Models of reactions to changes in nonverbal immediacy

This paper examined the similarities and differences among several models of nonverbal exchange. In that context, an experiment was conducted to test one specific explanation — the violations of expectations model. Immediacy and reward level (manipulated in terms of friend or stranger pairs) were factorially combined in dyads. A broad range of behavioral, arousal, and impression measures were taken. In general, the results of the experiment showed a dominant pattern of reciprocity to increased immediacy, especially on various evaluative measures. In contrast, compensatory responses were much less common in response to increased immediacy and when they occurred were primarily found on measures related to sensory stimulation and comfort. Although these results provided some limited support for the violations of expectations model, the same results were also consistent with some predictions from alternate models.

[1]  M. Patterson,et al.  Behavioral and cognitive consequences of reciprocal versus compensatory responses to preinteraction expectancies. , 1982 .

[2]  A. Mehrabian.  Significance of posture and posiion in the communication of attitude and status relationships. , 1969, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  I. Firestone,et al.  Reconciling verbal and nonverbal models of dyadic communication , 1977 .

[4]  M. Meisels,et al.  DEVELOPMENT OF PERSONAL SPACE SCHEMATA , 1969 .

[5]  Albert Mehrabian,et al.  Effects of Furniture Arrangement, Props, and Personality on Social Interaction. , 1971 .

[6]  J. Mccroskey,et al.  The measurement of interpersonal attraction , 1974 .

[7]  A. Schiffenbauer,et al.  Physical distance and attraction: An intensification effect , 1976 .

[8]  M. Worthy,et al.  Self-disclosure as an exchange process. , 1969 .

[9]  D. Stacks,et al.  A communicative model of violations of distancing expectations , 1979 .

[10]  J. Barefoot,et al.  Non-verbal responses and affiliative conflict theory. , 1974, The British journal of social and clinical psychology.

[11]  C A Kiesler,et al.  Visual behavior and face-to-face distance during interaction. , 1969, Sociometry.

[12]  Larry M. Coutts,et al.  Nonverbal Compensatory Reactions to Changes in Interpersonal Proximity , 1977 .

[13]  Jerold L. Hale,et al.  Relational Messages Associated with Nonverbal Behaviors. , 1984 .

[14]  M. E. Shaw,et al.  Reactions to interperson distance and topic intimacy: A comparison of strangers and friends , 1980 .

[15]  Howard J. Ehrlich,et al.  Reciprocal self-disclosure in a dyad , 1971 .

[16]  S. Jourard.  The Transparent Self , 1964 .

[17]  Stephen Nowicki,et al.  A new measure and social-learning model for interpersonal distance. , 1972 .

[18]  A. Kendon.  Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction. , 1967, Acta psychologica.

[19]  Antony J. Chapman,et al.  Friendship and social responsiveness in boys and girls. , 1977 .

[20]  Kristina A. Krail,et al.  The Sex Variable in the Intrusion of Personal Space , 1976 .

[21]  D. Barash.  Human Ethology , 1973 .

[22]  M. Patterson,et al.  Effects of nonverbal intimacy on arousal and behavioral adjustment , 1981 .

[23]  M. Argyle,et al.  EYE-CONTACT, DISTANCE AND AFFILIATION. , 1965, Sociometry.

[24]  M. Patterson.  A sequential functional model of nonverbal exchange. , 1982 .

[25]  E. Hall,et al.  The Hidden Dimension , 1970 .

[26]  Franklin Becker,et al.  Delineating Personal Distance and Territoriality. , 1971 .

[27]  Barry C. Certner.  Exchange of Self-Disclosures in Same-Sexed Groups of Strangers. , 1973 .

[28]  J. Burgoon.  A Communication Model of Personal Space Violations: Explication and an Initial Test. , 1978 .

[29]  A. Gouldner.  THE NORM OF RECIPROCITY: A PRELIMINARY STATEMENT * , 1960 .

[30]  The manipulation of self-disclosure. , 1967, The Journal of psychology.

[31]  S. Jourard,et al.  Healthy personality and self-disclosure. , 1959, Mental hygiene.

