Guidance/ Instructions
Assignment question- How does the social psychology of non-verbal communication (NVC) offer those running interviews (e.g. job, police, counselling) insights into how to run them effectively?
Key:
-This is a 2,000 word assignment
-Make sure to use 20 over references- All references must be 7th edition APA style. Use in text citations and then create a bibliography at the end put in alphabetical order and make sure to include the links of where accessed.
What are the key learning outcomes for this assignment?
– To demonstrate your ability to take NVC research and consider its practical application to real-world settings
– To demonstrate the ability to critically evaluate the design, findings and theory of some of the work cited – To demonstrate your ability to support your ideas with appropriate evidence
– To demonstrate original, analytical and independent thinking
What you have to in this assignment-
In this essay you need to selectively present some theory and research from the non-verbal communication (NVC) literature and explain how it is relevant to the context of interviews. For example, you could discuss
One interview context selected from- police interrogations of suspects, job interviews, interviews between a counsellor/psychiatrist/therapist and a client.
Structure for the essay-
(1) After your introduction, describe your chosen example interview setting and then go through different NVC channels that are relevant to it, remembering to make some critical evaluative points and try to get some original observational points in as well.
Your essay can then go through each channel in relation to your example context, with a review of some relevant work that you tailor to make it relevant to the interview context.
Channels of NVC’s you have to choose from-
▪ Facial expression
▪ Gaze and pupil dilation
▪ Gestures, body movements and posture
▪ Touch/bodily contact
▪ Spatial behaviour (‘proxemics’)
How should I approach writing the Introduction and Conclusion?
Answer-
Please use SHORT introductions. You do not need to signpost everything that is coming in your essay, nor do you need to define all terms to be used. Similarly, avoid giving us historical background and context about research in NVC. Simply use the Introduction to specify how you have chosen to answer the question – what your approach will be, what setting(s) you will focus on and which NVC channels you will discuss. With regards to the conclusion – please leave enough words for a strong conclusion – it is always disappointing to read an otherwise strong essay, only for it to end with a weak conclusion. Resist the temptation to just use the conclusion to summarise your essay. Instead, see the conclusion as a final paragraph in which you draw the essay to an end by making some final over-arching points.
In relation to the “how to run them effectively” part of the question, does this mean we should focus on just the person leading/running the interview?
You will inevitably also want to talk about the interviewee’s NVC as well as the NVC aspects of the setting and the interviewer. If you wish to discuss forensic police interviews, please focus on the police running them effectively and not taking the side of suspects trying to persuade the police of their innocence!
How can I find my own “voice” and strive to achieve a high 2:1 or 1st class grade for this essay?
Answer-
Essays awarded high grades of 68% – 95% will show excellent understanding and use of a wide range of relevant theory and research. They will be clearly written in a concise style, have concise and well-written Intro and Conclusion and a sense of a logical flow and structure leading the reader through the essay. There will be a good balance between breadth and depth of coverage (see a separate Q&A point about this above). Showing your ability to think for yourself can be achieved through arguing how some NVC research can be applied to interview contexts where the idea you are proposing is not already spelled out in a paper about using NVC in interviews. For example, you make a point about a finding from work on an NVC channel being relevant to a particular interview context, and one which you did not get from a paper that already makes that application. IMPORTANT: We do not expect ALL your observations in your essay to be original like this – it is OK to summarise papers that apply NVC to interviews, just try to also get some original points into your essay as well. Additionally, you can find your “voice” in the essay by perhaps pointing out a strength or weakness in a study that you are citing, or what you consider to be an un- or under-researched area in the literature or a methodological problem or challenge. Note that you do not need to tear about and critique each and every thing that you cite! It’s important to get critical evaluation in there, but you don’t need to do this each time you describe a study!
Key things to do in the essay!
-Explore evidence/ studies and balance breadth and depth. Think carefully about how many studies to describe, which ones to go into detail about, which ones to be succinct about, and overall how many points and how many interview settings to cover. Students often lose marks by trying to cover too much ground – too many points and too many studies, and then they end up not covering anything to sufficient depth. As a year 2 essay you need to leave words to show your ability – for example via critical evaluation – and this is only possible if you don’t try to cover too much.
-Integrate high level critical analysis/ critical evaluation of design/ findings and theory of cited work!
–Use a formal writing tone and use clear and straightforward language. Support points raised with evidence, and express your ideas in your own words (rather than using quotes). Make sure you present all sources correctly within the text and in the reference list at the end of your assignment. This should be done in correct APA 7th edition format, correctly punctuated and in alphabetical order.
