Information

Can non-verbal communication in interpersonal relationships be taught rather than acquired?

Can non-verbal communication in interpersonal relationships be taught rather than acquired?


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

In my experience people living together in difficult circumstances (e.g. close friends, family members) often learn to relate to each other's non-verbal cues.

For instance; A spouse may go shopping with a list in hand prepared by his partner, and return with a few items not mentioned on the list - only to have his partner indicate one or more items were missed by oversight. Similarly people sharing a room in a hostel may merely by a glance communicate an unspoken understanding of intent & action.

Understandably such incidents probably do not occur with high frequency. They are, however, not totally rare either. This brings me to my question:

Can such non-verbal communication be taught rather than acquired?


Can non-verbal communication in interpersonal relationships be taught rather than acquired? In many ways this question answers itself. As an acquired skill is one that is learnt, and by definition, anything that can be learnt can be taught.

As with many skills, non-verbal communication begins in childhood.

It is concluded that style of expression and skill in communication are influenced by the emotional expressiveness of the family environment.

Family socialization of emotional expression and nonverbal communication styles and skills.
Halberstadt, Amy G.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 51(4), Oct 1986, 827-836

Unlike, many, subconscious difficulties of the mind, learning to read body language can be practiced and improved. A simple google search reveals some of the books and online resources to teach people to improve these skills.

Teaching Approach for Developing Nonverbal Communication Skills in Students with Social Perception Deficits
Part I. The Basic Approach and Body Language Clues
Esther H. Minskoff, PhD


Conclusions

This study has presented the preliminary findings of a matched study conducted to investigate similarities and differences between two teaching environments: the traditional face-to-face (turn-taking) environment and an online (non-turn-taking) environment called the LBD eClassroom. Two sections of the same course were compared. The course objectives, the content, and the teaching pedagogy (experiential learning) were the same, as were the teaching team, the time frames and duration, the assignments, and grading criteria. Due to the nature of the study, there were some variables that could not be kept constant, such as student interest in the course at the outset.

Instruments like the GUIDATA were employed as social proxies used for online social visualization, and as instantaneous feedback tools. Because the most striking differences between learning face-to-face and learning online that emerged from these methods are related to interactivity, the tone of this article may suggest a preference for online education, which showed more plentiful and distributed interaction. This is not our position, however. Each environment has its distinct advantages and opportunities for teaching. The issue is not which venue is better or worse. The goal of the inquiry is to understand both the similarities and the differences in order to formulate online learning theories and improve teaching effectiveness across the board.

In the non-turn-taking collaborative interaction that occurs in the online environment used in this study, there is no theoretical limit for the data flow in number of words that can be generated. The effective limit is based on a synthesis of the groups' combined reading, comprehending, and typing skills. Because the LBD eClassroom is designed without auto-scrolling, participants read, comprehend, and respond at their own speed. Everyone can generate and send data when they are ready, and get as much data as they want at any given time. Once a message is posted into the LBD eClassroom, it becomes transparent and remains available to everyone there is no need to repeat, or to take notes. In contrast, in the face-to-face class session, all words, statements, and interactions disappear and are held only in an individual's memory.

The most substantial findings of this research to date regarding differences between turn-taking and non-turn-taking collaborative interactions are related to the issue of time. Intriguing questions are raised: Do participants who are engaged in the environment of synchronous non-turn-taking communication used in this study in fact create more time for themselves? What are the implications and applications of the extra 46 minutes it takes to read out the statements generated in a 30-minute real-time online peer-centered collaborative discussion vs. a face-to-face turn-taking instructor-centered discussion? If time is money, the participants in the online class are richer than their face-to-face counterparts. May one also assume that if information is power, and the data flow generated online is not only larger, but more varied, visible, and lasting than face-to-face, that online students would be more productive and have a better sense of self and others?

McLuhan (1969) wrote about how the linearity of a print-based information technology limits people's thought patterns. Words follow words, lines follow lines, paragraphs follow paragraphs, pages follow pages and so on, in a single, one-way necessary order, from the first page to the last. In McLuhan's view, learning through a linear medium discourages flexible, open-ended, multidirectional, and multidimensional thought. “Instead of being authoritative, books become authoritarian, demanding we think in a straight line, from a fixed point of view” ( Alexenberg, 2004). Designed to be read in privacy, McLuhan believed that books encourage isolation and non-involvement with others, so that the book's medium becomes stronger than its content. One could make a similar statement about turn-taking interaction as well. As one utterance follows the next, the process of taking turns (i.e., the anxiety of waiting/fearing to be called upon or blowing the chance, etc.) may become more important than the message ultimately shared, often out of sync as a result of having had to wait for one's turn.

The Internet is a new text- and graphics-based medium, with a powerful non-linear potential. As a medium, it can foster a polylogue of words and images where freshness, vividness, and acute awareness permeate the discussions. Venturing into this new land may change us, no matter how we cling to the familiarity we know. We propose that one of the changes, at least as regards synchronous CMC, may involve turn-taking and the nature of group participation.


Silence: The Secret Communication Tool

What if I told you silence is good for communication? Would you believe me?

You wouldn&rsquot be alone if you said no. Most people probably would disagree with me. In fact, many would argue that silence isn&rsquot even communication at all.

In reality, though, silence can be a very effective communication tool. Communication is simply about conveying a message, and sometimes silence can do that better than any words.

You may have heard the statistic that 93 percent of communication is nonverbal. It comes from research by Dr. Albert Mehrabian. He found that words convey only seven percent of our message, while the rest of communication occurs through our tone, volume, facial expressions, gestures, posture and the like. So if the majority of communication is nonverbal, doesn&rsquot it make sense that silence could be good communication?

In relationships, communication often becomes a game of oneupsmanship, rather than an exchange of ideas. The goal becomes to get the last word or have your idea win out, instead of a sharing of ideas. When communication functions in this way in a relationship, division is fostered rather than unity. It&rsquos no wonder that &ldquocommunication problems&rdquo is the top problem cited by partners coming to couples counseling.

Here are three reasons to use silence in your communication:

  • Communicate better. Many of us talk too much. All of us occasionally can be guilty of overtalking a subject to the extent that our point is missed. Silence forces us to shut up and get our message across in fewer words. Ironically, fewer words can result in a clearer, stronger message.
  • Hear what&rsquos really being said. Keeping our tongue quiet frees us up to listen to our partner. When we&rsquore not running off at the mouth, we can focus on what the other person is saying, plus pay attention to their nonverbal communication.
  • Reach resolution faster. The goal of communication should be to share information and reach a decision, not to win. Being silent at times not only reduces the noise but also speeds up resolution.

It&rsquos important to keep in mind that silence can be misused, too. Some people use it to express anger others to hurt or punish their partner. It&rsquos commonly used in abusive relationships. But silence can be used for good as well as bad. So don&rsquot let any negative experiences with silence keep you from using one of the best forms of communication.

It does take some courage to use silence as a communication tool, and it&rsquos not always easy to do. Ironically, we can feel more comfortable and safer if we keep talking. It&rsquos risky to leave our words hanging without further explanation or defense. But there&rsquos power in that silence, too.

Give silence a try. It can take some practice to learn how and when to use it correctly, so be patient and give yourself some time to learn. But when you do learn how to use silence effectively, look out. Your communication will become much more powerful.


3. Communication factors that influence learner achievement

Factors that could either contribute to effective and meaningful communication between educators and learners or impede the learning process resulting in a communication breakdown are relevant and warrant attention. Verbal communication, non-verbal communication, verbal aggression, communication apprehension, immediacy and teaching styles are all relevant factors discussed in the following sections.

3.1. Verbal communication

Educators and learners alike should be proficient in the Language of Learning and Teaching (LOLT) to be able to communicate effectively. In South Africa many learners receive instruction in English - a language that is not their mother tongue (Uys etਊl., 2007). These authors express concern that not all educators pay attention to the four basic language skills of reading, writing, speaking and listening. Similarly, Van der Poll and Van der Poll (2007) argue that learners need to obtain a level of mastery in the language in which they receive instruction to be able to understand the learning content in other subjects. They claim that understanding the LOLT is a requirement for learners if they wish to be academically successful. If learners are not proficient in the medium of instruction (Legotla etਊl., 2002) they might underachieve. In South Africa, learners are taught in either a first, second or third additional language. These learners have difficulty comprehending learning content as it is presented in a language that is not their mother tongue. In support of Legotla etਊl. (2002), Howie (2005) states that learners in urban areas who speak the language of instruction and have had considerable exposure to that language have a greater chance at succeeding than learners in rural areas. In South Africa, English has become the medium of instruction preferred by many parents, learners and institutions of learning. Jones (1990) as cited in McLauchlin (2007) points out that learners who have trouble understanding the LOLT are penalized because they are not able to express themselves adequately during spoken and written communication activities. Areas of potential conflict relating to verbal communication include dialect differences, especially grammar, morphology, vocabulary semantics and discussion modes. Learners who speak any non-standard dialect are often perceived as uneducated or less intelligent (Bennett, 2007).

Wahyuni (2017) in his study on the power of both verbal and non-verbal communication in leaning, notes the following regarding verbal communication. Educators who are proficient in the medium of instruction contribute significantly towards improving learner performance because they appear to have the skill in transferring information in both the written and spoken word in an effective manner. They conclude by stating and confirming the views in this study of the authors that good and effective communication skills enhance teaching and learning and ultimately learner performance.

Therefore, social interaction requires the use of language in a context that manifests modalities of effective communication. People have an innate ability to put their understanding into words – this essentially marks an advance in both understanding and development and as such have critical implications for teachers, who are regarded as the facilitators of learning (Eggen and Kauchak, 2014). Verbal communication therefore poses a threat to the educational experience, especially if learners are not proficient in the LOLT. This argument seems to be true for educators as well for those who have difficulty expressing themselves in English.

3.2. Non-verbal communication

According to Bambaeerooi and Shokrpour (2017), non-verbal communication is more refined in a way that it carries more depth during communication, more so in a teaching and learning environment. Therefore, its importance should not be underrated during teaching and learning as well as the impact that it could have on learner achievement. Bennett (2007) concurs that non-verbal communication finds expression in messages sent by individuals through unconscious body movements, such as facial expressions, gestures (kinesics), the unconscious use of personal space (proxemics) and unconscious physical touching (haptic). During communication activities, especially in classrooms, educators use gestures to impart information regarding subject matter, feelings and opinions. These gestures happen consciously or unconsciously but contribute significantly towards the overall communication activity. According to Raman and Sharma (2007), the verbal aspect of communication conveys only approximately 35% of the message, whereas the non-verbal component carries about 65% of the message. Therefore, the importance of non-verbal communication during classroom communication activities should not be underestimated as it could contribute either positively or negatively to the learning experience. An understanding of the impact that gestures have on people's perceptions of others will lead to informed and conscious choices regarding the use of certain gestures. Educators who work in multicultural and diverse classrooms should be aware of the importance of gestures during interaction with learners. In this regard, Ryan (1995) exhorts that appropriate actions should be selected to convey the intended message so that it can be interpreted correctly. Le Roux (2002) recommends that educators in South Africa remain perceptive to non-verbal messages that are conveyed in multicultural classroom environments. Gestures also assist learners in distinguishing between facts and opinions, while clarifying the meaning of terms. Learners even model certain gestures learnt from their educators (Orton, 2007). Similarly, Baringer and McCrosky (2000) state that non-verbal immediacy in the classroom results in both learners and educators achieving their goal, that is, enabling educators to convey their message effectively and learners to grasp learning content. In this way educational outcomes are achieved. Therefore, one may deduce that if educators and learners are aware of the important relationship between non-verbal communication and learning, they could identify ways of improving learner performance.

3.3. Verbal aggression

Miscommunication between educators and learners could be the cause of instances of verbal aggression reported in schools in South Africa (Prins, 2009). Incongruities of this nature negatively affect the relationship between educators and learners and the learning experience. De Wet (2006) claims that both educators and learners make themselves guilty of verbal aggression. Hassandri etਊl., (2007) discuss the negative consequences of verbal aggression and mention that it could instill feelings of low self-worth and result in the development of low self-concept. Verbal aggression thus defeats the purpose of transferring knowledge, values and a skill set that encourages good citizenship. In addition, the new generation of learners seem to be less willing to accept verbal abuse from educators.

