Nonverbal Communication Analysis
Research studies have established that messages between individuals is largely conveyed through nonverbal cues, such as body movements, physical appearance, interpersonal distance, intonation, and volume, among others. The messages communicated through words (verbal) only constitute a small proportion of overall communication. Therefore, increased awareness of nonverbal aspects of communication is critical to our continued existence and understanding other people’s needs, thoughts, feelings, and emotions. This paper presents an analysis of nonverbal interpersonal communication that I observed in a public venue in order to enhance my understanding of nonverbal communication by observing its application in the real life situations.
I chose to visit a restaurant as the best public venue because of the proximity offered by its sitting arrangements. It was during lunch-break on a weekday. From my sitting position, I could easily observe most people within the room. There was a man at one of the tables with a capacity of two customers. For the purpose of the discussion, we can refer this man as individual A. He kept looking at his watch, and suddenly received a phone call, stood up and walked towards the entry, where he met and welcomed another man, or individual B in this case. Since both men were in formal dress codes, their meeting was probably work related. I confirmed this view when I observed them more closely, as I recognized their clothing had emblems of two local companies that are in the same supply chain. Their firm and short-lived handshake demonstrated that they had little, if any, emotional connection with each other. Therefore, it was more certain that they were less concerned with their respective social life or experiences. This was also evident through the considerable distance they maintained from one another, as they had also failed to exchange any hugs. The distance between two interacting individuals, which is referred to as proxemics, is essential in highlighting the extent to which such individuals would likely exchange ideals or share information. Since they maintained some personal distance, these people appeared ready to disclose limited information to one another, mostly work-related. Personal distance allowed these men “to stay protected and untouched by others” as our book describes personal distance on page 158.
As I was writing down my observations, these two men walked towards their table, where they immediately ordered a meal. I also ordered a meal as I continued observing their nonverbal communication, but without attracting their attention. Immediately after taking their seats, their sitting postures also provided more nonverbal communication cues. They had both placed their hands on the table and had leaned slightly forward while interacting. While individual A had his arms open, individual’s B arms remained closed. These “nonverbal signals communicate a great part of your emotional experience” as our book mentions on page 142. The open arms posture often demonstrates that the individual is more accommodating and can probably embrace another person’s ideas or opinion. Conversely, the closed posture often highlights resistance to other people’s opinion. However, their leaning forward posture illustrated that they were both attentive to their subject of discussion, although individual A seemed more willing to grasp as much details as possible in their communication. Individual B kept looking at his watch during the discussion, which implied he was time conscious, and probably wanted to spend as less time as possible in the meeting. In the course of their interaction, individual B gradually failed to maintain eye contact, leaned back, and would occasionally throw glances across the restaurant. His lack of eye contact could “signal lack of interest” p.149. All of these nonverbal cues implied that he was increasingly