-Each paragraph of the body of the essay should express a single key idea (supported by relevant evidence) and this idea should be clear from the first sentence of the paragraph. Make sure to establish links from one paragraph to the next and to organise paragraphs sequentially, building up your argument as you go along. Do not use single sentence paragraphs. Avoid excessively long sentences. When revising ask yourself whether you could break up a single long sentence into two or more smaller ones.
–Make sure to answer/ link back to questions throughout -As you progress with your writing, regularly go back to the question and keep checking if all of your answers are clearly focused on it.
-For each point you make in your assignment, it must be clear how this point helps to answer the question. Students who do this well will often link the points made back to the question directly. When citing literature, ensure you are picking out the key parts that allow you to answer your question of interest – be selective with the literature you are using to ensure it is clear how it contributes to answering the question set. Before submitting your work, ensure that each paragraph clearly contributed to answering the question – if it does not, then consider whether it was a good use of words.
-Start by reading the essential reading, considering the question you are addressing and your approach. Additional sources may be cited within the essential/recommended reading and these are often a good starting point. By accessing an original source rather than relying on a summary in a textbook, you may gain a better understanding of the study and therefore be able to use the evidence from it in a way that is more beneficial for your essay. Search for recent articles that have cited these articles and search for additional papers using key terms related to the research you are discussing. It is also a good idea to find sources of evidence that challenge or refute the claims of original research that you cite in order to demonstrate that you have read more widely around the topic and have considered alternative interpretations or explanations of findings.
Marking criteria-
Writing presentation-Very good writing style and structure, with accurate referencing and the assignment adheres to APA style.
Answering the question- A very good answer that explicitly addresses the question (or learning outcomes) throughout the assignment.
Knowledge and evidence-Clear evidence of relevant wider reading and shows full understanding of key issues/concepts/ methods. Use of evidence shows originality of thought
Evaluation and critique- Arguments are clearly constructed and well justified, with strong evidence of analytical skill and/or problem solving.
An outstanding answer displaying exceptional understanding of the topic. The arguments are clearly constructed and the answer is very well organised and presented. There is clear evidence of outside reading and evidence of a high degree of originality of thought, analytical skill and /or problem solving. Professionally presented, with referencing of exemplary standard.
Background research- lecture notes (make sure to explore studies and research outside of this too!)
Non verbal communication
Functions of NVC
▪ Patterson (1988):- ▪ To provide information to others ▪ To regulate interaction (e.g. turn-taking) ▪ To express intimacy (e.g. liking) ▪ To attempt to exert social control ▪ Presentation ▪ Affect management ▪ Facilitating service or task goals
Patterson (1995, 1998, 2001):- Parallel-processing model of NVC
– 4 ‘classes’ of factors:- ▪ Determinants (biology, culture, gender, personality) ▪ Social environment (partner, setting) ▪ Cognitive-affective mediators (expectancies, goals, dispositions, cognitive resources, attention focus, schemas) ▪ Person-perception and behavioural processes (impression formation, actor behaviour) ▪ Many ‘automatic’ judgements may be biologically based – e.g. reactions to NVC of babies
NVC is NOT language (Patterson, Fridlund & Crivelli, 2023)
▪ Words have fairly invariant meanings, but not NVC (e.g. ask friend about weather and they scowl) ▪ Language has order and context rules – syntax ▪ ECG and imaging studies – left hemisphere for verbal tasks, right for NVC (Corballis, 2014) ▪ The physical environment impacts NVC more, both physically and via social norms and dictates that NVC “meanings” are not universal ▪ NVC is “always on” ▪ In NVC cues can be sent and received concurrently ▪ NVC often occurs outside our awareness ▪ It is damaging to see NVC as “body language” because it suggests “an almost invariant rulebook”
Channels of NVC
▪ Facial expression ▪ Gaze and pupil dilation ▪ Gestures, body movements and posture ▪ Touch/bodily contact ▪ Spatial behaviour (‘proxemics’) ▪ Clothing ▪ Non-linguistic aspects of speech ▪ Smell (e.g. use of perfumes)
Differences in sensitivity
▪ Some clinical disturbances affect non-verbal encoding and decoding (e.g. Schizophrenia, ASD) ▪ Overall, women are more sensitive to non-verbal cues and decode them more accurately than men ▪ strong cross-cultural evidence for this, apart from one exception which we will discuss later ! (e.g. Hall, 1979; Rosenthal & DePaulo, 1979; Rosip & Hall, 2004) ▪ The older we get the worse we get at decoding nonverbal cues ▪ older individuals (e.g. aged 70+) are worse at lying and at detecting deception ▪ Training can improve sensitivity (Matsumoto & Hwang, 2011)
