What is the nature of nonverbal communication in relation to nonverbal behavior?
INTRODUCTION
This essay typically discusses the essence of nonverbal communication and how it is related in the manifestation of nonverbal behavior. For the purposes of the broad scope of nonverbal communication, the focus of just one theory seems to be not that appropriate to be utilized in this straightforward essay. Thus, in this essay the discussion of nonverbal communication will be expounded. Further, nonverbal communication having a vague meaning cannot be completely discussed but a descriptive view of nonverbal communication will be tackled. The discussion will also tackle the nonverbal behavior as a medium in which it will be used for communication.
In demonstration of the vagueness of nonverbal communication, it can refer to the vocal features, which in turn can also be objectively seen in the facial expressions. Nonverbal communication may also refer in the manner of which it can be touched and smell or the several artifacts that can be used as a tool of making a facade. The vagueness of nonverbal communication sometimes leads to misinterpretations. A review of related literatures that seeks to examine whether or not nonverbal behavior can be regarded as communicative is also included in this essay.
MAIN PART
The study of verbal and nonverbal communication has assumed a prominent role in psychology during the past 20 years ( 1978; 1983). One classic definition of nonverbal communication given by (1989) is nonverbal communication as the process by which nonverbal behaviors are used, either singly or in combination with verbal behaviors, in the exchange and interpretation of messages within a given situation or context. Moreover, (1989), categorized nonverbal communication into eight classes among which are facial expression and eye behavior, body movements and gestures, touching behavior, voice characteristics, culture and time, environment, clothing and personal artifacts and body types, shapes and sizes. As an example of the illustration of facial expression and eye behavior as being a modifier of meaning of other nonverbal behavior is when two persons waiting for a cab at the same time in a waiting shed. Just when a cab is about to embark, the issue is who gets to have the cab first, one person rushes to the cab wherein the cab is in fact in front of the other person waiting for a cab, the facial expression and the initiation of eye contact between the two person involved would tell who gets to have the cab first, whether the other gives in to the rushing passenger or the one who was in front of the cab would readily hop in to the said cab and deny the rushing passenger. Similarly, according to (1972), eye contact is another important aspect of nonverbal communication.
Further, with respect as to what behaviors can be considered and regarded as being communicative, the definition of nonverbal communication shares different point of views. Some theorists have argued that all nonverbal behavior should be regarded as communicative (1968). Others have argued that only behaviors intended to be communicative should be regarded as such ( 1969). However, both viewpoints are criticized by (1972), who argued that for nonverbal behavior to be regarded as communicative, it needs to be shown that it is used both to transmit and receive information in their terminology; there is both systematic encoding and appropriate decoding. Thus, not all nonverbal behavior is necessarily communicative. Further, . (1972) have suggested a definition of communication as it implies that one person (an encoder) is actively making his experience known to some other person (a decoder) by means of a shared code. In agreement to (1972), for nonverbal behavior to be communicative is has to comply with the essence of being able to communicate clearly and with sense to the other person. Simply stated, all nonverbal behavior necessitates nonverbal communication. For example, a boy winks over a stranger, does not mean that there is a nonverbal communication going on between the two of them since the stranger is did not make the sense of connection with the boy (encoder) who makes the wink and thus putting no meaning to the wink being enacted by the boy. Although the boy is actively seeking the attention of the stranger, a response has not been made by the stranger and that the stranger did not share the same code as that of the boy.
The narrow definition of nonverbal communication as only occurring when the sender consciously intends to give a message to be received by another in which the exclusion of nonverbal behavior from the category of communication is rejected by (1978) and therefore contends that these subsidiary behaviors are more than secondarily informative; they are a fully integrated part of the total message one transmits to another. The message itself would be different were they not present. For (1978), nonverbal communication may not exactly necessitates the manifestation of a nonverbal behavior but their contention in the exclusion of nonverbal behaviors is based on the fact that these nonverbal behaviors may act more than informatively in the sense that their integration may constitute the totality of the message of the nonverbal communication.
CONCLUSION
Nonverbal communications may have either use or not use nonverbal behavior in the communication streaming. Other authors have contest to the fact that the use of nonverbal behaviors are meaningful in communicating nonverbally and are likely indicative of the real message it is about to convey and therefore, proposes that all nonverbal behavior should be considered as communicative . But other authors in contrast, propose that not all nonverbal behaviors can be considered communicative of the fact that they are not being used solely for communication purposes. Nevertheless, nonverbal behavior discloses critical information about emotions and relationships (1985). The importance of subtle expressive behaviors is incorporated to how we communicate with others and in assessing the interpretation of behavior. Nonverbal cues are often more powerful and reliable than verbal cues ( 1984).
The explanations of the nature of nonverbal communication contributed to the study of communication such that it is able to uncover the underlying factors behind those nonverbal behaviors as having meaning or no meaning at all. Nonverbal communication is in itself very subtle means to communicate yet its impact is unquestionably means something and may in some sense striking.
0 comments:
Post a Comment