Learners who have been subjected to this form of abuse should focus on developing positive interpersonal relations and, in extreme cases, seek professional assistance. Myburgh and Poggenpoel (2009) state that learners who have been affected should focus on developing good interpersonal relations. Educators and learners should also improve their listening skills for increased comprehension of what is being said instead of listening only to provide a response. Uludag (2013) investigated the influence aggression has on learner achievement and have found that influences academic performance negatively. His study reveals that even students who display aggressive behaviour obtain lower scores than learners who have less aggressive tendencies. This finding confirms prior studies findings that aggressive behaviour displayed by either learners or educators negatively impact learner performance.

3.4. Communication apprehension

When educators or learners have a fear of communicating with one another they experience communication apprehension (Robinson, 2007). Educators and learners could experience this apprehension in a classroom setting as the LOLT may not be their mother tongue. Learners experience anxiety or fear of embarrassment should they respond to educators' questions or participate in classroom discussions. Miller and Nadler (2009) explain that learners' levels of anxiety and fear can be so high before communicating that they fail to communicate effectively with educators or fellow learners. Studies conducted by Neer (1990) and Robinson (2007) have confirmed that learners experience communication apprehension in educational environments and educators should help learners to gain confidence and participate in classroom discussions. It is not only learners who are affected, educators also experience communication apprehension, especially new educators entering the field. Roby's (2009) research in this regard reveals that educators are apprehensive about communicating in groups, public speaking and in some instances one-on-one dialogues. A fear of communicating publicly could adversely affect their performance in class and have a negative impact on learner achievement. More importantly, miscommunication can occur as a result of communication apprehension and influence how learners interpret the messages they are sending.

3.5. Immediacy

It is difficult for learning to take place in a hostile learning environment. Good interpersonal relationships should exist between educators and learners to promote the acquisition of knowledge and skills. Robinson (2007) asserts that good relationships between educators and learners create a positive learning environment and reduce the physical and psychological distance between educators and learners. In so doing, learning becomes a pleasant experience which educators should strive towards achieving. Bainbridge-Frymier and Houser (2000) believe that effective communication skills are important to achieve good teaching practices, referential skill, ego support and conflict management. Referential skill implies the process of explaining and clarifying, which is significant in the context of learning and teaching and remains key to learners achieving educational outcomes. Educators provide direction in developing good interpersonal relationships with learners and in this regard should lead by example as learners often model their behaviours. Hawking (2005) supports this notion that educators play a crucial role in fostering a classroom environment that is conducive to teaching and learning. It should be an environment where learners have the freedom to express their opinions frankly and honestly. Attentive listening, coupled with good interpersonal relations in our experience with the new generation of learners, has shown that learners have a voice and that they want educators to listen to their viewpoints. According to Guffey and Loewy (2011), listening is an intricate process that needs communicators to be attentive not only to their surroundings, but also to the senders who are conveying information in a way. Educators should have effective listening skills to understand problems that learners experience during the transfer of knowledge. Similarly, learners should have good listening skills because they also need to understand the messages communicated to them by their educators. Noteworthy, in this regard, is the argument by Berko etਊl. (2010) that listening is enhanced if the listener is not prone to prejudgement, understands that communication is a two-way process and that both senders and receivers have a responsibility to listen attentively during communication activities.

Furthermore, a distinction needs to be drawn between immediacy and interpersonal skills which are both essential requisites for effective communication. Immediacy refers to good interpersonal relationships, whereas interpersonal skills refer to soft skills that people require to be successful and that are important during communication activities (Young, 2005). Interpersonal skills are needed during interactions especially when striving towards achieving a specific goal (Osakwe, 2009). It is also necessary to demonstrate appropriate social behaviours that are appropriate to specific contexts such as a classroom environment and learners should know this (Osakwe, 2009). Ultimately, amiable and caring relationships will develop between educators and learners and, in so doing, foster good social, emotional and academic functioning of learners (Bergsman etਊl., 2013).

Akif Sözer (2019) investigated educator immediacy based on how learners perceived educator behaviour. The results reveal that learners who have good interpersonal relationships with learners and demonstrate positive behaviour in classes are more effective than educators who do not have sound relationships with learners. Noteworthy of this study is that immediacy was frequently observed by way of non-verbal immediacy. This is implying that educators were observed through their actions such as gestures, eye contact and even smiling. Educators who frequently displayed a friendly attitude towards learners were deemed to be more efficient and the results of these learners were better than learners, who perceived their educators in a negative light.

3.6. Teaching as an interactive process

Teaching is a communicative activity in which the transfer of information or knowledge takes place. The way messages are conveyed determines the success or failure of an educational activity (Osakwe, 2009). Teaching styles should be varied to reach as many learners as possible. Mji and Magato (2006) contend that varying teaching styles accommodate most learners. In addition, Duta etਊl. (2014) state that educators' viewpoints regarding a topic affects the teaching style/s they employ in the learning environment. They explain that educators have a personal, pedagogical or interactional stance. The personal viewpoint focusses on how educators and learners perceive their roles in an educational environment. Educators should not be viewed as knowledge banks responsible for educating learners, nor should learners be recipients of knowledge. Rather, learners should be engaged in the learning process and educators should facilitate the learning process. The pedagogical viewpoint refers specifically to how educators view their responsibility as facilitators and how learners view their responsibilities as learners in an educational context. The interactional viewpoint was of primary importance to this study, describing how educators interact in the teaching environment and how learners perform their tasks in the classroom.

As the authors of this paper, we argue that an understanding of communication differences extends beyond the mere desire for constructive pedagogical relationships and enabling classroom interactions. These engagements promote healthy teacher-learner relationships which in turn embed effective communicative practices that seek the continuous negotiation and renegotiation of identities between the various participants (educators and learners) involved. Ultimately, teaching, learning and being able to function in a group context, such as multicultural educational settings mean being aware of differences and essentially, embracing diversity. An interactional approach is therefore tantamount to the acquisition of a skill set that will equip learners to think critically and solve problems, especially in a multicultural schooling context. In addition, the advent of the computer age has changed the face of education. Lehman and Dufrene (2011) state that constant improvements in technology have broadened communication preferences for organisations such as schools. However, technology should enhance communication in the classroom and not replace the important role of the educator. The use of technology enhances classroom communication and enriches learning experiences for learners (Lim and Morris, 2009), especially in well-resourced schools. Yet, there are schools that lack resources, especially those in rural areas.


Proxemics

Proxemics refers to the study of how space and distance influence communication. We only need look at the ways in which space shows up in common metaphors to see that space, communication, and relationships are closely related. For example, when we are content with and attracted to someone, we say we are “close” to him or her. When we lose connection with someone, we may say he or she is “distant.” In general, space influences how people communicate and behave. Smaller spaces with a higher density of people often lead to breaches of our personal space bubbles. If this is a setting in which this type of density is expected beforehand, like at a crowded concert or on a train during rush hour, then we make various communicative adjustments to manage the space issue. Unexpected breaches of personal space can lead to negative reactions, especially if we feel someone has violated our space voluntarily, meaning that a crowding situation didn’t force them into our space. Additionally, research has shown that crowding can lead to criminal or delinquent behavior, known as a “mob mentality” (Andersen, 1999). To better understand how proxemics functions in nonverbal communication, we will more closely examine the proxemic distances associated with personal space and the concept of territoriality.


Doctorina - Happy Life

The more we practice paying attention to the details of their communication with others, the more we begin to notice how much is actually missing - so tiny messages transmitted subtle non-verbal communication, tone of voice or choice of words, because the other person does not dare to express them directly or not itself is not aware of, and that would certainly improve the relationship if they were observed and clarified.

Usually these are not the elements that will significantly reduce the quality of communication, which is one reason why they do not recognize - but the other reason is that often we do not have any experience on how to jump and improve relationships can be to learn to pay attention.

In many situations we do not follow enough has been said to be beset by or answering the right question at the right time. Everyone has a different experience of resolved and unresolved arguments, or opinions of other people subsequently and indirectly . Sometimes important things can be explained and misunderstandings avoided if we recognize the problem, and correctly translate the words of another person, or find the right words to explain our position, but, as with many other truly important aspects of life we ​​rarely take the time to afford it.

I have the impression that many people in situations where they are not sure what to say, trying to think of a quick response through rationally learned ideas, empty of humor or provocation, or simply avoid or refrain from confrontation. It's quite another thing when in such situations, listen to your body and feels that it's sending. Listening to the feelings of you, prevevši it in words, identify the problem and find the right response. One must practice, because in the course of communication our focus is directed towards the outside and it is much harder to notice subtle psychosomatic reactions.

Often people say they know there is no point in controlling it, but they want to relax and be spontaneous. The conflict between spontaneity and the effort to communicate better quality common as soon as we invest time and energy in that direction.
In my experience, it's easy for most people to notice, that the 'spontaneous' and automatic reactions, those answers and behaviors that emerge from us before we think about it, almost before we even notice, often learned defensive coping mechanisms, or ways expression learned from the environment, rather than a genuine and honest reactions that really express who we are. It is important to learn not to react automatically. We need to give yourself time to feel what is the right answer our feelings . Provided that we have learned to be honest with yourself.

In a way, as if afraid to take the majority of the time and not answer immediately, as we have learned to expect that the other person will use that time to 'outperform' and 'defeat' in communication. The reality is quite the opposite: not only in many situations, the other person does not have any need for it, rather than getting yourself time, sending him a message on several levels: one of them is that we care about the outcome of the communication and to carefully think about what he said and what we say, and the second is that we are aware, present and reacting with genuine feelings (which automatically means an attitude of self-esteem). Moreover, in many situations where the other person is communicating inappropriately, the time that the answer often prompts her to reflect on her own behavior.

Nonverbal communication carries the most important message: not only aware of, and expressed thoughts and feelings, but even the unconscious ones. No need to avoid the trap and-white judgment and believing that a specific movement or gesture means exactly what we ascribe to him. Many eager observers of nonverbal communication might annoy you, convincing you that you are thinking what they think you think, try not to become one of them.

Every gesture and mime change is necessary to compare with all the other elements of nonverbal and verbal communication, rather than being interpreted separately. Also, the elements of the situation may affect the person's feelings, as well as random thoughts, memories and associations, and also the embarrassment if a person is aware that everything I watch (the discomfort that will increase manifold hasty interpretation!), Similar to a lie detector innocent suspects can be further upset by false if in fear of being misunderstood and wrongly accused. I recommend, as with many other aspects of life, that the interpretation of non-verbal communication others prefer to let their feelings and overall impression, rather than a conscious and rational analysis.

If you consciously try to control their nonverbal speech to send the message that you do not feel real, it is usually unsuccessful, except for the extremely skilled actors. The nature of nonverbal communication is honest expression, and if we manage to control some parts of the body, others will send the right message. What we need to do - for our own sake even more than for results - that in itself develop true feelings that we want to convey non-verbal speech.

Any communication with the other person, all she say and how we say it, affect its relationship with us and further communication - ie. how much on a separate occasion they have the confidence to open up to us. It's easy to run into 'spiritual realms' - everyday communication is where true spirituality begins.

We often say something like "I did everything I could . I no longer know how to talk to that person! 'But is that really true? Is there maybe something else that we can say or do . but we have the will, courage or humility? Maybe even a lot of things? Often, 'all we could do' in reality means' all we could do without risking too much or compromising their ego. "

Similarly as in relation to themselves, and in their relationships with others takes time and perseverance to rehearse a full presence in the moment, a profound awareness of and sensitivity to all that is happening within us and within us. It is even more difficult to learn to communicate their thoughts in an honest and compassionate manner. But once you learn it, our relationships - what's most important to quality of life - have a chance to flourish.
Copyright Kosjenka Muk, 2006

Communication is one of the basic needs of human existence, and can be defined as the transmission or exchange of information between the sender wants to communicate a message and a recipient whose task is to decode it. One of the basic conditions that enable social interaction is the ability to communicate.
Verbal communication refers to the actual words used in the conversation. It is believed that the main function of language reporting on ideas, events and things that are not immediately present.Nonverbal communication is the interpersonal behavior of all the spoken words.
Whether it is verbal or non-verbal, communication takes place using the characters. The signs are, with some conditions, whatever it is, if the receiver of the message have some meaning, and decoded into "meaning." It is clear that the characteristics of the recipient, as well as the social context, determine the meaning that he will be given a received character.

But when it comes to non-verbal behavior, the signs are social norms that are implied. Intention and consciousness of the person who conveys the necessary preconditions are not, as is often non-verbally convey and what we do not want, or do not intend to reveal about themselves.
Some of our mechanical actions and provide the type of information to which neither we nor those around us are not aware warned. We perform an action, and it is perceived. Its meaning has been read, but not to vote. When "airing mood" becomes conscious, it can be controlled.