The Spatial channel – Proxemics
▪ Spatial metaphors are common ▪ Space can convey liking/disliking ▪ Space can convey power and control: – e.g. Kane (1971) – violent prisoners and personal space (Sommer, 1969 coined the phrase “personal space”) ▪ Patterson, Fridlund & Crivelli, 2023 argue that personal space is not an invariant zone (strangers vs friends vs romantic partners) – they argue that interpersonal closeness is negotiated ▪ Hall (1966) – in different settings we are comfortable with different distances ▪ Culture and proxemics (Hall, 1966)
Touch
• Extremely powerful – linked with emotion and relationships • Even fleeting, incidental touches can have marked effects:- ▪ Crusco & Wetzel (1984) – larger tips if touched on hand by waitress ▪ Greater liking for librarian and library if touched on hand by librarian (Fisher, Rytting, & Heslin, 1976) – but only female Ps affected. ▪ Gueguen (2007) – romantic song in nightclub – light touch on arm – > perceived dominance and sexual attractiveness of man ▪ Gueguen, Jacob and Boulbry – waitress suggestions for meal choices • Chaplin et. al. (2000; 112 US undergrads) – firm handshakes associated with extraversion, emotional expressiveness, negatively to shyness and neuroticism; found a .56 correlation between composite first impression rating (positivity) and firmness of handshake for m & f Ps and m and f targets
Facial expression as a channel
▪ Important for conveying emotion
▪ Ekman et al (1972) – happiness, surprise, fear, sadness, anger, disgust – expressed the same throughout the world
▪ People born deaf and blind show many of the basic facial expressions (EiblEibesfeldt, 1972) ▪ Gender differences – women attend to faces > men do
▪ ‘Micro-expressions’ of < 2/5ths second (Haggard & Issacs, 1966)
▪ Recognising emotion is apparently part of emotional intelligence
▪ Body posture also used to process meaning of facial expressions – neuroscience evidence of body-selective brain regions, even in macaque monkeys – triggered by images of scared humans and cats as well as monkeys (Taubert et. al., 2022)
▪ Horses heartbeats increase when shown an image of an angry human face McComb et. al., 2018)
▪ Problems with methodology of work on emotion recognition (Patterson, Fridlund & Crivelli, 2023) – e.g. matching rates of 40-50% accepted; incorrect assumption of evolution promoting universality
Gaze
▪ Very powerful and often automatic ▪ e.g. pupil dilation and blink rate
▪ Observers pay much attention to eyes ▪ Sometimes a ‘leaky’ channel
▪ Gaze can be used to exert dominance (Hall et al., 2005) and interacts with head positioning (e.g. bowed head with gaze)
▪ Gaze as a threat signal (Exline & Yellin, 1969; Marsh et al., 1978)
▪ Gaze aversion is often perceived negatively in interactions (Wirth et al., 2010)
Culture and NVC (1)
▪ Example: touch (Jourard, 1966). Couples in San Juan (Puerto Rico), Paris and London.
▪ ‘Display rules’ differ cross-culturally (Argyle, 1975) – in Japan it is common to use laughter and/or smiling to conceal negative emotions for example
▪ Same NV acts can mean different things – e.g. finger move across throat = threat signal in UK but “I love you” in Swaziland!
Culture (2): Decoding emotion
▪ Matsumoto (1992) – compared U.S. and Japanese participants on recognition of 6 emotions
▪ Americans were better at identifying anger, disgust, fear and sadness ▪ No differences on happiness and surprise
▪ Matsumoto (2002;2008):- -perhaps events eliciting emotion differ culturally, but facial muscle movements relatively universal
▪ Masuda et al (2008) -Japanese look at expressions of others in the social context more than Americans when decoding facial expressions
▪ Work of Kitayama and others shows we are more accurate at decoding facial expressions from the same ethnic group as our own and same broad national culture
The complexity of NVC
▪ The same non-verbal acts can mean different things in different situations
▪ We need to understand and appreciate the context of communication
▪ For example – seating arrangements for an interview can impact on eye contact, proximity, imply power and status, etc…
The influence of setting and role
▪ Rozelle, Druckman & Baxter (1975) – police officers and citizens
▪ Actor-observer (A-O) divergence ▪ Rozelle et al (1986) – employment interviews are often affected by A-O divergences
Interviews: a meta analysis
• Martin -Raugh et. al. (2022) – interviewers rely on system 1 processing – quick, intuitive; meta -analysis of 63 studies; • Cues associated most strongly with interview performance were professional appearance (ρ = .62), eye contact (ρ = .45), and head movement ( ρ = .43); • Some gender differences moderated effects.
Non-verbal enthusiasm
▪ Washburn & Hakel (1973) – gazing, gesturing, smiling in an interview
▪ Keenan (1976) – non-verbal approval is reflected in the interviewee
▪ Strong et al (1971) – counsellors/therapists with expressive NVC styles are judged more positively by their clients and may be more effective partly by encouraging clients to talk and engage better (see also Bourget, 1977 and Claiborn, 1979; Fiquer et al, 2017)
Can we detect lies? (part one)
▪ Functional that we are not great at detecting lies?!
