hand movements.Journal of Communication, 1972,22, 353–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L., & Maccoby, N. On resistance to persuasive communications.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964,68, 359–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J.Psychometric methods. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hovland, C. E., Janis, I., & Kelley, H. H.Communication and persuasion. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendon, A. Movement coordination in social interaction: Some examples described.Acta Psychologica, 1970,32, 100–125.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kendon, A. Some relationships between body motion and speech: An analysis of an example. In A. W. Seigman & B. Pope (Eds.),Studies in dyadic communication, New York: Pergamon Press, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendon, A. The role of visible behavior in the organization of social interaction. In M. von Cranach & I. Vine (Eds.),Social communication and movement: Studies of interaction and expression in man and chimpanzee. London: Academic Press, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerlinger, F. N. & Pedhazur, E. J.Multiple regression in behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaCrosse, M. B. Nonverbal behavior and perceived counselor attractiveness and persuasiveness.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1974,22, 563–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maslow, C., Yoselson, K., & London, H. Persuasiveness of confidence expressed via language and body language.British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 1971,10, 234–240.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • McDowall, J. J. Interactional synchrony: A reappraisal.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1978,36, 963–975.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, W. Personality and attitude change: An information processing theory. In A. Greenwald, T. Brock, & T. Ostrom (Eds.),Psychological foundations of attitudes. New York: Academic Press, 1968, pp. 171–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, W. The nature of attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.).The handbook of social psychology, Vol. III (2nd ed.). Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1969, pp. 188–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehrabian, A., & Williams, M. Nonverbal concomitants of perceived and intended persuasiveness.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1969,13, 37–58.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, N., & Baron, R. On measuring counterarguing.Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 1973,3, 101–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, N., Maruyama, G., Beaber, R., & Valone, K. Speed of speech and persuasion.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976,34, 615–624.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monroe, A. H., & Ehninger, D.Principles and types of speech communication, (7th ed.). Glenview, Illinois: Scott-Foresman, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neisser, U.Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newtson, D. A. Attribution and the unit of perception of ongoing behavior.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1973,28, 28–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortony, A. Remembering, understanding, and representation.Cognitive Science, 1978,2, 53–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterhouse, R. V. & Brock, T. C. Distraction increases yielding to propoganda by inhibiting counterarguing.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1970,15, 344–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, W. B. The effect of vocal cues on credibility and attitude change.Western Speech, 1971,35, 167–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, W. B. & Brommel, B. J. Vocalic communication in persuasion.Quarterly Journal of Speech, 1972,58, 298–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, W. B. & Conklin, F. Nonverbal vocalic communication and perception of a speaker.Speech Monographs, 1971,38, 235–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, H. M. Conversational control functions of nonverbal behavior. In A. W. Seigman & S. Feldstein (Eds.),Nonverbal behavior and communication. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, W. G.Statistical methods. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timney, B., & London, H. Body language concomitants of persuasiveness and persuasibility in dyadic interaction.International Journal of Group Tensions, 1973,3, 48–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winer, B. J.Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimbardo, P. G., Snyder, M., Thomas, J., Gold, A., & Gurwitz, S. Modifying the impact of persuasive communications with external distraction.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1970,16, 669–680.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cleveland State University, 44115, Cleveland, OH

    W. Gill Woodall Ph.D. (member of the Department of Communication)

  2. Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI

    Judee K. Burgoon (Ed.D., member of the Department of Communication)

Authors
  1. W. Gill Woodall Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Judee K. Burgoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Woodall, W.G., Burgoon, J.K. The effects of nonverbal synchrony on message comprehension and persuasiveness. J Nonverbal Behav 5, 207–223 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987460

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987460

Keywords

Search

Navigation