Non-verbal communication performs three functions. One part of our non-verbal behavior directed regulation of the mechanism of social interaction, the second part is related to the expression of opinions, and the third is related to the expression of emotional states.
Feeling and expressing emotions is an integral part of life. Emotions are related to human behavior. If you're not sure how you feel, but you realize that you behave in a way that sends a clear message, from your behavior, you can understand how you feel. For example, if you talk to someone while you have a friend and an angry look on his face, it can not because you are angry or dissatisfied with this person without being aware of it.
Much of the nonverbal communication crosses all international and linguistic boundaries, but some parts are different in different cultures. In any case, the hidden language complements the spoken word in ways that are only recently beginning to understand better.
People who good command of nonverbal communication probably work more effectively in an intercultural arena, because we communicate nonverbally quickly gives what we need to determine - whether the other person has confidence in us, is us, and we tend to be optimistic about the outcome of the meeting. All this happens without a single spoken word.

The main channels of nonverbal communication are visual (seeing, eye contact and view), facial expressions, body language (contact, posture, gestures, nod), personal space, and show yourself parajezik. The most important aspect of nonverbal behavior is considered a visual interaction, where the vision is more important than seeing the eye contact because it provides access to many non-verbal signs.
The man most of his time is spent in communication with other people. The man in the interaction, face to face, mainly focusing on his words, and forgetting that at the same time his movements, attitudes and facial expressions tell a story.

Non-verbal communication consists of a multitude of characters, each with its own meaning. We communicate daily with these characters and "read" them with other people, and they do not even realize it. In most cases we do not know the typical movements and facial expressions.
Many gestures absorbed from the social environment in which we live, and they are in our lives strongly modify the unconscious stimulating the social customs. I have an innate expressions often drastically modified by social pressures. Human passion exercise movement is such that in the past have tried to learn "speaker gestures" despite the fact that a small number of people in need of such instruction.

At each interaction emotional send out signals, and these signals affect the people around us. What we are socially more appropriate, to better monitor the signals that are sent to. Until such transfer is due to unconscious imitation of emotions that we see in some other, using unwitting motor mimicry, their facial expressions, gestures, tone, and other nonverbal expressions of emotion.

Most of the data from the non-verbal communication is decrypted in the limbic system, the early preverbal part of the brain that controls emotions and that is beyond our conscious control. An example is a strong communicator subconscious iris. When something attracts our interest, the iris expands. These changes can hardly be measured, but the effect can be dramatic, as this other people look more attractive.

Non-verbal communication is much more important and complex aspect of interpersonal interaction than they appear at first glance can do.

Like other species, we are ruled by biological rules that control our actions, reactions, body language, gestures. People are rarely aware of your posture, movements and gestures can tell the story of a very different man from the one spoken in their own voice.
From the professional point of view, whenever a call ¨ ¨ perceptive or intuitive ¨ ¨ person, we think of his or her ability to detect the expression of meaning gestures of another person and compare them with what signal words. Or else, when we say that we have a hunch ¨ ¨ ¨ or ¨ feeling in my stomach that someone has lied to us, in fact we find that his body language and spoken words do not match.

Women usually has a better ability to perceive than men, and this fact led to one of the famous thesis on female intuition ¨ ¨. Women have an innate ability to collect and decipher the unspoken signals, as they have a very strong sense of detail. Consequently, very few men and women staff agree to live with it, and vice versa, most women are able to pull a man's hat on his eyes and that he was not aware of that.

This female intuition is especially pronounced in women who have just given birth. During the first years of the mother relies exclusively on movements in the communication link with their child, and it is believed that this is why women often have a more developed ability to perceive than men.

Are still being researched and debated in order to reveal the movements of the signals are inborn, learned, genetically transferred or acquired in some other way. Conducted a study in which they observed the blind and / or deaf people who could not learn by listening to signals from movements or watching. Studies have shown that the expression of laughter in children who are born deaf or blind occur independently of whether taught or simulated. Research has supported some of Darwin's original beliefs about inborn gestures when they studied the facial expressions of people from five mutually very distant cultures. They found that each culture uses the same basic facial expressions to show feeling, which led them to conclude that it is undoubtedly an innate gestures.

Much of our basic movements is learned behavior, such as the meaning of many gestures of a specific culture to which we belong. Most of the basic communication gestures are the same all over the world. People laugh when they are happy, frowning stare or scowl when they are sad or angry.Nodding almost everywhere means that ¨ ¨ or agree with something. It is an inborn nod your head that is probably innate movement, because it serves the deaf and blind people. Swinging its head from side to side indicates ¨ ¨ ne and that is a sign of disagreement also equal everywhere, and the movement can be learned in childhood. When a child turns to the side and does not accept the mother's breast.

The evolutionary origin of some movements can establish deep in our primitive past. Gnashing of teeth comes from the act of assault, and modern man is so ridicules or shows their enemy though, of course, one does not intend to attack the teeth. Laughter is initially represented a threat, and a smile today expressed satisfaction and pleasure. Shrug is also a good example that shows the movements generally accepted that a person does not know or understand what is being said. It is a complex movement in three parts: exposed palms, elevated and retracted his shoulders and raised his eyebrows.

Just as spoken language varies from one culture to another, so it is with the express movement. In a culture of individual gesture is common to all, while the second may seem meaningless or, in turn, have a completely different meaning.

Sign round toes (¨ ¨ OK) gesture - meaning ¨ ¨ OK is widespread in all English-speaking countries, but though its meaning is rapidly spreading through Europe and Asia, some countries have different meaning and origin. In France, for example, means ¨ ¨ zero ¨ or ¨ nothing in Japan may mean ¨ ¨ money.

The movement of the thumb raised - the UK, Australia and New Zealand thumbs-up has three meanings. It is generally recognized in that hitchhiker, then typically a sign confirming that everything was all right, but when it suddenly twitches his thumb up, then we get the meaning ¨ There you go! ¨ or ¨ ¨ fall victim. In some countries, such as Greece, the main thing is full of meaning ¨ ¨ my hat.

V-sign - this is a sign widely accepted in Australia, New Zealand and the UK and usually implies ¨ Here! ¨. Winston Churchill popularized the V sign of victory in the second. World War II, but he was the one sign with two fingers did palm forward. Palm facing the speaker, however, the sign is an obscene insult. In many parts of Europe V sign with the palm inwards, it is still a sign of victory ¨ ¨.

These examples show that misinterpretations of movements in different cultures have unpleasant consequences, and that, before any conclusion about someone's body language, it is useful to detect the region where the culture is such a person.


Skill 3: Keep stress in check

How many times have you felt stressed during a disagreement with your spouse, kids, boss, friends, or coworkers and then said or done something you later regretted? If you can quickly relieve stress and return to a calm state, you’ll not only avoid such regrets, but in many cases you’ll also help to calm the other person as well. It’s only when you’re in a calm, relaxed state that you’ll be able to know whether the situation requires a response, or whether the other person’s signals indicate it would be better to remain silent.

In situations such as a job interview, business presentation, high-pressure meeting, or introduction to a loved one’s family, for example, it’s important to manage your emotions, think on your feet, and effectively communicate under pressure.

Communicate effectively by staying calm under pressure
Use stalling tactics to give yourself time to think. Ask for a question to be repeated or for clarification of a statement before you respond.
Pause to collect your thoughts. Silence isn’t necessarily a bad thing—pausing can make you seem more in control than rushing your response.
Make one point and provide an example or supporting piece of information. If your response is too long or you waffle about a number of points, you risk losing the listener’s interest. Follow one point with an example and then gauge the listener’s reaction to tell if you should make a second point.
Deliver your words clearly. In many cases, how you say something can be as important as what you say. Speak clearly, maintain an even tone, and make eye contact. Keep your body language relaxed and open.
Wrap up with a summary and then stop. Summarize your response and then stop talking, even if it leaves a silence in the room. You don’t have to fill the silence by continuing to talk.

Quick stress relief for effective communication

When a conversation starts to get heated, you need something quick and immediate to bring down the emotional intensity. By learning to quickly reduce stress in the moment, you can safely take stock of any strong emotions you’re experiencing, regulate your feelings, and behave appropriately.

Recognize when you’re becoming stressed. Your body will let you know if you’re stressed as you communicate. Are your muscles or stomach tight? Are your hands clenched? Is your breath shallow? Are you “forgetting” to breathe?

Take a moment to calm down before deciding to continue a conversation or postpone it.

Bring your senses to the rescue. The best way to rapidly and reliably relieve stress is through the senses—sight, sound, touch, taste, smell—or movement. For example, you could pop a peppermint in your mouth, squeeze a stress ball in your pocket, take a few deep breaths, clench and relax your muscles, or simply recall a soothing, sensory-rich image. Each person responds differently to sensory input, so you need to find a coping mechanism that is soothing to you.

Look for humor in the situation. When used appropriately, humor is a great way to relieve stress when communicating. When you or those around you start taking things too seriously, find a way to lighten the mood by sharing a joke or an amusing story.

Be willing to compromise. Sometimes, if you can both bend a little, you’ll be able to find a happy middle ground that reduces the stress levels for everyone concerned. If you realize that the other person cares much more about an issue than you do, compromise may be easier for you and a good investment for the future of the relationship.

Agree to disagree, if necessary, and take time away from the situation so everyone can calm down. Go for a stroll outside if possible, or spend a few minutes meditating. Physical movement or finding a quiet place to regain your balance can quickly reduce stress.


From SOLER to SURETY for effective non-verbal communication

Background: This paper critiques the model for non-verbal communication referred to as SOLER (which stands for: "Sit squarely" "Open posture" "Lean towards the other" "Eye contact "Relax"). It has been approximately thirty years since Egan (1975) introduced his acronym SOLER as an aid for teaching and learning about non-verbal communication.

Aim: There is evidence that the SOLER framework has been widely used in nurse education with little published critical appraisal. A new acronym that might be appropriate for non-verbal communication skills training and education is proposed and this is SURETY (which stands for "Sit at an angle" "Uncross legs and arms" "Relax" "Eye contact" "Touch" "Your intuition").

The new model: The proposed model advances the SOLER model by including the use of touch and the importance of individual intuition is emphasised. The model encourages student nurse educators to also think about therapeutic space when they teach skills of non-verbal communication.


What Is Assertive Communication? 10 Real-Life Examples

For many, speaking up for oneself is easier said than done.

And while it may be uncomfortable, assertiveness is a communication style linked to a wide range of positive outcomes across multiple settings.

This article will describe what it means to be assertive, why it is so important, and how to enhance it. Ultimately, by increasing this valuable communication skill, more respectful, equitable, and fulfilling relationships may be realized.


The hierarchical structure of the model

Interactive speech processing

According to evidence from human archaeology, spoken language has existed for at least a hundred thousand years, which is much longer than that of written language ( Tattersall, 2010). It is thus generally recognized that there has been sufficient time for the human brain to evolve and adapt to the process of spoken language ( Berwick et al., 2013). As the basis of spoken language, speech processing provides an ideal window into the relation between language and the human brain.

During verbal communication, individuals convey information via vocal sounds. The sounds are produced by the speaker and perceived by the listener, both of which involve widely distributed brain regions such as the early auditory cortex (A1+), classic Broca’s area, Wernicke’s area and premotor area ( Wilson et al., 2004 2007 Pickering and Garrod, 2013). Almost all previous models on speech processing, however, focus on either speech perception of the listener, e.g. the dual stream model ( Hickok and Poeppel, 2007), or speech production of the speaker, e.g. the DIVA model ( Tourville and Guenther, 2011) and the WEAVER++ model ( Levelt et al., 1999), omitting the interactive nature of verbal communication.

To address this issue, recent fMRI-based pseudo-hyperscanning studies have been conducted. The evidence has indicated that a distinctive pattern of INS is associated with the interactive speech processing between the speaker and the listener. For instance, Stephens et al. (2010) asked a speaker to narrate a personal story in the scanner while the brain activity of the speaker was recorded. Then, the audio recording of the story was played back to the listeners while their brain activities were measured in sequence. General linear model analysis was conducted to assess the relationship between time courses of brain activities in the same brain areas in different participants. The results showed that the brain activity of the speaker during speech production was synchronized with that of the listeners during speech perception in widespread homologous brain areas.

