Social Influence and Nonverbal Exchange

  • Miles L. Patterson
Part of the Springer Series in Social Psychology book series (SSSOC)

Abstract

The various chapters in this volume provide testimony for the importance of nonverbal behavior in the interaction process. The volume of empirical research in this area is another indicator of the central role of nonverbal components in social behavior. Until relatively recently, however, theoretical perspectives have been limited in number and scope. For example, Argyle and Dean’s (1965) equilibrium theory of interpersonal intimacy was a dominant force in directing research through the late 1970s. My own arousal-labeling model (Patterson, 1976) provided an alternate and more comprehensive explanation for patterns of nonverbal exchange, but the impact of the latter model was not as great as that of equilibrium theory. More recent models include Burgoon’s (1978) expectancy-norm model of personal space violations and Cappella and Greene’s (1982) discrepancy-arousal model. A discussion of the specifics of these various models is outside the scope of this chapter but, in all four of these models, interpersonal affect plays an important role in mediating the patterns of nonverbal exchange. Furthermore, each of these models is reactive in nature. That is, each focuses on the actor’s nonverbal response to a particular behavioral pattern initiated by one’s partner. A discussion of these various models can be found elsewhere (Patterson, 1984).

Keywords

Univer 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Altman, I., & Haythorn, W. W. (1967). The effects of social isolation and group composition on performance. Human Relations, 20, 313–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Argyle, M. (1972). Non-verbal communication in human social interaction. In R. A. Hinde (Ed.), Non-verbal communication (pp. 243–269 ). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Argyle, M., & Dean, J. (1965). Eye-contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry, 28, 289–304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Argyle, M., Lalljee, M., & Cook, M. (1968). The effects of visability on interaction in a dyad. Human Relations, 21, 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burgoon, J. K. (1978). A communication model of personal space violations: Explication and an initial test. Human Communication Research, 4, 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cappella, J. N., & Greene, J. O. (1982). A discrepancy-arousal explanation of mutual influence in expressive behavior for adult and infant-adult interaction. Communication Monographs, 49, 89–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Collins, B. E., & Raven, B. H. (1969). Psychological aspects of structure in the small group: Interpersonal attraction, coalitions, communication and power. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology: Vol. 4. Group psychology and the phenomena of interaction ( 2nd ed., pp. 102–204 ). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  8. Edinger, J. A., & Patterson, M. L. (1983). Nonverbal involvement and social control. Psychological Bulletin, 93, 30–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ellsworth, P. C. ( 1977, August). Some questions about the role of arousal in the interpretation of direct gaze. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  10. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1969). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage and codings. Semiotica, 7, 49–97.Google Scholar
  11. Exline, R. V. (1972). Visual interaction: The glances of power and preference. In J. K. Cole (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. 19, pp. 163–206 ). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  12. Exline, R. V., Ellyson, S. L., & Long, B. (1975). Visual behavior as an aspect of power role relationships. In P. Pliner, L. Krames, & T. Alloway (Eds.), Advances in the study of communication and affect (Vol. 2, pp. 21–52 ). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  13. French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167 ). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  14. Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual. Garden City, NY: Anchor.Google Scholar
  15. Harrison, R. P. (1973). Nonverbal communication. In I. S. Pool, W. Schramm, N. Maccoby, F. Fry, E. Parker, & J. L. Fern (Eds.), Handbook of communication, ( 46–76 ). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  16. Henley, N. M. (1973). Status and sex: Some touching observations. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 2, 91–93.Google Scholar
  17. Henley, N. M. (1977). Body politics: Power, sex, and nonverbal communication. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  18. Hottenstein, M. P. (1978). An exploration of the relationship between age, social status, and facial gesturing (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1977). Dissertation Abstracts International, 38$15648B–5649B. (University Microfilms No. 78–06, 598 )Google Scholar
  19. Keating, C. F., Mazur, A., & Segall, M. H. (1977). Facial gestures which influence the perception of status. Sociometry, 40, 374–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kendon, A. (1967). Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction. Acta Psychologica, 26, 22–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. MacKay, D. M. (1972). Formal analysis of communicative processes. In R. A. Hinde (Ed.), Non-verbal communication (pp. 3–25 ). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Major, B., & Heslin, R. (1982). Perceptions of cross-sex and same-sex nonreciprocal touch: It is better to give than to receive. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 6, 148–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Patterson, M. L. (1976). An arousal model of interpersonal intimacy. Psychological Review, 83, 235–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Patterson, M. L. (1982). A sequential functional model of nonverbal exchange. Psychological Review, 89, 231–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Patterson, M. L. (Ed.). (1984). Nonverbal intimacy and exchange. New York: Human Sciences.Google Scholar
  26. Summerhayes, D. L., & Suchner, R. W. (1978). Power implications of touch in male-female relationships. Sex Roles, 4, 103–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thayer, S. (1969). The effect of interpersonal looking duration on dominance judgments. Journal of Social Psychology, 79, 285–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zimmerman, L. E. S. (1977). First impressions as influenced by eye contact, sex, and demographic background (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nevada-Reno, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts International, 37$16414B–6415B. (University Microfilms No. 77–12, 978 ).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miles L. Patterson

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations