Análisis de los principios aplicables

Tactile communication, or communication by touch, also

referred to as haptics, is perhaps the most primitive form of communication. Developmentally, touch is probably the first sense to be used; even in the womb, the child is stimulated by touch. Soon after birth the child is fondled, caressed, patted, and stroked. In turn, the child explores its world through touch. In a very short time, the child learns to communicate a

wide variety of meanings through touch. Not surprisingly, touch also varies with your relation- ship stage. In the early stages of a relationship, you touch little; in intermediate stages (involve- ment and intimacy), you touch a great deal; and at stable or deteriorating stages, you again touch little (Guerrero & Andersen, 1991).

The Meanings of Touch

Touch may communicate five major meanings (Jones, 2005; Jones & Yarbrough, 1985).

n _{Positive emotions. Touch often communicates positive emotions, mainly between inti-}

mates or others who have a relatively close relationship. Among the most important of these positive emotions are support, appreciation, inclusion, sexual interest or intent, and affection. Additional research found that touch communicated such positive feelings as composure, immediacy, trust, similarity and equality, and informality (Burgoon, 1991). Touch also has been found to facilitate self-disclosure (Rabinowitz, 1991).

n _{Playfulness. Touch often communicates a desire to play, either affectionately or aggres-}

sively. When touch is used in this manner, the playfulness deemphasizes the emotion and tells the other person that it’s not to be taken seriously. Playful touches lighten an interac- tion.

n _{Control. Touch also may seek to control the behaviors, attitudes, or feelings of the other}

person. Such control may communicate various different kinds of messages. To ask for compliance, for example, we touch the other person to communicate, “Move over,” “Hurry,” “Stay here,” or “Do it.” Touching to control may also communicate status and dominance (DiBaise & Gunnoe, 2004; Henley, 1977). The higher-status and dominant person, for

VIEWPOINTS Here are a few findings from research on nonverbal gender differences (Burgoon, Guerrero, & Floyd, 2010; Gamble & Gamble, 2003; Guerrero & Hecht, 2008; KroLøkke & Sørensen, 2006; Stewart, Cooper, & Stewart, 2003): (1) Women smile more than men. (2) Women stand closer to each other than do men and are generally approached more closely than men. (3) Both men and women, when speaking, look at men more than at women. (4) Women both touch and are touched more than men. (5) Men extend their bodies more, taking up greater areas of space, than women. What problems might these differences create when men and women communicate with each other?

example, initiates touch. In fact, it would be a breach of etiquette for the lower-status person to touch the person of higher status.

n _{Ritual. Much touching centers on performing rituals; for example, in greetings and de-}

partures. Shaking hands to say hello or goodbye is perhaps the clearest example of ritu- alistic touching, but we might also hug, kiss, or put an arm around another’s shoulder.

n _{Task-related. Touching is often associated with the performance of a function, such}

as removing a speck of dust from another person’s face, helping someone out of a car, or checking someone’s forehead for fever. Task-related touching seems generally to be regarded positively. In studies on the subject, for example, book borrowers had a more positive attitude toward the library and the librarian when touched lightly, and cus- tomers gave larger tips when lightly touched by the waitress (Marsh, 1988). Similarly, diners who were touched on the shoulder or hand when being given their change in a restaurant tipped more than diners who were not touched (Crusco & Wetzel, 1984; Guéguen & Jacob, 2004; Stephen & Zweigenhaft, 1986).

As you can imagine, touching also can get you into trouble. For example, touching that is too positive (or too intimate) too early in a relationship may send the wrong signals. Sim- ilarly, playing too roughly or holding someone’s arm to control their movements may be resented. Using ritualistic touching incorrectly or in ways that may be culturally insensi- tive may likewise get you into difficulty.

Touch avoidance

Much as we have a need and desire to touch and be touched by others, we also have a tendency to avoid touch from certain people or in certain circum- stances (Andersen, 2004; Andersen & Leibowitz, 1978).

