Skip to main content
Log in

Nonverbal relational control in family communication

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

Abstract

A nonverbal component for an observational coding system of verbal relational control, the Family Relational Communication Control Coding System (FRCCCS; Friedlander & Heatherington, 1989) was developed and validated for research with families or other groups. In so doing, it was demonstrated that nonverbal relational control behaviors can be reliably identified and that these behaviors enhance communicative meaning in predictable ways. First, a pool of nonverbal behaviors with relational control meaning (e.g., head nod, raised eyebrow) was identified from consultation with family therapy researchers and from the literature. Second, the behaviors that were retained from the results of a content validity test were perceived by three independent samples as commonly understood, discrete attempts to either gain control (“one-up”) or relinquish control (“one down”) of a social relationship. Still other behaviors were eliminated based on results of a cluster analysis, the interpretation of which was the basis for composing operational definitions for four classes of nonverbal behaviors. Finally, assessments of the interjudge reliability and criterion validity of the nonverbal coding scheme supported its psychometric adequacy. Comparison of effect sizes showed that these discrete nonverbal behaviors accounted for over twice the variance in observers' perceptions as the verbal behaviors.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1986).Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, G. (1936/1958).Naven. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgoon, J. K., Buller, D. B., & Woodall, W. G. (1989).Nonverbal communication: The unspoken dialogue. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgoon, J. K., & Hale, J. L. (1984). The fundamental topoi of relational communication.Communication Monographs, 51, 193–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claiborn, C. D. (1979). Counselor verbal intervention, nonverbal behavior, and social power.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 26, 378–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dittmann, A. T. (1972). Developmental factors in conversational behavior.Journal of Communication, 22, 404–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericson, P. M., & Rogers, L. E. (1973). New procedures for analyzing relational communication.Family Process, 12, 245–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleiss, J. L. (1981).Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, J. P., & Poole, M. S. (1982). Relational coding schemes: The question of validity. In M. Burgoon (Ed.),Communication yearbook 5 (pp. 235–257). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books, Rutgers University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, J. P., & Sillars, A. L. (1980). Relational coding and perceptions of dominance. In B. Morse & T. Phelps (Eds.),Interpersonal communication: A relational perspective (pp. 322–333). Minneapolis, MN: Burgess.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedlander, M. L., & Heatherington, L. (1989). Analyzing relational control in family therapy interviews.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36, 139–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedlander, M. L., Heatherington, L., & Wildman, J. (1991). Interpersonal control in structural and Milan systemic family therapy.Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 17, 395–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaul, R., Simon, L., Friedlander, M. L., Heatherington, L., & Cutler, C. (1991). Correspondence of family therapists' perceptions with the FRCCCS coding rules for triadic interactions.Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 17, 379–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1967).Interaction ritual. New York: Anchor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottman, J. M. (1979).Marital interaction: Empirical investigations. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haley, J. (1967). Toward of theory of pathological systems. In G. H. Zuk & I. Boszormenyi-Nagy (Eds.),Family therapy and disturbed families (pp. 11–27). Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heatherington, L. (1988). Coding relational control in counseling: Criterion validity.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35 41–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heatherington, L., & Allen, G. J. (1984). Sex and relational communication patterns in counseling.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35(1), 41–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heatherington, L., & Friedlander, M. L. (1987).Family Relational Communication Control Coding System coding manual. Unpublished manuscript, available from L. Heatherington, Psychology Department, Bronfman Science Center, Williams College, Williamstown, MA 01267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heatherington, L., & Friedlander, M. L. (1990a). Applying task analysis to structural family therapy.Journal of Family Psychology, 4 36–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heatherington, L., & Friedlander, M. L. (1990b). Complementarity and symmetry in family therapy communication.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37 261–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henley, N. M. (1977).Body politics: Power, sex, and nonverbal communications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keppel, G. (1982).Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiesler, D. J., Sheridan, M. J., Winter, J. E., & Kolevzon, M. S. (1981).Family therapist intervention coding system: Manual for coding nonverbal behavior from family therapy sessions. Unpublished manuscript, The Family Institute of Virginia, Virginia Department of Corrections, Richmond.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaCrosse, M. B. (1975). Nonverbal behavior and perceived counselor attractiveness and persuasiveness.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22 563–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leary, T. F. (1957).Interpersonal diagnosis of personality. New York: Ronald Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mark, R. A. (1971). Coding communication at the relational level.The Journal of Communication, 21 221–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehrabian, A. (1969). Significance of posture and position in the communication of attitude and status relationships.Psychological Bulletin, 71 359–372.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Millar, D. P. (1981, May).Integrating verbal and nonverbal messages of relational control. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Convention, Minneapolis, MN.

  • Millar, F. E., & Rogers, L. E. (1980, August).The ups and downs of relational communication: A case study. Paper presented at the Eastern Communication Association Convention, Ocean City, MD.

  • Patterson, M. L. (1983).Nonverbal behavior: A functional perspective. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raymond, L., Friedlander, M. L., Heatherington, L., Ellis, M. V., & Sargent, J. (in press). Communication processes in structural family therapy: Case study of an anorexic family.Journal of Family Psychology.

  • Rogers, L. E., & Bagarozzi, D. A. (1983). An overview of relational communication and implications for theory. In D. A. Bagarozzi, A. P. Jurovich, & R. W. Jackson (Eds.),Marital and family therapy (pp. 48–78). New York: Human Sciences Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, L. E., & Farace, R. (1975). Relational communication analysis: New measurement procedures.Human Communication Research, 1 222–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sluzki, C. E., & Beavin, J. (1965/1977). Symmetry and complementarity: An operational definition and a typology of dyads. In P. Watzlawick & J. Weakland (Eds. & Trans.),The interactional view (pp. 71–87). New York: Norton. (Reprinted fromActa Psiquiatrica Psicologia de America Latina, 1965,11, 321–330)

    Google Scholar 

  • Suen, H. K. (1988). Agreement, reliability, accuracy, and validity: Toward a clarification.Behavioral Assessment, 10 343–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Summerhayes, D. L., & Suchner, R. W. (1978). Power implications of touch in male-female relationships.Sex Roles, 4 103–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tepper, D. T., & Haase, R. F. (1978). Verbal and nonverbal communication of facilitative conditions.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 25 35–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, J. H. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58 236–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J. H., & Jackson, D. D. (1967).Pragmatics of human communication. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, N., Budney, S., Wood, L., & Russell, R. L. (1989). Nonverbal events in psychotherapy.Clinical Psychology Review, 9 487–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, L. C. (1988).The state of the art in family therapy research: Controversies and recommendations. New York: Family Process Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Siegel, S.M., Friedlander, M.L. & Heatherington, L. Nonverbal relational control in family communication. J Nonverbal Behav 16, 117–139 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00990326

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00990326

Keywords

Navigation