A naturalistic study of the meanings of touch. Journal of Research in Personality, 7, 368–373. Effects of gaze, touch, and use of name on evaluation of “engaged” couples. Multivariate analysis versus multiple univariate analyses. The nonverbal semantics of power and gender: A perceptual study. The nonverbal basis of attraction: Flirtation, courtship, and seduction. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 13, 83–96.Įllsworth, P. Gender differences in the initiation and attribution of tactile intimacy. Human Communication Research, 17, 232–265.ĭerlega, V., Lewis, R. Nonverbal expectancies and evaluative consequences of violations. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 13, 97–120.īurgoon, J. Nonverbal expectancy violations and conversational involvement. Southern Communication Journal, 56, 96–113.īurgoon, J. Applying a social meaning model to relational message interpretations of conversational involvement: Comparing observer and participant perspectives. Communication Monographs, 55, 58–79.īurgoon, J. Nonverbal expectancy violations theory: Model elaboration and application to immediacy behaviors. Communication Monographs, 54, 19–41.īurgoon, J. Validation and measurement of the fundamental themes of relational communication. Communication Monographs, 51, 193–214.īurgoon, J. The fundamental topoi of relational communication. Human Communication Research, 12, 495–524.īurgoon, J. Communicative effects of gaze behavior: A test of two contrasting explanations. Nonverbal communication: The unspoken dialogue. Human Communication Research, 10, 351–378.īurgoon, J. Relational messages associated with nonverbal behaviors. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.īurgoon, J. Nimmo (Ed.), Communication yearbook 4 (pp. Nonverbal communication research in the 1970s: An overview. “Touch me, like me”: Artifact? Proceedings of the 81st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 8, 153–154.īurgoon, J.
Women's Studies in Communication, 5, 29–38.īreed, G., & Ricci, J. A comparison of the effects of sex and status on the perceived appropriateness of nonverbal behaviors. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 10, 83–101.īaglan, T., & Nelson, D. Functions of gaze in social interaction: Communication and monitoring. Gender initiator attractiveness was more influential than status in moderating interpretations.Ībele, A. Proximity and postural openness together produced differential interpretations of composure, similarity, and affection. Close proximity was also more immediate and similar but dominant. Postural openness/relaxation paralleled touch in conveying greater intimacy, composure, informality, and similarity but was also less dominant than a closed/tense posture. The form of touch also mattered, with handholding and face touching expressing the most intimacy, composure, and informality handholding and the handshake expressing the least dominance, and the handshake conveying the most formality but also receptivity/trust. Results showed that touching typically conveyed more composure, immediacy, receptivity/trust, affection, similarity/depth/equality, dominance, and informality than its absence.
Also examined were the possible moderating effects of the communicator characteristics of gender and attractiveness and relationship characteristics of gender composition and status differentials. Two field experiments examined this presumption by investigating the relational message interpretations assigned to differing levels and types of touch, proximity, and posture. According to a social meaning model of nonverbal communication, many nonverbal behaviors have consensually recognized meanings.
0 kommentar(er)