However, the INS identified in this study may arise from the fact that the speaker hears the same vocal sounds during speech production as the listener hears during speech perception. To address this limitation, Liu et al. (2020) employed a similar paradigm to that used by Stephens et al. (2010), but specifically examined INS between the brain areas related to articulation in the speaker and those related to auditory perception in the listener. The authors found that the brain activities of the listeners in the auditory temporal cortex, including the A1+, middle temporal gyrus (MTG) and superior temporal gyrus/sulcus (STG/STS), were selectively synchronized with that of the speaker in the articulatory motor cortex (i.e. the larynx/phonation cortex) when the listener perceived intelligible speech produced by the speaker. This effect was still valid after controlling the brain activity of the speaker in the auditory cortex and that in the articulatory motor cortex of the listeners ( Liu et al., 2020). Moreover, significant INS was found between the A1+ of the listeners and the articulatory motor cortex of the speaker when listening to unintelligible foreign speech ( Liu et al., 2020) [notably, this effect was not found between the homologous brain areas in Stephens et al. (2010)]. Together, these findings suggest that during interactive speech processing, two types of INS might arise. One type is associated with a common external input such as the vocal sound, which will result in INS between the same homologous brain areas of interacting partners. The other type is associated with interactive linguistic processes such as that between the production and perception of the vocal sound. The latter will result in INS between both the same and different brain areas of interacting partners.

Additionally, previous single-brain evidence has indicated that visual inputs may facilitate or interfere with auditory processing ( McGurk and MacDonald, 1976 Skipper et al., 2007). Jiang et al. (2012) provided initial evidence to extend this effect from a single-brain situation to a dual-brain situation. Specifically, Jiang et al. (2012) had two individuals freely communicate either face-to-face or back-to-back. No scripts were given to the participants for recitation or rehearsal participants were only given a piece of news about a hot topic that they were to discuss as they would do in daily life. The fNIRS-based hyperscanning was used to simultaneously record brain activities from the two partners. Meanwhile, the entire experiment was video-recorded. The recorded videos were further coded to obtain information on communication behaviours. This information was then linked to INS to understand the underlying cognitive processes of INS. The results showed a significant INS increase in the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) between partners during a face-to-face dialogue but not during a back-to-back dialogue, a face-to-face monologue or a back-to-back monologue. Further INS-behaviour linking analyses showed that INS in the left IFG during the face-to-face dialogue was mainly contributed by audiovisual information integration ( Jiang et al., 2012). Other fNIRS-based hyperscanning studies confirmed the involvement of the left IFG during face-to-face verbal communication ( Osaka et al., 2015). They additionally identified that the right IFG was more closely associated with non-verbal communication compared to verbal communication ( Saito et al., 2010 Osaka et al., 2015 Koike et al., 2016). Together, these findings suggest that the INS in the left IFG may serve as the neural base for audiovisual integration during successful interpersonal verbal communication.

Mutual understanding

By decoding the semantic, conceptual and/or syntactic information that is embedded in the phonological and/or visual signals following interactive speech processing, communicating partners are mutually understood. Although it is obvious that mutual understanding depends on interactive speech processing, it remains unclear whether mutual understanding itself is associated with a distinctive pattern of INS relative to interpersonal speech processing in an interpersonal communication context.

Recently, an increasing number of studies have offered supportive evidence that INS in specific high-order brain areas between communicating partners may serve as the neural base for mutual understanding. For instance, during verbal communication, INS occurs not only in the lower-order linguistic areas but also in a set of higher-order linguistic and extralinguistic areas such as the MTG and STG/STS, temporoparietal junction (TPJ), precuneus, IFG, insula, premotor area, medial prefrontal cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex of the speaker and that of the listener ( Stephens et al., 2010 Silbert et al., 2014). Additionally, there is a strong positive correlation between the spatial extent of significant speaker–listener INS and the level of mutual understanding ( Stephens et al., 2010). Interestingly, this correlation was found in INS of higher-order brain areas such as the STG/STS rather than in low-order brain areas such as the A1+ ( Stephens et al., 2010 Liu et al., 2020). Moreover, INS in higher-order brain areas is not present when listening to unintelligible foreign speech ( Stephens et al., 2010 Liu et al., 2017 2020).

Most interestingly, the process of obtaining a mutual understanding can be distinguished from the interactive speech processing based not only on the spatial pattern of INS but also on the temporal pattern of INS, i.e. a temporal-spatial gradient pattern. Specifically, Stephens et al. (2010) found that the speaker–listener INS was shown in the A1+ when the time courses of the brain activity of the speaker and that of the listener were temporally aligned INS also occurred in high-order brain areas such as the TPJ, precuneus and striatum when the time course of the brain activity of the listener lagged behind that of the brain activity of the speaker by ∼1–4 s ( Stephens et al., 2010). More direct evidence is provided by Liu et al. (2020). Specifically, they calculated INS by shifting the time course of the brain activity of the listener in the auditory areas relative to that in the articulatory motor area of the speaker from −6 s (i.e. the brain activity of the listener preceded the brain activity of the speaker) to 6 s (i.e. the brain activity of the listener lagged behind that of the speaker) at an interval of 2 s. The results showed that INS initially occurred in the A1+ when the brain activity of the listener was time-aligned with that of the speaker, then extending to the STG/STS when the time course of listener lagged behind that of the speaker by 2 s. Finally, INS spread to the MTG when the brain activity of the listener lagged behind that of the speaker by 4 s. These findings were corroborated with data obtained using fNIRS-based pseudo-hyperscanning ( Liu et al., 2017). That is, the brain activity of the listener in the parietal areas was significantly synchronized with the brain activity of the speaker in the prefrontal areas with a 5-s time lag for the listener. These findings clearly demonstrated a distinctive neurocognitive process of mutual understanding other than pure auditory speech processing.

In addition, a shared representation of syntax is necessary for successful decoding of semantic information and then achieving a mutual understanding. Previously, robust behavioural evidence showed that individuals tend to use the same syntax as one another during communication ( Branigan et al., 2000 Lu et al., 2001 Cai et al., 2012). Recently, Liu et al. (2019) provided fNIRS-based hyperscanning evidence for this effect. They had two individuals take turns producing sentences. The communicating partners either employed the same or different syntax in their utterances. The results showed that the use of the same syntax between partners was accompanied by a significantly greater INS in the right posterior STG/STS than what accompanied the use of different syntax. Moreover, INS in this region is significantly correlated with the quality of communication. Therefore, this study further supports the proposition that both shared semantic and syntactic representations are associated with distinctive patterns of INS that are different from those associated with interactive speech processing.

Relationship establishment and maintenance

Humans are usually organized into different types of interpersonal relationships. The relationships can either be inherent kinship, such as that of parent–child and siblings, or emergent relationships through communication, such as that of teacher–student, friends and romantic couples. Previous evidence has indicated that interpersonal relationships usually emerge when group members act jointly or contingently with each other ( Marsh et al., 2009 Algoe, 2019), during which turn-taking plays a key role ( Pickering and Garrod, 2004 Wilson and Wilson, 2005). Thus, turn-based interpersonal communication is suggested to be a prerequisite for ( Diamond, 2003) and effective in triggering the neurocognitive signatures of interpersonal relationships ( Winterheld et al., 2013 Algoe et al., 2017). Even for an inherent kinship such as parent–child relationship, interpersonal communication also plays a supportive role ( Eisenberg et al., 1998 2007).

To better understand the role of interpersonal verbal communication in establishing and maintaining interpersonal relationships, the effect of both role assignment and inherent kinships should be excluded. Jiang et al. (2015) examined the question of how a leader emerges from a three-member leadless group discussion task. Before the experiment, no leader or follower role was assigned. Additionally, the three members of each group were not acquainted with one another prior to the experiment. The fNIRS-based hyperscanning was employed to test the neural bases of leader emergence. Most importantly, the overall procedures of the experiment were video recorded. Based on the video data as well as additional behavioural assessments, both leadership and various indexes of communication, such as communication skills and competence, initiation of communications and frequencies of verbal and non-verbal communications, were coded. The results showed that a leader spontaneously emerged from the discussion group. Moreover, the emergence of a leader was accompanied by a stronger INS in the leader–follower pairs than in the follower–follower pairs in the left TPJ. Importantly, the quality of verbal communication (i.e. the initiation of verbal communication by the leaders) rather than the quantity of verbal communication (i.e. frequencies of verbal communication between leaders and followers) enhanced the INS of the leader–follower pairs. Interestingly, neither quality nor quantity of non-verbal communication contributed significantly to leader emergence. These findings well demonstrated that verbal communication helps individuals establish leadership when the effects of role assignment and inherent kinships were excluded.

A more interesting finding from Jiang et al. (2015) is that INS between leaders and followers can successfully distinguish the leader–follower pairs from the follower–follower pairs 23 s after the onset of communication. Although no other studies on verbal communication during leader emergence have confirmed this finding, studies on non-verbal communication have provided some evidence. For instance, Konvalinka et al. (2014) examined dual-brain activity as measured by EEG-based hyperscanning during a finger-tapping task. The roles of the leader and the follower were obtained by behavioural analysis, i.e. the follower was the person who adapted to the taping behaviours of the partner. The results showed a stronger frontal alpha-suppression in the leaders than in the followers during both task anticipation and execution stages. This finding indicates that the difference in brain activity between leaders and followers already appeared before the onset of interaction. This difference, however, might reflect the personal characteristics of leaders rather than interpersonal relationships. Thus, more evidence is needed to show whether the distinctive pattern of INS in leader–follower pairs appear before the onset of communication.

Several studies provided clues about the effect of role assignment, though these studies did not test verbal communication. For instance, Sänger et al. (2012) assigned the roles of leaders and followers to participants before dyadic guitar play. Delta- and theta-band EEG signals showed significantly higher values in the phase locking index, i.e. the invariance of phases across trials in the time–frequency domain, in the leaders than in the followers even before the onset of play. However, as only one follower was involved in the experiment, it was not possible to compare INS between the leader–follower pairs and the follower–follower pairs. In a subsequent study, Sänger et al. (2013) used a similar paradigm to examine the directional INS between leaders and followers in guitar duets. However, in this study, the authors found significantly higher INS in alpha-band EEG signals from the frontal cortex of the leaders to other brain areas of the followers after the onset of play. Thus, it seemed that role assignment alone was not sufficient to induce INS that is specific to interpersonal relationships.

More direct evidence about the role of verbal communication in the establishment of interpersonal relationships comes from a recent study ( Zheng et al., 2020). To separate the effect of verbal communication, role assignment and interpersonal relationships, Zheng et al. (2020) employed a dyadic resting-state paradigm. Specifically, haemodynamic brain activities were collected from teachers and students using fNIRS-based hyperscanning when no task was conducted, with participants’ eyes closed, both before and after a one-to-one teaching task. The results prior to teaching did not show any significant INS even when the roles of teachers and that of students had been assigned to participants. Additionally, no significant INS was shown after verbal communication when there was no role assignment among participants. However, when both roles were assigned among participants and verbal communication occurred, i.e. after teaching, a significant increase in INS was found between teachers and students. Moreover, INS after teaching was significantly higher than that before teaching. Additionally, teacher–student INS appeared only after a turn-taking mode of teaching but not after a lecturing or video mode of teaching. Behavioural assessment confirmed the creation of teacher–student affiliative bonds. The strength of affiliative bonds after a turn-taking mode of teaching was significantly higher than that after a lecturing mode of teaching and marginally higher than that after a video mode of teaching. Moreover, the increased INS in the resting state was significantly correlated with the strength of teacher–student affiliative bonds after a turn-taking mode of teaching. These findings together suggest that both the role assignment and the reciprocity of verbal communication are necessary for the establishment of the teacher–student relationship.

Additional evidence comes from parent–child verbal communication. A recent study by Nguyen et al. (2020) examined mother–child INS during a free verbal communication task using fNIRS-based hyperscanning. The results showed that not only did mother–child verbal communication induce higher INS than communication between random pairs but also that INS was gradually enhanced over the course of verbal communication. Additionally, turn-taking contributed mostly to the enhancement of INS relative to other indexes of verbal communication, such as content relevance or contingency. Even for preverbal children, modes of communication such as mutual gaze and smiling also contribute to INS between the child and the adult ( Piazza et al., 2020). These findings suggest that even for inherent kinships, verbal and non-verbal communications, turn-taking in particular, can further strengthen interpersonal relationships.

Taken together, these findings provide supportive evidence for the important role of verbal communication in establishing and maintaining interpersonal relationships when other factors, such as role assignment and inherent kinships, are considered.