[32]  A. Imada,et al.  Influence of nonverbal communication and rater proximity on impressions and decisions in simulated employment interviews. , 1977 .

[33]  M. Argyle,et al.  Gaze and Mutual Gaze , 1994, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[34]  Albert Mehbabian.  Orientation behaviors and nonverbal attitude communication. , 1967 .

[35]  Effect of age on expectancy of success and on risk-taking behavior. , 1974 .

[36]  Visual interaction and distance. , 1973, British journal of psychology.

[37]  Paul B. Paulus,et al.  Psychology of Group Influence , 1981 .

[38]  R. Baron.  Invasions of personal space and helping: Mediating effects of invader's apparent need ☆ , 1978 .

[39]  M. Patterson.  Compensation in Nonverbal Immediacy Behaviors: A Review , 1973 .

[40]  J. Mccroskey,et al.  The Development of an Instrument for Measuring Intermediate Interaction Behavior in Small Group Communication. , 1971 .

[41]  James C. Baxter,et al.  Nonverbal expression as a function of crowding during a simulated police-citizen encounter. , 1975 .

[42]  O. Watson,et al.  Quantitative Research in Proxemic Behavior1 , 1966 .

[43]  John D. Davis,et al.  Reciprocity of self-disclosure in interviews: Modeling or social change? , 1974 .

[44]  J. F. Andersen.  Teacher Immediacy as a Predictor of Teaching Effectiveness , 1979 .

[45]  P. Bell,et al.  Physical Distance and Helping: Some Unexpected Benefits of “Crowding In” on Others1 , 1976 .

[46]  R. Exline,et al.  VISUAL BEHAVIOR IN A DYAD AS AFFECTED BY INTERVIEW CONTENT AND SEX OF RESPONDENT. , 1965, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[47]  D. Stacks,et al.  The role of nonverbal behaviors as distractors in resistance to persuasion in interpersonal contexts , 1981 .

[48]  George Thomas,et al.  Reactions to physical closeness. , 1977 .

[49]  J. Burgoon,et al.  Three field experiments on the effects of violations of conversational distance , 1982 .

[50]  John O. Greene,et al.  A discrepancy‐arousal explanation of mutual influence in expressive behavior for adult and infant‐adult interaction 1 , 1982 .

[51]  Robert Sommer,et al.  Invasions of Personal Space , 1966 .

[52]  P. Andersen,et al.  The measurement of nonverbal immediacy , 1979 .

[53]  E. Ebbesen,et al.  Effects of a violation of personal space on escape and helping responses , 1975 .

[54]  G Breed,et al.  The effect of intimacy: reciprocity or retreat? , 1972, The British journal of social and clinical psychology.

[55]  V. Sermat,et al.  Content analysis of verbal communication in the development of a relationship: conditions influencing self-disclosure. , 1973, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[56]  R. Pellegrini,et al.  Interpersonal Spatial Orientation in Dyads. , 1970 .

[57]  M. Patterson,et al.  Interpersonal distance and impression formation. , 1970, Journal of personality.

[58]  J. Mccroskey.  Measurement of the Credibility of Peers and Spouses. , 1973 .

[59]  V. Derlega,et al.  Friendship and disclosure reciprocity. , 1976 .

[60]  S. Jourard,et al.  Cognition, cathexis, and the dyadic effect in men's self-disclosing behavior. , 1960 .

[61]  A. Mehrabian,et al.  Language Within Language: Immediacy, a Channel in Verbal Communication , 1968 .

[62]  Judee K. Burgoon,et al.  TOWARD A THEORY OF PERSONAL SPACE EXPECTATIONS AND THEIR VIOLATIONS , 1976 .

[63]  J. R. Aiello.  A test of equilibrium theory: Visual interaction in relation to orientation, distance and sex of interactants , 1972 .

[64]  M. Patterson.  An arousal model of interpersonal intimacy. , 1976 .

[65]  J. M. Dabbs,et al.  The Effects of Lighting, Distance and Intimacy of Topic on Verbal and Visual Behavior* , 1974 .

[66]  M. Patterson,et al.  Compensatory Reactions to Spatial Intrusion , 1971 .