Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 115–130 | Cite as

The judgment of rapport: A cross-cultural comparison between Americans and Greeks



Interpersonal perception was examined cross-culturally by having samples of Greek and American subjects view and judge the level of rapport throughout the same series of 50 dyadic interactions recorded in America. The overall pattern of results showed that: (a) the judgment policies and accuracy of the Greek and American samples were remarkably similar; (b) both groups fell far short of the agreement level possible for this task; and (c) the low levels of achievement were a consequence of both groups giving insufficient weight to valid behavioral predictors of rapport while relying on the apparently compelling but invalid cues, smiling and expressivity. Both the Greeks and Americans, it appears, have widely shared implicit theories or policies regarding which observable (i.e., nonverbal) aspects of an interaction indicate its positivity; these implicit policies are remarkably similar and they are imperfect.


Social Psychology Implicit Theory American Sample Dyadic Interaction American Subject 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1992). Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin, 111, 256–274.Google Scholar
  2. Beal, D., Gillis, J.S., & Stewart, T. (1978). The lens model: Computational procedures and applications.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 46, 3–28.Google Scholar
  3. Bernieri, F., & Gillis, J. S. (1993). Depressed mood and social perception: A cross-cultural replication.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 77, 154.Google Scholar
  4. Bernieri, F., & Rosenthal, R. (1991). Coordinated movement in human interaction. In R. S. Feldman & B. Rime (Eds.),Fundamentals of nonverbal behavior (pp. 401–432). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bernieri, F., Reznick, J. S., & Rosenthal, R. (1988). Synchrony, pseudo synchrony, and dissynchrony: Measuring the entrainment process in mother-infant interactions.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 243–253.Google Scholar
  6. Bernieri, F., Gillis, J. S., & Davis, J. M. (1994).The judgment of rapport: A lens model analysis. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  7. Bernieri, F., Davis, J., Rosenthal, R., & Knee, C. (1994). Interactional synchrony and rapport: Measuring synchrony in displays devoid of sound and facial affect.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 303–311.Google Scholar
  8. Borkenau, P., & Liebler, A. (1992). Trait inferences: Sources of validity at zero-acquaintance.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 645–657.Google Scholar
  9. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1969). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage, and coding.Semiotica, 1, 49–98.Google Scholar
  10. Fridlund, A. J., Ekman, P., & Oster, H. (1987). Facial expressions of emotion: A review of the literature, 1970–1983. In A. W. Siegman & S. Feldstein (Eds.),Nonverbal behavior and communication (2nd ed.) (pp. 143–224). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Gifford, R. (1994). A lens-mapping framework for understanding the encoding and decoding of interpersonal dispositions in nonverbal behavior.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 398–412.Google Scholar
  12. Gifford, R., Ng, C. F., & Wilkinson, M. (1985). Nonverbal cues in the employment interview: Links between applicant qualities and interviewer judgments.Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 729–736.Google Scholar
  13. Gillis, J. S., & Bernieri, F. (1994, November).Explorations in facilitating judgmental performance with holistic stimuli. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Brunswik Society, St. Louis, MO.Google Scholar
  14. Gillis, J. S., Bernieri, F., & Wooten, E. (in press). The effects of stimulus medium and feedback on the judgment of rapport.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.Google Scholar
  15. Knapp, M. L., & Hall, J. A. (1992).Nonverbal communication in human interaction (3rd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
  16. Matsumoto, D., & Kudoh, T. (1993). American-Japanese cultural differences in attributions of personality based on smiles.Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 17, 231–243.Google Scholar
  17. Mincel, B., Becker, P., & Korchin, S. (1991). A cross-cultural view of mental health.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 22, 157–181.Google Scholar
  18. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1991).Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  19. Rosenthal, R., Hall, J. A., DiMatteo, M. R., Rogers, P. L., & Archer, D. (1979).Sensitivity to nonverbal communication: The PONS test. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Scherer, K. R., & Walbott, H. G. (1994). Evidence for universality and cultural variation of differential emotion response patterning.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 310–328.Google Scholar
  21. Tickle-Degnen, L., & Rosenthal, R. (1987). Group rapport and nonverbal behavior.Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 113–136.Google Scholar
  22. Tickle-Degnen, L., & Rosenthal, R. (1990). The nature of rapport and its nonverbal correlates.Psychological Inquiry, 1, 285–293.Google Scholar
  23. Watson, O. M. (1970).Proxemic behavior: A cross-cultural study. The Hague: Mouton Press.Google Scholar
  24. Webster's Ninth Collegiate Dictionary. (1983). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentUniversity of ToledoToledo

Personalised recommendations