Head Movements

Bowing is a nonverbal greeting ritual that is more common in Asian cultures than Western cultures, but the head nod, which is a common form of acknowledgement in many cultures, is actually an abbreviated bow. Japan is considered a noncontact culture , which refers to cultural groups in which people stand farther apart while talking, make less eye contact, and touch less during regular interactions. Because of this, bowing is the preferred nonverbal greeting over handshaking. Bows vary based on status, with higher status people bowing the least. For example, in order to indicate the status of another person, a Japanese businessperson may bow deeply. An interesting ritual associated with the bow is the exchange of business cards when greeting someone in Japan. This exchange allows each person to view the other’s occupation and title, which provides useful information about the other’s status and determines who should bow more. Since bowing gives each person a good view of the other person’s shoes, it is very important to have clean shoes that are in good condition, since they play an important part of initial impression formation.


Proxemics

Proxemics refers to the study of how space and distance influence communication. We only need look at the ways in which space shows up in common metaphors to see that space, communication, and relationships are closely related. For example, when we are content with and attracted to someone, we say we are “close” to him or her. When we lose connection with someone, we may say he or she is “distant.” In general, space influences how people communicate and behave. Smaller spaces with a higher density of people often lead to breaches of our personal space bubbles. If this is a setting in which this type of density is expected beforehand, like at a crowded concert or on a train during rush hour, then we make various communicative adjustments to manage the space issue. Unexpected breaches of personal space can lead to negative reactions, especially if we feel someone has violated our space voluntarily, meaning that a crowding situation didn’t force them into our space. Additionally, research has shown that crowding can lead to criminal or delinquent behavior, known as a “mob mentality” (Andersen, 1999). To better understand how proxemics functions in nonverbal communication, we will more closely examine the proxemic distances associated with personal space and the concept of territoriality.


Silence: The Secret Communication Tool

What if I told you silence is good for communication? Would you believe me?

You wouldn&rsquot be alone if you said no. Most people probably would disagree with me. In fact, many would argue that silence isn&rsquot even communication at all.

In reality, though, silence can be a very effective communication tool. Communication is simply about conveying a message, and sometimes silence can do that better than any words.

You may have heard the statistic that 93 percent of communication is nonverbal. It comes from research by Dr. Albert Mehrabian. He found that words convey only seven percent of our message, while the rest of communication occurs through our tone, volume, facial expressions, gestures, posture and the like. So if the majority of communication is nonverbal, doesn&rsquot it make sense that silence could be good communication?

In relationships, communication often becomes a game of oneupsmanship, rather than an exchange of ideas. The goal becomes to get the last word or have your idea win out, instead of a sharing of ideas. When communication functions in this way in a relationship, division is fostered rather than unity. It&rsquos no wonder that &ldquocommunication problems&rdquo is the top problem cited by partners coming to couples counseling.

Here are three reasons to use silence in your communication:

  • Communicate better. Many of us talk too much. All of us occasionally can be guilty of overtalking a subject to the extent that our point is missed. Silence forces us to shut up and get our message across in fewer words. Ironically, fewer words can result in a clearer, stronger message.
  • Hear what&rsquos really being said. Keeping our tongue quiet frees us up to listen to our partner. When we&rsquore not running off at the mouth, we can focus on what the other person is saying, plus pay attention to their nonverbal communication.
  • Reach resolution faster. The goal of communication should be to share information and reach a decision, not to win. Being silent at times not only reduces the noise but also speeds up resolution.

It&rsquos important to keep in mind that silence can be misused, too. Some people use it to express anger others to hurt or punish their partner. It&rsquos commonly used in abusive relationships. But silence can be used for good as well as bad. So don&rsquot let any negative experiences with silence keep you from using one of the best forms of communication.

It does take some courage to use silence as a communication tool, and it&rsquos not always easy to do. Ironically, we can feel more comfortable and safer if we keep talking. It&rsquos risky to leave our words hanging without further explanation or defense. But there&rsquos power in that silence, too.

Give silence a try. It can take some practice to learn how and when to use it correctly, so be patient and give yourself some time to learn. But when you do learn how to use silence effectively, look out. Your communication will become much more powerful.


Conclusions

This study has presented the preliminary findings of a matched study conducted to investigate similarities and differences between two teaching environments: the traditional face-to-face (turn-taking) environment and an online (non-turn-taking) environment called the LBD eClassroom. Two sections of the same course were compared. The course objectives, the content, and the teaching pedagogy (experiential learning) were the same, as were the teaching team, the time frames and duration, the assignments, and grading criteria. Due to the nature of the study, there were some variables that could not be kept constant, such as student interest in the course at the outset.

Instruments like the GUIDATA were employed as social proxies used for online social visualization, and as instantaneous feedback tools. Because the most striking differences between learning face-to-face and learning online that emerged from these methods are related to interactivity, the tone of this article may suggest a preference for online education, which showed more plentiful and distributed interaction. This is not our position, however. Each environment has its distinct advantages and opportunities for teaching. The issue is not which venue is better or worse. The goal of the inquiry is to understand both the similarities and the differences in order to formulate online learning theories and improve teaching effectiveness across the board.

In the non-turn-taking collaborative interaction that occurs in the online environment used in this study, there is no theoretical limit for the data flow in number of words that can be generated. The effective limit is based on a synthesis of the groups' combined reading, comprehending, and typing skills. Because the LBD eClassroom is designed without auto-scrolling, participants read, comprehend, and respond at their own speed. Everyone can generate and send data when they are ready, and get as much data as they want at any given time. Once a message is posted into the LBD eClassroom, it becomes transparent and remains available to everyone there is no need to repeat, or to take notes. In contrast, in the face-to-face class session, all words, statements, and interactions disappear and are held only in an individual's memory.

The most substantial findings of this research to date regarding differences between turn-taking and non-turn-taking collaborative interactions are related to the issue of time. Intriguing questions are raised: Do participants who are engaged in the environment of synchronous non-turn-taking communication used in this study in fact create more time for themselves? What are the implications and applications of the extra 46 minutes it takes to read out the statements generated in a 30-minute real-time online peer-centered collaborative discussion vs. a face-to-face turn-taking instructor-centered discussion? If time is money, the participants in the online class are richer than their face-to-face counterparts. May one also assume that if information is power, and the data flow generated online is not only larger, but more varied, visible, and lasting than face-to-face, that online students would be more productive and have a better sense of self and others?

McLuhan (1969) wrote about how the linearity of a print-based information technology limits people's thought patterns. Words follow words, lines follow lines, paragraphs follow paragraphs, pages follow pages and so on, in a single, one-way necessary order, from the first page to the last. In McLuhan's view, learning through a linear medium discourages flexible, open-ended, multidirectional, and multidimensional thought. “Instead of being authoritative, books become authoritarian, demanding we think in a straight line, from a fixed point of view” ( Alexenberg, 2004). Designed to be read in privacy, McLuhan believed that books encourage isolation and non-involvement with others, so that the book's medium becomes stronger than its content. One could make a similar statement about turn-taking interaction as well. As one utterance follows the next, the process of taking turns (i.e., the anxiety of waiting/fearing to be called upon or blowing the chance, etc.) may become more important than the message ultimately shared, often out of sync as a result of having had to wait for one's turn.

The Internet is a new text- and graphics-based medium, with a powerful non-linear potential. As a medium, it can foster a polylogue of words and images where freshness, vividness, and acute awareness permeate the discussions. Venturing into this new land may change us, no matter how we cling to the familiarity we know. We propose that one of the changes, at least as regards synchronous CMC, may involve turn-taking and the nature of group participation.


From SOLER to SURETY for effective non-verbal communication

Background: This paper critiques the model for non-verbal communication referred to as SOLER (which stands for: "Sit squarely" "Open posture" "Lean towards the other" "Eye contact "Relax"). It has been approximately thirty years since Egan (1975) introduced his acronym SOLER as an aid for teaching and learning about non-verbal communication.

Aim: There is evidence that the SOLER framework has been widely used in nurse education with little published critical appraisal. A new acronym that might be appropriate for non-verbal communication skills training and education is proposed and this is SURETY (which stands for "Sit at an angle" "Uncross legs and arms" "Relax" "Eye contact" "Touch" "Your intuition").

The new model: The proposed model advances the SOLER model by including the use of touch and the importance of individual intuition is emphasised. The model encourages student nurse educators to also think about therapeutic space when they teach skills of non-verbal communication.


Doctorina - Happy Life

The more we practice paying attention to the details of their communication with others, the more we begin to notice how much is actually missing - so tiny messages transmitted subtle non-verbal communication, tone of voice or choice of words, because the other person does not dare to express them directly or not itself is not aware of, and that would certainly improve the relationship if they were observed and clarified.

Usually these are not the elements that will significantly reduce the quality of communication, which is one reason why they do not recognize - but the other reason is that often we do not have any experience on how to jump and improve relationships can be to learn to pay attention.

In many situations we do not follow enough has been said to be beset by or answering the right question at the right time. Everyone has a different experience of resolved and unresolved arguments, or opinions of other people subsequently and indirectly . Sometimes important things can be explained and misunderstandings avoided if we recognize the problem, and correctly translate the words of another person, or find the right words to explain our position, but, as with many other truly important aspects of life we ​​rarely take the time to afford it.

I have the impression that many people in situations where they are not sure what to say, trying to think of a quick response through rationally learned ideas, empty of humor or provocation, or simply avoid or refrain from confrontation. It's quite another thing when in such situations, listen to your body and feels that it's sending. Listening to the feelings of you, prevevši it in words, identify the problem and find the right response. One must practice, because in the course of communication our focus is directed towards the outside and it is much harder to notice subtle psychosomatic reactions.

Often people say they know there is no point in controlling it, but they want to relax and be spontaneous. The conflict between spontaneity and the effort to communicate better quality common as soon as we invest time and energy in that direction.
In my experience, it's easy for most people to notice, that the 'spontaneous' and automatic reactions, those answers and behaviors that emerge from us before we think about it, almost before we even notice, often learned defensive coping mechanisms, or ways expression learned from the environment, rather than a genuine and honest reactions that really express who we are. It is important to learn not to react automatically. We need to give yourself time to feel what is the right answer our feelings . Provided that we have learned to be honest with yourself.

In a way, as if afraid to take the majority of the time and not answer immediately, as we have learned to expect that the other person will use that time to 'outperform' and 'defeat' in communication. The reality is quite the opposite: not only in many situations, the other person does not have any need for it, rather than getting yourself time, sending him a message on several levels: one of them is that we care about the outcome of the communication and to carefully think about what he said and what we say, and the second is that we are aware, present and reacting with genuine feelings (which automatically means an attitude of self-esteem). Moreover, in many situations where the other person is communicating inappropriately, the time that the answer often prompts her to reflect on her own behavior.

Nonverbal communication carries the most important message: not only aware of, and expressed thoughts and feelings, but even the unconscious ones. No need to avoid the trap and-white judgment and believing that a specific movement or gesture means exactly what we ascribe to him. Many eager observers of nonverbal communication might annoy you, convincing you that you are thinking what they think you think, try not to become one of them.

Every gesture and mime change is necessary to compare with all the other elements of nonverbal and verbal communication, rather than being interpreted separately. Also, the elements of the situation may affect the person's feelings, as well as random thoughts, memories and associations, and also the embarrassment if a person is aware that everything I watch (the discomfort that will increase manifold hasty interpretation!), Similar to a lie detector innocent suspects can be further upset by false if in fear of being misunderstood and wrongly accused. I recommend, as with many other aspects of life, that the interpretation of non-verbal communication others prefer to let their feelings and overall impression, rather than a conscious and rational analysis.

If you consciously try to control their nonverbal speech to send the message that you do not feel real, it is usually unsuccessful, except for the extremely skilled actors. The nature of nonverbal communication is honest expression, and if we manage to control some parts of the body, others will send the right message. What we need to do - for our own sake even more than for results - that in itself develop true feelings that we want to convey non-verbal speech.

Any communication with the other person, all she say and how we say it, affect its relationship with us and further communication - ie. how much on a separate occasion they have the confidence to open up to us. It's easy to run into 'spiritual realms' - everyday communication is where true spirituality begins.