Among the important findings is that touch avoidance is positively related to com- munication apprehension, or fear or anxiety about communicating: People who fear oral communication also score high on touch avoidance. Touch avoidance also is high among those who self-disclose little; touch and self-disclosure are intimate forms of communica- tion, and people who are reluctant to get close to another person by self-disclosure also seem reluctant to get close through touch.

Older people have higher touch avoidance scores for opposite-sex persons than do younger people. Apparently, as we get older we are touched less by members of the op- posite sex, and this decreased frequency of touching may lead us to avoid touching. Males score higher than females on same-sex touch avoidance. This accords well with our ste- reotypes: Men avoid touching other men, but women may and do touch other women. Women, it is found, have higher touch avoidance scores for opposite-sex touching than do men.

Culture and Touch

The several functions and examples of touching discussed ear- lier in this chapter were based on studies in North America; in other cultures these functions are not served in the same way. In some cultures, for example, some task- related touching is viewed negatively and is to be avoided. Among Koreans it is consid- ered disrespectful for a store owner to touch a customer in, say, handing back change; it is considered too intimate a gesture. A member of another culture who is used to such touching may consider the Korean’s behavior cold and aloof. Muslim children are socialized not to touch members of the opposite sex; their behavior can easily be inter- preted as unfriendly by American children who are used to touching one another (Dresser, 2005).

Some cultures—including many in southern Europe and the Middle East—are contact cul- tures; others are noncontact cultures, such as those of northern Europe and Japan. Members of contact cultures maintain close distances, touch one another in conversation, face each other more directly, and maintain longer and more focused eye contact. Members of noncon- tact cultures maintain greater distance in their interactions, touch each other rarely (if at all), avoid facing each other directly, and maintain much less direct eye contact. As a result of these

VIEWPOINTS Consider, as Nancy Henley asks in her book Body

Politics (1977), who would touch

whom—say, by putting an arm on the other person’s shoulder or by putting a hand on the other per- son’s back—in the following dyads: teacher and student, doctor and patient, manager and worker, minis- ter and parishioner, business execu- tive and secretary. Do your answers reveal that the higher-status person initiates touch with the lower-status person? Henley argues that in addi- tion to indicating relative status, touching demonstrates the asser- tion of male power, dominance, and superior status over women. When women touch men, Henley says, any suggestion of a female-domi- nant relationship is not acceptable (to men), so the touching is inter- preted as a sexual invitation. What do you think of this position?

differences, problems may occur. For example, northern Europeans and Japanese may be per- ceived as cold, distant, and uninvolved by southern Europeans—who may in turn be perceived as pushy, aggressive, and inappropriately intimate.

Paralanguage

Paralanguage is the vocal but nonverbal dimension of speech. It has to

do with the manner in which you say something rather than with what you say. An old exercise used to increase a student’s ability to express different emotions, feelings, and attitudes was to have the student say the following sentence while accenting or stressing different words: “Is this the face that launched a thousand ships?” Significant differences in meaning are easily communicated, depending on where the stress is placed. Consider, for example, the following variations:

1. Is this the face that launched a thousand ships?

2. Is this the face that launched a thousand ships? 3. Is this the face that launched a thousand ships? 4. Is this the face that launched a thousand ships? 5. Is this the face that launched a thousand ships?

Each of these five sentences communicates something different. Each, in fact, asks a to- tally different question, even though the words used are identical. All that distinguishes the sentences is variation in stress, one of the aspects of paralanguage.

In addition to stress, paralanguage includes such vocal characteristics as rate and volume. Paralanguage also includes the vocalizations we make when laughing, yelling, moaning, whin- ing, and belching; vocal segregates—sound combinations that aren’t words—such as “uh-uh” and “shh”; and pitch, the highness or lowness of vocal tone (Argyle, 1988; Trager 1958, 1961).

Paralanguage and People Perception

When listening to people—regardless of what they’re saying—we form impressions based on their paralanguage as to what kind of people they are. It does seem that certain voices are symptomatic of certain personality types or problems and, specifically, that the personality orientation gives rise to the vocal qualities. Our impressions of others from paralanguage cues span a broad range and consist of physical im- pressions (perhaps about body type and certainly about gender and age), personality impres- sions (they sound shy, they appear aggressive), and evaluative impressions (they sound like good people, they sound evil and menacing, they have vicious laughs).