▪ Even when we are correct, we can’t tell what the truth is! (DePaulo et al, 1985)
▪ ‘Leakage hierarchy’ (Ekman & Friesen, 1969): face least ‘leaky’, body and vocal cues most ‘leaky’
Detecting lies (part 2)
▪ Stiff & Miller (1984) – judges rely too much on stereotypical beliefs about lying that are often misleading
▪ Any awkward or non-fluent behaviour is often mis-interpreted as signifying lying
▪ Ekman & O’Sullivan (1991) – most of us perform no better than chance at detecting lies
▪ Bond & DePaulo (2006) – better in auditory than visual channel
Detecting Lies (part 3) ▪ Easier to become a better liar than a better decoder of lies!
▪ ‘Secret tests’ in relationships (Baxter & Wilmot, 1984)
▪ Women are worse at detecting lies than men! (Rosenthal & DePaulo, 1979) – but not in all cultures (Hall, 1979)
Detecting lies (part 4)
– Situational Constraints (Morris, 1982) ▪ Lying is easier when available cues for observers are reduced ▪ Give-aways of lying include: hand to face contacts; body shifts; ‘microexpressions’ ▪ But the same signs can indicate stress, discomfort, etc…
▪ Levine et al (2005) – training doesn’t really help
▪ Bond & DePaulo (2008) – no evidence for individual differences in lie detection ability; analysis of >200 studies suggested humans no better than chance at lie detection
Vrij, Edward, Roberts, & Bull (2000)
▪ Vrij (2000) found a 67% accuracy rate for detecting truths and a 44% accuracy rate for detecting lies.
▪ Vrij and Semin (1996) found that 75% of professional lie detectors (police officers, customs officers and so on) believe that liars look away, although gaze aversion has not been found to be a reliable indicator of deception (DePaulo et al., 1985; Vrij, 2000; Zuckerman, DePaulo, & Rosenthal, 1981).
Vrij, Edward, Roberts, & Bull (2000)
▪ Liars may experience high levels of emotion and cognitive load and these may be detectable – this may be why high stake lies are easier to detect (DePaulo, Kirkendol, Tang, & O’Brien, 1988)
▪ Ps watched a film of a theft in a hospital and some asked to tell truth about it, others to lie. High cognitive load because liars had to devise their lies immediately after seeing the film
▪ Their verbal content and body language was coded by observers ▪ High cognitive load is associated with: a longer latency period, more ‘ah’ and ‘non -ah’ speech disturbances, a slower speech rate and fewer illustrators and hand/finger movements
▪ Accuracy WAS higher than chance
▪ But Vrij et al (2019) later conclude that evidence for NV cues of deception has very small effect sizes and cues can actually be associated with stress
ten Brinke & Porter, 2012
▪ Videos of 78 (35 deceptive) individuals who made televised pleas for the safe return (or information leading to the arrest of an unknown suspect in the murder) of their relative were gathered from news agencies in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States
▪ Compared genuine versus deceptive pleas
▪ Strong evidence for conviction – e.g. forensics
ten Brinke & Porter, 2012
▪ Deceptive murderers:- ▪ were more likely to express disgust and less likely to express sadness than genuine pleaders ▪ use more tentative language and fewer words ▪ expressed upper face surprise and lower face happiness ▪ blinked nearly twice as quickly as genuinely distressed individuals but showed no difference in direct gaze duration
▪ Micro expressions occurred rarely and could not be used to distinguish truthful and deceptive interviews
*ten Brinke, L. & Porter, S. (2012). Cry me a river: Identifying the behavioral consequences of extremely high-stakes interpersonal deception. Law and Human Behavior, Vol 36(6), Dec, 2012. pp. 469-477. Available as PDF on PsycINFO
Patterson, Fridlund & Crivelli, 2023
▪ Most research reports null or minimal results in terms of lie detection ability of humans from NVC cues ▪ Micro expressions are very infrequent and inferences about them lead to false positives and false negatives (Burgoon, 2018; DePaulo et al., 2003; Hartwig & Bond, 2011).
▪ Many studies did not take into account the contextual factors that led to stress and ambivalence in their participants, signs of which were mislabelled “deception.”
▪ Study of smiling has been pivotal – e.g. new understanding of “duchenne” smile is that it can be affected by sociality and produced on demand (Crivelli & Fridlund, 2019; FernándezDols & Carrera, 2010; Girard et al., 2021; Krumhuber & Kappas, 2022; Krumhuber & Manstead, 2009).