We often say something like "I did everything I could . I no longer know how to talk to that person! 'But is that really true? Is there maybe something else that we can say or do . but we have the will, courage or humility? Maybe even a lot of things? Often, 'all we could do' in reality means' all we could do without risking too much or compromising their ego. "

Similarly as in relation to themselves, and in their relationships with others takes time and perseverance to rehearse a full presence in the moment, a profound awareness of and sensitivity to all that is happening within us and within us. It is even more difficult to learn to communicate their thoughts in an honest and compassionate manner. But once you learn it, our relationships - what's most important to quality of life - have a chance to flourish.
Copyright Kosjenka Muk, 2006

Communication is one of the basic needs of human existence, and can be defined as the transmission or exchange of information between the sender wants to communicate a message and a recipient whose task is to decode it. One of the basic conditions that enable social interaction is the ability to communicate.
Verbal communication refers to the actual words used in the conversation. It is believed that the main function of language reporting on ideas, events and things that are not immediately present.Nonverbal communication is the interpersonal behavior of all the spoken words.
Whether it is verbal or non-verbal, communication takes place using the characters. The signs are, with some conditions, whatever it is, if the receiver of the message have some meaning, and decoded into "meaning." It is clear that the characteristics of the recipient, as well as the social context, determine the meaning that he will be given a received character.

But when it comes to non-verbal behavior, the signs are social norms that are implied. Intention and consciousness of the person who conveys the necessary preconditions are not, as is often non-verbally convey and what we do not want, or do not intend to reveal about themselves.
Some of our mechanical actions and provide the type of information to which neither we nor those around us are not aware warned. We perform an action, and it is perceived. Its meaning has been read, but not to vote. When "airing mood" becomes conscious, it can be controlled.

Non-verbal communication performs three functions. One part of our non-verbal behavior directed regulation of the mechanism of social interaction, the second part is related to the expression of opinions, and the third is related to the expression of emotional states.
Feeling and expressing emotions is an integral part of life. Emotions are related to human behavior. If you're not sure how you feel, but you realize that you behave in a way that sends a clear message, from your behavior, you can understand how you feel. For example, if you talk to someone while you have a friend and an angry look on his face, it can not because you are angry or dissatisfied with this person without being aware of it.
Much of the nonverbal communication crosses all international and linguistic boundaries, but some parts are different in different cultures. In any case, the hidden language complements the spoken word in ways that are only recently beginning to understand better.
People who good command of nonverbal communication probably work more effectively in an intercultural arena, because we communicate nonverbally quickly gives what we need to determine - whether the other person has confidence in us, is us, and we tend to be optimistic about the outcome of the meeting. All this happens without a single spoken word.

The main channels of nonverbal communication are visual (seeing, eye contact and view), facial expressions, body language (contact, posture, gestures, nod), personal space, and show yourself parajezik. The most important aspect of nonverbal behavior is considered a visual interaction, where the vision is more important than seeing the eye contact because it provides access to many non-verbal signs.
The man most of his time is spent in communication with other people. The man in the interaction, face to face, mainly focusing on his words, and forgetting that at the same time his movements, attitudes and facial expressions tell a story.

Non-verbal communication consists of a multitude of characters, each with its own meaning. We communicate daily with these characters and "read" them with other people, and they do not even realize it. In most cases we do not know the typical movements and facial expressions.
Many gestures absorbed from the social environment in which we live, and they are in our lives strongly modify the unconscious stimulating the social customs. I have an innate expressions often drastically modified by social pressures. Human passion exercise movement is such that in the past have tried to learn "speaker gestures" despite the fact that a small number of people in need of such instruction.

At each interaction emotional send out signals, and these signals affect the people around us. What we are socially more appropriate, to better monitor the signals that are sent to. Until such transfer is due to unconscious imitation of emotions that we see in some other, using unwitting motor mimicry, their facial expressions, gestures, tone, and other nonverbal expressions of emotion.

Most of the data from the non-verbal communication is decrypted in the limbic system, the early preverbal part of the brain that controls emotions and that is beyond our conscious control. An example is a strong communicator subconscious iris. When something attracts our interest, the iris expands. These changes can hardly be measured, but the effect can be dramatic, as this other people look more attractive.

Non-verbal communication is much more important and complex aspect of interpersonal interaction than they appear at first glance can do.

Like other species, we are ruled by biological rules that control our actions, reactions, body language, gestures. People are rarely aware of your posture, movements and gestures can tell the story of a very different man from the one spoken in their own voice.
From the professional point of view, whenever a call ¨ ¨ perceptive or intuitive ¨ ¨ person, we think of his or her ability to detect the expression of meaning gestures of another person and compare them with what signal words. Or else, when we say that we have a hunch ¨ ¨ ¨ or ¨ feeling in my stomach that someone has lied to us, in fact we find that his body language and spoken words do not match.

Women usually has a better ability to perceive than men, and this fact led to one of the famous thesis on female intuition ¨ ¨. Women have an innate ability to collect and decipher the unspoken signals, as they have a very strong sense of detail. Consequently, very few men and women staff agree to live with it, and vice versa, most women are able to pull a man's hat on his eyes and that he was not aware of that.

This female intuition is especially pronounced in women who have just given birth. During the first years of the mother relies exclusively on movements in the communication link with their child, and it is believed that this is why women often have a more developed ability to perceive than men.

Are still being researched and debated in order to reveal the movements of the signals are inborn, learned, genetically transferred or acquired in some other way. Conducted a study in which they observed the blind and / or deaf people who could not learn by listening to signals from movements or watching. Studies have shown that the expression of laughter in children who are born deaf or blind occur independently of whether taught or simulated. Research has supported some of Darwin's original beliefs about inborn gestures when they studied the facial expressions of people from five mutually very distant cultures. They found that each culture uses the same basic facial expressions to show feeling, which led them to conclude that it is undoubtedly an innate gestures.

Much of our basic movements is learned behavior, such as the meaning of many gestures of a specific culture to which we belong. Most of the basic communication gestures are the same all over the world. People laugh when they are happy, frowning stare or scowl when they are sad or angry.Nodding almost everywhere means that ¨ ¨ or agree with something. It is an inborn nod your head that is probably innate movement, because it serves the deaf and blind people. Swinging its head from side to side indicates ¨ ¨ ne and that is a sign of disagreement also equal everywhere, and the movement can be learned in childhood. When a child turns to the side and does not accept the mother's breast.

The evolutionary origin of some movements can establish deep in our primitive past. Gnashing of teeth comes from the act of assault, and modern man is so ridicules or shows their enemy though, of course, one does not intend to attack the teeth. Laughter is initially represented a threat, and a smile today expressed satisfaction and pleasure. Shrug is also a good example that shows the movements generally accepted that a person does not know or understand what is being said. It is a complex movement in three parts: exposed palms, elevated and retracted his shoulders and raised his eyebrows.

Just as spoken language varies from one culture to another, so it is with the express movement. In a culture of individual gesture is common to all, while the second may seem meaningless or, in turn, have a completely different meaning.

Sign round toes (¨ ¨ OK) gesture - meaning ¨ ¨ OK is widespread in all English-speaking countries, but though its meaning is rapidly spreading through Europe and Asia, some countries have different meaning and origin. In France, for example, means ¨ ¨ zero ¨ or ¨ nothing in Japan may mean ¨ ¨ money.

The movement of the thumb raised - the UK, Australia and New Zealand thumbs-up has three meanings. It is generally recognized in that hitchhiker, then typically a sign confirming that everything was all right, but when it suddenly twitches his thumb up, then we get the meaning ¨ There you go! ¨ or ¨ ¨ fall victim. In some countries, such as Greece, the main thing is full of meaning ¨ ¨ my hat.

V-sign - this is a sign widely accepted in Australia, New Zealand and the UK and usually implies ¨ Here! ¨. Winston Churchill popularized the V sign of victory in the second. World War II, but he was the one sign with two fingers did palm forward. Palm facing the speaker, however, the sign is an obscene insult. In many parts of Europe V sign with the palm inwards, it is still a sign of victory ¨ ¨.

These examples show that misinterpretations of movements in different cultures have unpleasant consequences, and that, before any conclusion about someone's body language, it is useful to detect the region where the culture is such a person.


Skill 3: Keep stress in check

How many times have you felt stressed during a disagreement with your spouse, kids, boss, friends, or coworkers and then said or done something you later regretted? If you can quickly relieve stress and return to a calm state, you’ll not only avoid such regrets, but in many cases you’ll also help to calm the other person as well. It’s only when you’re in a calm, relaxed state that you’ll be able to know whether the situation requires a response, or whether the other person’s signals indicate it would be better to remain silent.

In situations such as a job interview, business presentation, high-pressure meeting, or introduction to a loved one’s family, for example, it’s important to manage your emotions, think on your feet, and effectively communicate under pressure.

Communicate effectively by staying calm under pressure
Use stalling tactics to give yourself time to think. Ask for a question to be repeated or for clarification of a statement before you respond.
Pause to collect your thoughts. Silence isn’t necessarily a bad thing—pausing can make you seem more in control than rushing your response.
Make one point and provide an example or supporting piece of information. If your response is too long or you waffle about a number of points, you risk losing the listener’s interest. Follow one point with an example and then gauge the listener’s reaction to tell if you should make a second point.
Deliver your words clearly. In many cases, how you say something can be as important as what you say. Speak clearly, maintain an even tone, and make eye contact. Keep your body language relaxed and open.
Wrap up with a summary and then stop. Summarize your response and then stop talking, even if it leaves a silence in the room. You don’t have to fill the silence by continuing to talk.

Quick stress relief for effective communication

When a conversation starts to get heated, you need something quick and immediate to bring down the emotional intensity. By learning to quickly reduce stress in the moment, you can safely take stock of any strong emotions you’re experiencing, regulate your feelings, and behave appropriately.

Recognize when you’re becoming stressed. Your body will let you know if you’re stressed as you communicate. Are your muscles or stomach tight? Are your hands clenched? Is your breath shallow? Are you “forgetting” to breathe?

Take a moment to calm down before deciding to continue a conversation or postpone it.

Bring your senses to the rescue. The best way to rapidly and reliably relieve stress is through the senses—sight, sound, touch, taste, smell—or movement. For example, you could pop a peppermint in your mouth, squeeze a stress ball in your pocket, take a few deep breaths, clench and relax your muscles, or simply recall a soothing, sensory-rich image. Each person responds differently to sensory input, so you need to find a coping mechanism that is soothing to you.

Look for humor in the situation. When used appropriately, humor is a great way to relieve stress when communicating. When you or those around you start taking things too seriously, find a way to lighten the mood by sharing a joke or an amusing story.

Be willing to compromise. Sometimes, if you can both bend a little, you’ll be able to find a happy middle ground that reduces the stress levels for everyone concerned. If you realize that the other person cares much more about an issue than you do, compromise may be easier for you and a good investment for the future of the relationship.

Agree to disagree, if necessary, and take time away from the situation so everyone can calm down. Go for a stroll outside if possible, or spend a few minutes meditating. Physical movement or finding a quiet place to regain your balance can quickly reduce stress.


What Is Assertive Communication? 10 Real-Life Examples

For many, speaking up for oneself is easier said than done.

And while it may be uncomfortable, assertiveness is a communication style linked to a wide range of positive outcomes across multiple settings.

This article will describe what it means to be assertive, why it is so important, and how to enhance it. Ultimately, by increasing this valuable communication skill, more respectful, equitable, and fulfilling relationships may be realized.


3. Communication factors that influence learner achievement

Factors that could either contribute to effective and meaningful communication between educators and learners or impede the learning process resulting in a communication breakdown are relevant and warrant attention. Verbal communication, non-verbal communication, verbal aggression, communication apprehension, immediacy and teaching styles are all relevant factors discussed in the following sections.

3.1. Verbal communication

Educators and learners alike should be proficient in the Language of Learning and Teaching (LOLT) to be able to communicate effectively. In South Africa many learners receive instruction in English - a language that is not their mother tongue (Uys etਊl., 2007). These authors express concern that not all educators pay attention to the four basic language skills of reading, writing, speaking and listening. Similarly, Van der Poll and Van der Poll (2007) argue that learners need to obtain a level of mastery in the language in which they receive instruction to be able to understand the learning content in other subjects. They claim that understanding the LOLT is a requirement for learners if they wish to be academically successful. If learners are not proficient in the medium of instruction (Legotla etਊl., 2002) they might underachieve. In South Africa, learners are taught in either a first, second or third additional language. These learners have difficulty comprehending learning content as it is presented in a language that is not their mother tongue. In support of Legotla etਊl. (2002), Howie (2005) states that learners in urban areas who speak the language of instruction and have had considerable exposure to that language have a greater chance at succeeding than learners in rural areas. In South Africa, English has become the medium of instruction preferred by many parents, learners and institutions of learning. Jones (1990) as cited in McLauchlin (2007) points out that learners who have trouble understanding the LOLT are penalized because they are not able to express themselves adequately during spoken and written communication activities. Areas of potential conflict relating to verbal communication include dialect differences, especially grammar, morphology, vocabulary semantics and discussion modes. Learners who speak any non-standard dialect are often perceived as uneducated or less intelligent (Bennett, 2007).