One of the most interesting findings on voice and personal characteristics is that listeners can accurately judge the socioeconomic status (high, middle, or low) of speakers after hearing a 60-second voice sample. In fact, many listeners reported that they made their judgments in less than 15 seconds. It has also been found that the speakers judged to be of high status were rated as being of higher credibility than those rated of middle or low status.

It’s interesting to note that listeners agree with one another about the personality of the speaker even when their judgments are in error. Listeners have similar stereotyped ideas about the way vocal characteristics and personality characteristics are related, and they use these stereotypes in their judgments.

Paralanguage and Persuasion

The rate of speech is the aspect of paralanguage that has received the most research attention—because speech rate is related to persuasiveness. Therefore, it’s of interest to the advertiser, the politician, and anyone else who wants to convey information or to influence others orally—especially when time is limited or expensive. The research on rate of speech shows that in one-way communication situations, persons who talk fast are more persuasive and are evaluated more highly than those who talk at or below normal speeds (MacLachlan, 1979). This greater persuasiveness and higher regard holds true whether the person talks fast naturally or the speech is sped up electronically (as in time- compressed speech).

Interpersonal ChoICe poInt

Touching

Your supervisor touches just about everyone. You don’t like it and want it to stop—at least as far as you’re concerned. What are some ways you can nonverbally show your aversion to this unwanted touching?

In one experiment, subjects were asked to listen to taped messages and then to indicate both the degree to which they agreed with the message and their opinions as to how intelli- gent and objective they thought the speaker was (MacLachlan, 1979). Rates of 111, 140 (the average rate), and 191 words per minute were used. Subjects agreed most with the fastest speech and least with the slowest speech. Further, they rated the fastest speaker as the most intelligent and objective and the slowest speaker as the least intelligent and objective. Even in experiments in which the speaker was known to have something to gain personally from per- suasion (as would, say, a salesperson), the speaker who spoke at the fastest rate was the most persuasive. Research also finds that faster speech rates increase listeners’ perceptions of speaker competence and dominance (Buller, LePoire, Aune, & Eloy, 1992).

Although generally research finds that a faster than normal speech rate lowers listener comprehension, a rapid rate may still have the advantage in communicating information (Jones, Berry, & Stevens, 2007; MacLachlan, 1979). For example, people who listened to speeches at 201 words per minute (140 is average) comprehended 95 percent of the message, and those who listened to speeches at 282 words per minute (that is, double the normal rate) comprehended 90 percent. Even though the rates increased dramatically, the comprehension rates fell only slightly. These 5 percent and 10 percent losses are more than offset by the increased speed and thus make the faster rates much more efficient in communicating information. If the speech speeds are increased more than 100 percent, however, listener comprehension falls dramatically.

Exercise caution in applying this research to your own interpersonal interactions (MacLachlan, 1979). Realize that while the speaker is speaking, the listener is generating and framing a reply. If the speaker talks too rapidly, there may not be enough time to compose this reply, and resentment may be generated. Furthermore, the increased rate may seem so un- natural that the listener may come to focus on the speed of speech rather than the thought expressed.

Culture and Paralanguage

Cultural differences also need to be taken into consideration when we evaluate the results of the studies on speech rate, because different cultures view speech rate differently. For example, investigators found that Korean male speakers who spoke rapidly were given unfavorable credibility ratings, unlike Americans who spoke rapidly (Lee & Boster, 1992). Researchers have suggested that in individualist societies a rapid-rate speaker is seen as more competent than a slow-rate speaker, whereas in collectivist cultures a speaker who uses a slower rate is judged more competent.

Silence

“Speech,” wrote Thomas Mann, “is civilization itself. The word, even the most contradictory word, preserves contact; it’s silence which isolates.” Philosopher Karl Jaspers, on the other hand, observed that “the ultimate in thinking as in communication is silence.” And philoso- pher Max Picard noted that “silence is nothing merely negative; it’s not the mere absence of speech. It’s a positive, a complete world in itself.” The one thing on which these contradictory observations agree is that silence communicates. Your silence communicates just as intensely as anything you verbalize (Jaworski, 1993; Richmond, McCroskey, & Hickson, 2012).