Wahyuni (2017) in his study on the power of both verbal and non-verbal communication in leaning, notes the following regarding verbal communication. Educators who are proficient in the medium of instruction contribute significantly towards improving learner performance because they appear to have the skill in transferring information in both the written and spoken word in an effective manner. They conclude by stating and confirming the views in this study of the authors that good and effective communication skills enhance teaching and learning and ultimately learner performance.

Therefore, social interaction requires the use of language in a context that manifests modalities of effective communication. People have an innate ability to put their understanding into words – this essentially marks an advance in both understanding and development and as such have critical implications for teachers, who are regarded as the facilitators of learning (Eggen and Kauchak, 2014). Verbal communication therefore poses a threat to the educational experience, especially if learners are not proficient in the LOLT. This argument seems to be true for educators as well for those who have difficulty expressing themselves in English.

3.2. Non-verbal communication

According to Bambaeerooi and Shokrpour (2017), non-verbal communication is more refined in a way that it carries more depth during communication, more so in a teaching and learning environment. Therefore, its importance should not be underrated during teaching and learning as well as the impact that it could have on learner achievement. Bennett (2007) concurs that non-verbal communication finds expression in messages sent by individuals through unconscious body movements, such as facial expressions, gestures (kinesics), the unconscious use of personal space (proxemics) and unconscious physical touching (haptic). During communication activities, especially in classrooms, educators use gestures to impart information regarding subject matter, feelings and opinions. These gestures happen consciously or unconsciously but contribute significantly towards the overall communication activity. According to Raman and Sharma (2007), the verbal aspect of communication conveys only approximately 35% of the message, whereas the non-verbal component carries about 65% of the message. Therefore, the importance of non-verbal communication during classroom communication activities should not be underestimated as it could contribute either positively or negatively to the learning experience. An understanding of the impact that gestures have on people's perceptions of others will lead to informed and conscious choices regarding the use of certain gestures. Educators who work in multicultural and diverse classrooms should be aware of the importance of gestures during interaction with learners. In this regard, Ryan (1995) exhorts that appropriate actions should be selected to convey the intended message so that it can be interpreted correctly. Le Roux (2002) recommends that educators in South Africa remain perceptive to non-verbal messages that are conveyed in multicultural classroom environments. Gestures also assist learners in distinguishing between facts and opinions, while clarifying the meaning of terms. Learners even model certain gestures learnt from their educators (Orton, 2007). Similarly, Baringer and McCrosky (2000) state that non-verbal immediacy in the classroom results in both learners and educators achieving their goal, that is, enabling educators to convey their message effectively and learners to grasp learning content. In this way educational outcomes are achieved. Therefore, one may deduce that if educators and learners are aware of the important relationship between non-verbal communication and learning, they could identify ways of improving learner performance.

3.3. Verbal aggression

Miscommunication between educators and learners could be the cause of instances of verbal aggression reported in schools in South Africa (Prins, 2009). Incongruities of this nature negatively affect the relationship between educators and learners and the learning experience. De Wet (2006) claims that both educators and learners make themselves guilty of verbal aggression. Hassandri etਊl., (2007) discuss the negative consequences of verbal aggression and mention that it could instill feelings of low self-worth and result in the development of low self-concept. Verbal aggression thus defeats the purpose of transferring knowledge, values and a skill set that encourages good citizenship. In addition, the new generation of learners seem to be less willing to accept verbal abuse from educators.

Learners who have been subjected to this form of abuse should focus on developing positive interpersonal relations and, in extreme cases, seek professional assistance. Myburgh and Poggenpoel (2009) state that learners who have been affected should focus on developing good interpersonal relations. Educators and learners should also improve their listening skills for increased comprehension of what is being said instead of listening only to provide a response. Uludag (2013) investigated the influence aggression has on learner achievement and have found that influences academic performance negatively. His study reveals that even students who display aggressive behaviour obtain lower scores than learners who have less aggressive tendencies. This finding confirms prior studies findings that aggressive behaviour displayed by either learners or educators negatively impact learner performance.

3.4. Communication apprehension

When educators or learners have a fear of communicating with one another they experience communication apprehension (Robinson, 2007). Educators and learners could experience this apprehension in a classroom setting as the LOLT may not be their mother tongue. Learners experience anxiety or fear of embarrassment should they respond to educators' questions or participate in classroom discussions. Miller and Nadler (2009) explain that learners' levels of anxiety and fear can be so high before communicating that they fail to communicate effectively with educators or fellow learners. Studies conducted by Neer (1990) and Robinson (2007) have confirmed that learners experience communication apprehension in educational environments and educators should help learners to gain confidence and participate in classroom discussions. It is not only learners who are affected, educators also experience communication apprehension, especially new educators entering the field. Roby's (2009) research in this regard reveals that educators are apprehensive about communicating in groups, public speaking and in some instances one-on-one dialogues. A fear of communicating publicly could adversely affect their performance in class and have a negative impact on learner achievement. More importantly, miscommunication can occur as a result of communication apprehension and influence how learners interpret the messages they are sending.

3.5. Immediacy

It is difficult for learning to take place in a hostile learning environment. Good interpersonal relationships should exist between educators and learners to promote the acquisition of knowledge and skills. Robinson (2007) asserts that good relationships between educators and learners create a positive learning environment and reduce the physical and psychological distance between educators and learners. In so doing, learning becomes a pleasant experience which educators should strive towards achieving. Bainbridge-Frymier and Houser (2000) believe that effective communication skills are important to achieve good teaching practices, referential skill, ego support and conflict management. Referential skill implies the process of explaining and clarifying, which is significant in the context of learning and teaching and remains key to learners achieving educational outcomes. Educators provide direction in developing good interpersonal relationships with learners and in this regard should lead by example as learners often model their behaviours. Hawking (2005) supports this notion that educators play a crucial role in fostering a classroom environment that is conducive to teaching and learning. It should be an environment where learners have the freedom to express their opinions frankly and honestly. Attentive listening, coupled with good interpersonal relations in our experience with the new generation of learners, has shown that learners have a voice and that they want educators to listen to their viewpoints. According to Guffey and Loewy (2011), listening is an intricate process that needs communicators to be attentive not only to their surroundings, but also to the senders who are conveying information in a way. Educators should have effective listening skills to understand problems that learners experience during the transfer of knowledge. Similarly, learners should have good listening skills because they also need to understand the messages communicated to them by their educators. Noteworthy, in this regard, is the argument by Berko etਊl. (2010) that listening is enhanced if the listener is not prone to prejudgement, understands that communication is a two-way process and that both senders and receivers have a responsibility to listen attentively during communication activities.

Furthermore, a distinction needs to be drawn between immediacy and interpersonal skills which are both essential requisites for effective communication. Immediacy refers to good interpersonal relationships, whereas interpersonal skills refer to soft skills that people require to be successful and that are important during communication activities (Young, 2005). Interpersonal skills are needed during interactions especially when striving towards achieving a specific goal (Osakwe, 2009). It is also necessary to demonstrate appropriate social behaviours that are appropriate to specific contexts such as a classroom environment and learners should know this (Osakwe, 2009). Ultimately, amiable and caring relationships will develop between educators and learners and, in so doing, foster good social, emotional and academic functioning of learners (Bergsman etਊl., 2013).

Akif Sözer (2019) investigated educator immediacy based on how learners perceived educator behaviour. The results reveal that learners who have good interpersonal relationships with learners and demonstrate positive behaviour in classes are more effective than educators who do not have sound relationships with learners. Noteworthy of this study is that immediacy was frequently observed by way of non-verbal immediacy. This is implying that educators were observed through their actions such as gestures, eye contact and even smiling. Educators who frequently displayed a friendly attitude towards learners were deemed to be more efficient and the results of these learners were better than learners, who perceived their educators in a negative light.

3.6. Teaching as an interactive process

Teaching is a communicative activity in which the transfer of information or knowledge takes place. The way messages are conveyed determines the success or failure of an educational activity (Osakwe, 2009). Teaching styles should be varied to reach as many learners as possible. Mji and Magato (2006) contend that varying teaching styles accommodate most learners. In addition, Duta etਊl. (2014) state that educators' viewpoints regarding a topic affects the teaching style/s they employ in the learning environment. They explain that educators have a personal, pedagogical or interactional stance. The personal viewpoint focusses on how educators and learners perceive their roles in an educational environment. Educators should not be viewed as knowledge banks responsible for educating learners, nor should learners be recipients of knowledge. Rather, learners should be engaged in the learning process and educators should facilitate the learning process. The pedagogical viewpoint refers specifically to how educators view their responsibility as facilitators and how learners view their responsibilities as learners in an educational context. The interactional viewpoint was of primary importance to this study, describing how educators interact in the teaching environment and how learners perform their tasks in the classroom.

As the authors of this paper, we argue that an understanding of communication differences extends beyond the mere desire for constructive pedagogical relationships and enabling classroom interactions. These engagements promote healthy teacher-learner relationships which in turn embed effective communicative practices that seek the continuous negotiation and renegotiation of identities between the various participants (educators and learners) involved. Ultimately, teaching, learning and being able to function in a group context, such as multicultural educational settings mean being aware of differences and essentially, embracing diversity. An interactional approach is therefore tantamount to the acquisition of a skill set that will equip learners to think critically and solve problems, especially in a multicultural schooling context. In addition, the advent of the computer age has changed the face of education. Lehman and Dufrene (2011) state that constant improvements in technology have broadened communication preferences for organisations such as schools. However, technology should enhance communication in the classroom and not replace the important role of the educator. The use of technology enhances classroom communication and enriches learning experiences for learners (Lim and Morris, 2009), especially in well-resourced schools. Yet, there are schools that lack resources, especially those in rural areas.


The hierarchical structure of the model

Interactive speech processing

According to evidence from human archaeology, spoken language has existed for at least a hundred thousand years, which is much longer than that of written language ( Tattersall, 2010). It is thus generally recognized that there has been sufficient time for the human brain to evolve and adapt to the process of spoken language ( Berwick et al., 2013). As the basis of spoken language, speech processing provides an ideal window into the relation between language and the human brain.

During verbal communication, individuals convey information via vocal sounds. The sounds are produced by the speaker and perceived by the listener, both of which involve widely distributed brain regions such as the early auditory cortex (A1+), classic Broca’s area, Wernicke’s area and premotor area ( Wilson et al., 2004 2007 Pickering and Garrod, 2013). Almost all previous models on speech processing, however, focus on either speech perception of the listener, e.g. the dual stream model ( Hickok and Poeppel, 2007), or speech production of the speaker, e.g. the DIVA model ( Tourville and Guenther, 2011) and the WEAVER++ model ( Levelt et al., 1999), omitting the interactive nature of verbal communication.

To address this issue, recent fMRI-based pseudo-hyperscanning studies have been conducted. The evidence has indicated that a distinctive pattern of INS is associated with the interactive speech processing between the speaker and the listener. For instance, Stephens et al. (2010) asked a speaker to narrate a personal story in the scanner while the brain activity of the speaker was recorded. Then, the audio recording of the story was played back to the listeners while their brain activities were measured in sequence. General linear model analysis was conducted to assess the relationship between time courses of brain activities in the same brain areas in different participants. The results showed that the brain activity of the speaker during speech production was synchronized with that of the listeners during speech perception in widespread homologous brain areas.

However, the INS identified in this study may arise from the fact that the speaker hears the same vocal sounds during speech production as the listener hears during speech perception. To address this limitation, Liu et al. (2020) employed a similar paradigm to that used by Stephens et al. (2010), but specifically examined INS between the brain areas related to articulation in the speaker and those related to auditory perception in the listener. The authors found that the brain activities of the listeners in the auditory temporal cortex, including the A1+, middle temporal gyrus (MTG) and superior temporal gyrus/sulcus (STG/STS), were selectively synchronized with that of the speaker in the articulatory motor cortex (i.e. the larynx/phonation cortex) when the listener perceived intelligible speech produced by the speaker. This effect was still valid after controlling the brain activity of the speaker in the auditory cortex and that in the articulatory motor cortex of the listeners ( Liu et al., 2020). Moreover, significant INS was found between the A1+ of the listeners and the articulatory motor cortex of the speaker when listening to unintelligible foreign speech ( Liu et al., 2020) [notably, this effect was not found between the homologous brain areas in Stephens et al. (2010)]. Together, these findings suggest that during interactive speech processing, two types of INS might arise. One type is associated with a common external input such as the vocal sound, which will result in INS between the same homologous brain areas of interacting partners. The other type is associated with interactive linguistic processes such as that between the production and perception of the vocal sound. The latter will result in INS between both the same and different brain areas of interacting partners.

Additionally, previous single-brain evidence has indicated that visual inputs may facilitate or interfere with auditory processing ( McGurk and MacDonald, 1976 Skipper et al., 2007). Jiang et al. (2012) provided initial evidence to extend this effect from a single-brain situation to a dual-brain situation. Specifically, Jiang et al. (2012) had two individuals freely communicate either face-to-face or back-to-back. No scripts were given to the participants for recitation or rehearsal participants were only given a piece of news about a hot topic that they were to discuss as they would do in daily life. The fNIRS-based hyperscanning was used to simultaneously record brain activities from the two partners. Meanwhile, the entire experiment was video-recorded. The recorded videos were further coded to obtain information on communication behaviours. This information was then linked to INS to understand the underlying cognitive processes of INS. The results showed a significant INS increase in the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) between partners during a face-to-face dialogue but not during a back-to-back dialogue, a face-to-face monologue or a back-to-back monologue. Further INS-behaviour linking analyses showed that INS in the left IFG during the face-to-face dialogue was mainly contributed by audiovisual information integration ( Jiang et al., 2012). Other fNIRS-based hyperscanning studies confirmed the involvement of the left IFG during face-to-face verbal communication ( Osaka et al., 2015). They additionally identified that the right IFG was more closely associated with non-verbal communication compared to verbal communication ( Saito et al., 2010 Osaka et al., 2015 Koike et al., 2016). Together, these findings suggest that the INS in the left IFG may serve as the neural base for audiovisual integration during successful interpersonal verbal communication.

Mutual understanding

By decoding the semantic, conceptual and/or syntactic information that is embedded in the phonological and/or visual signals following interactive speech processing, communicating partners are mutually understood. Although it is obvious that mutual understanding depends on interactive speech processing, it remains unclear whether mutual understanding itself is associated with a distinctive pattern of INS relative to interpersonal speech processing in an interpersonal communication context.

Recently, an increasing number of studies have offered supportive evidence that INS in specific high-order brain areas between communicating partners may serve as the neural base for mutual understanding. For instance, during verbal communication, INS occurs not only in the lower-order linguistic areas but also in a set of higher-order linguistic and extralinguistic areas such as the MTG and STG/STS, temporoparietal junction (TPJ), precuneus, IFG, insula, premotor area, medial prefrontal cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex of the speaker and that of the listener ( Stephens et al., 2010 Silbert et al., 2014). Additionally, there is a strong positive correlation between the spatial extent of significant speaker–listener INS and the level of mutual understanding ( Stephens et al., 2010). Interestingly, this correlation was found in INS of higher-order brain areas such as the STG/STS rather than in low-order brain areas such as the A1+ ( Stephens et al., 2010 Liu et al., 2020). Moreover, INS in higher-order brain areas is not present when listening to unintelligible foreign speech ( Stephens et al., 2010 Liu et al., 2017 2020).

Most interestingly, the process of obtaining a mutual understanding can be distinguished from the interactive speech processing based not only on the spatial pattern of INS but also on the temporal pattern of INS, i.e. a temporal-spatial gradient pattern. Specifically, Stephens et al. (2010) found that the speaker–listener INS was shown in the A1+ when the time courses of the brain activity of the speaker and that of the listener were temporally aligned INS also occurred in high-order brain areas such as the TPJ, precuneus and striatum when the time course of the brain activity of the listener lagged behind that of the brain activity of the speaker by ∼1–4 s ( Stephens et al., 2010). More direct evidence is provided by Liu et al. (2020). Specifically, they calculated INS by shifting the time course of the brain activity of the listener in the auditory areas relative to that in the articulatory motor area of the speaker from −6 s (i.e. the brain activity of the listener preceded the brain activity of the speaker) to 6 s (i.e. the brain activity of the listener lagged behind that of the speaker) at an interval of 2 s. The results showed that INS initially occurred in the A1+ when the brain activity of the listener was time-aligned with that of the speaker, then extending to the STG/STS when the time course of listener lagged behind that of the speaker by 2 s. Finally, INS spread to the MTG when the brain activity of the listener lagged behind that of the speaker by 4 s. These findings were corroborated with data obtained using fNIRS-based pseudo-hyperscanning ( Liu et al., 2017). That is, the brain activity of the listener in the parietal areas was significantly synchronized with the brain activity of the speaker in the prefrontal areas with a 5-s time lag for the listener. These findings clearly demonstrated a distinctive neurocognitive process of mutual understanding other than pure auditory speech processing.

In addition, a shared representation of syntax is necessary for successful decoding of semantic information and then achieving a mutual understanding. Previously, robust behavioural evidence showed that individuals tend to use the same syntax as one another during communication ( Branigan et al., 2000 Lu et al., 2001 Cai et al., 2012). Recently, Liu et al. (2019) provided fNIRS-based hyperscanning evidence for this effect. They had two individuals take turns producing sentences. The communicating partners either employed the same or different syntax in their utterances. The results showed that the use of the same syntax between partners was accompanied by a significantly greater INS in the right posterior STG/STS than what accompanied the use of different syntax. Moreover, INS in this region is significantly correlated with the quality of communication. Therefore, this study further supports the proposition that both shared semantic and syntactic representations are associated with distinctive patterns of INS that are different from those associated with interactive speech processing.

Relationship establishment and maintenance

Humans are usually organized into different types of interpersonal relationships. The relationships can either be inherent kinship, such as that of parent–child and siblings, or emergent relationships through communication, such as that of teacher–student, friends and romantic couples. Previous evidence has indicated that interpersonal relationships usually emerge when group members act jointly or contingently with each other ( Marsh et al., 2009 Algoe, 2019), during which turn-taking plays a key role ( Pickering and Garrod, 2004 Wilson and Wilson, 2005). Thus, turn-based interpersonal communication is suggested to be a prerequisite for ( Diamond, 2003) and effective in triggering the neurocognitive signatures of interpersonal relationships ( Winterheld et al., 2013 Algoe et al., 2017). Even for an inherent kinship such as parent–child relationship, interpersonal communication also plays a supportive role ( Eisenberg et al., 1998 2007).

To better understand the role of interpersonal verbal communication in establishing and maintaining interpersonal relationships, the effect of both role assignment and inherent kinships should be excluded. Jiang et al. (2015) examined the question of how a leader emerges from a three-member leadless group discussion task. Before the experiment, no leader or follower role was assigned. Additionally, the three members of each group were not acquainted with one another prior to the experiment. The fNIRS-based hyperscanning was employed to test the neural bases of leader emergence. Most importantly, the overall procedures of the experiment were video recorded. Based on the video data as well as additional behavioural assessments, both leadership and various indexes of communication, such as communication skills and competence, initiation of communications and frequencies of verbal and non-verbal communications, were coded. The results showed that a leader spontaneously emerged from the discussion group. Moreover, the emergence of a leader was accompanied by a stronger INS in the leader–follower pairs than in the follower–follower pairs in the left TPJ. Importantly, the quality of verbal communication (i.e. the initiation of verbal communication by the leaders) rather than the quantity of verbal communication (i.e. frequencies of verbal communication between leaders and followers) enhanced the INS of the leader–follower pairs. Interestingly, neither quality nor quantity of non-verbal communication contributed significantly to leader emergence. These findings well demonstrated that verbal communication helps individuals establish leadership when the effects of role assignment and inherent kinships were excluded.

A more interesting finding from Jiang et al. (2015) is that INS between leaders and followers can successfully distinguish the leader–follower pairs from the follower–follower pairs 23 s after the onset of communication. Although no other studies on verbal communication during leader emergence have confirmed this finding, studies on non-verbal communication have provided some evidence. For instance, Konvalinka et al. (2014) examined dual-brain activity as measured by EEG-based hyperscanning during a finger-tapping task. The roles of the leader and the follower were obtained by behavioural analysis, i.e. the follower was the person who adapted to the taping behaviours of the partner. The results showed a stronger frontal alpha-suppression in the leaders than in the followers during both task anticipation and execution stages. This finding indicates that the difference in brain activity between leaders and followers already appeared before the onset of interaction. This difference, however, might reflect the personal characteristics of leaders rather than interpersonal relationships. Thus, more evidence is needed to show whether the distinctive pattern of INS in leader–follower pairs appear before the onset of communication.

Several studies provided clues about the effect of role assignment, though these studies did not test verbal communication. For instance, Sänger et al. (2012) assigned the roles of leaders and followers to participants before dyadic guitar play. Delta- and theta-band EEG signals showed significantly higher values in the phase locking index, i.e. the invariance of phases across trials in the time–frequency domain, in the leaders than in the followers even before the onset of play. However, as only one follower was involved in the experiment, it was not possible to compare INS between the leader–follower pairs and the follower–follower pairs. In a subsequent study, Sänger et al. (2013) used a similar paradigm to examine the directional INS between leaders and followers in guitar duets. However, in this study, the authors found significantly higher INS in alpha-band EEG signals from the frontal cortex of the leaders to other brain areas of the followers after the onset of play. Thus, it seemed that role assignment alone was not sufficient to induce INS that is specific to interpersonal relationships.

More direct evidence about the role of verbal communication in the establishment of interpersonal relationships comes from a recent study ( Zheng et al., 2020). To separate the effect of verbal communication, role assignment and interpersonal relationships, Zheng et al. (2020) employed a dyadic resting-state paradigm. Specifically, haemodynamic brain activities were collected from teachers and students using fNIRS-based hyperscanning when no task was conducted, with participants’ eyes closed, both before and after a one-to-one teaching task. The results prior to teaching did not show any significant INS even when the roles of teachers and that of students had been assigned to participants. Additionally, no significant INS was shown after verbal communication when there was no role assignment among participants. However, when both roles were assigned among participants and verbal communication occurred, i.e. after teaching, a significant increase in INS was found between teachers and students. Moreover, INS after teaching was significantly higher than that before teaching. Additionally, teacher–student INS appeared only after a turn-taking mode of teaching but not after a lecturing or video mode of teaching. Behavioural assessment confirmed the creation of teacher–student affiliative bonds. The strength of affiliative bonds after a turn-taking mode of teaching was significantly higher than that after a lecturing mode of teaching and marginally higher than that after a video mode of teaching. Moreover, the increased INS in the resting state was significantly correlated with the strength of teacher–student affiliative bonds after a turn-taking mode of teaching. These findings together suggest that both the role assignment and the reciprocity of verbal communication are necessary for the establishment of the teacher–student relationship.

Additional evidence comes from parent–child verbal communication. A recent study by Nguyen et al. (2020) examined mother–child INS during a free verbal communication task using fNIRS-based hyperscanning. The results showed that not only did mother–child verbal communication induce higher INS than communication between random pairs but also that INS was gradually enhanced over the course of verbal communication. Additionally, turn-taking contributed mostly to the enhancement of INS relative to other indexes of verbal communication, such as content relevance or contingency. Even for preverbal children, modes of communication such as mutual gaze and smiling also contribute to INS between the child and the adult ( Piazza et al., 2020). These findings suggest that even for inherent kinships, verbal and non-verbal communications, turn-taking in particular, can further strengthen interpersonal relationships.

Taken together, these findings provide supportive evidence for the important role of verbal communication in establishing and maintaining interpersonal relationships when other factors, such as role assignment and inherent kinships, are considered.


Head Movements

Bowing is a nonverbal greeting ritual that is more common in Asian cultures than Western cultures, but the head nod, which is a common form of acknowledgement in many cultures, is actually an abbreviated bow. Japan is considered a noncontact culture , which refers to cultural groups in which people stand farther apart while talking, make less eye contact, and touch less during regular interactions. Because of this, bowing is the preferred nonverbal greeting over handshaking. Bows vary based on status, with higher status people bowing the least. For example, in order to indicate the status of another person, a Japanese businessperson may bow deeply. An interesting ritual associated with the bow is the exchange of business cards when greeting someone in Japan. This exchange allows each person to view the other’s occupation and title, which provides useful information about the other’s status and determines who should bow more. Since bowing gives each person a good view of the other person’s shoes, it is very important to have clean shoes that are in good condition, since they play an important part of initial impression formation.


Watch the video: The Importance of Nonverbal Cues as told by Friends (May 2022).