The Functions of Silence

Like words and gestures, silence serves important communica- tion functions. Here are several:

n _{To provide time to think. Silence allows the speaker time to think, time to formulate and}

organize his or her verbal communications. Before messages of intense conflict, as well as those confessing undying love, there is often silence. Again, silence seems to prepare the receiver for the importance of these future messages.

n _{To hurt. Some people use silence as a weapon to hurt others. We often speak of giving}

someone “the silent treatment.” After a conflict, for example, one or both individuals may remain silent as a kind of punishment. Silence used to hurt others also may take the form of refusing to acknowledge the presence of another person, as in disconfirmation (see

Chapter 5); here silence is a dramatic demonstration of the total indifference one person feels toward the other.

n _{To respond to personal anxiety. Sometimes silence is used as a response to personal anx-}

iety, shyness, or threats. You may feel anxious or shy among new people and prefer to re-

main silent. By remaining silent you preclude the chance of rejection. Only when you break your silence and attempt to communicate with another person do you risk rejection.

n _{To prevent communication. Silence may be used to prevent communication of certain}

messages. In conflict situations, silence is sometimes used to prevent certain topics from surfacing or to prevent one or both parties from saying things they may later regret. In such situations, silence often allows us time to cool off before expressing hatred, severe criti- cism, or personal attacks that we know are irreversible.

n _{To communicate emotions. Like the eyes, face, or hands, silence can also be used to com-}

municate emotions (Ehrenhaus, 1988; Lane, Koetting, & Bishop, 2002). Sometimes silence

communicates a determination to be uncooperative or defiant; by refusing to engage in verbal communication, you defy the authority or the legitimacy of the other person’s posi- tion. Silence is often used to communicate annoyance, usually accompanied by a pouting expression, arms crossed in front of the chest, and nostrils flared. Silence may express af- fection or love, especially when coupled with long and longing gazes into each other’s eyes.

n _{To achieve specific effects. Silence may also be used strategically, to achieve specific effects.}

The pause before making what you feel is an important comment or after hearing about some mishap may be strategically positioned to communicate a desired impression—to make your idea stand out among others or perhaps to give others the impression that you care a lot more than you really do. In some cases a prolonged silence after someone voices disagreement may give the appearance of control and superiority. It’s a way of saying, “I can respond in my own time.” Generally, research finds that people use silence strategically more with strangers than they do with close friends (Hasegawa & Gudykunst, 1998).

n _{To say nothing. Of course, you also may use silence when you simply have nothing to say,}

when nothing occurs to you, or when you don’t want to say anything. James Russell Lowell Remaining silent is at times your right. At other times, however, it may be unlawful. You have the right to remain silent so as not to incriminate yourself. You have a right to protect your privacy—to withhold information that has no bearing on the matter at hand. For example, your previous relationship history, affectional orientation, or religion is usually irrelevant to your ability to function in a job, and thus may be kept private in most job-related situations. On the other hand, these issues may be relevant when, for example, you’re about to enter a more intimate phase of a relationship; then there may be an obligation to reveal information about yourself that could ethically have been kept hidden at earlier relationship stages.

You do not have the right to remain silent and to refuse to reveal information about crimes you’ve seen others commit. However, psychiatrists, clergy, and lawyers—fortunately or unfortunately—are often exempt from the requirement to reveal information about criminal activities when the information had been gained through privileged communi- cation with clients.

Ethics in Interpersonal Communication

intErpErSonAl SilEnCE

EthICAl ChoICE PoInt

On your way to work, you witness a father verbally abusing his three-year-old child. You worry that he might psychologically harm the child, and your first impulse is to speak up and tell this man that verbal abuse can have lasting effects on the child and often leads to physical abuse. At the same time, you don't want to interfere with his right to speak to his child and you certainly don't want to make

In document Lima, 7 de julio de 2021 (página 61-67)