Louisiana State University
LSU Digital Commons
LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses
Graduate School
1973
The Use of Kinesics in Establishing and
Determining Meaning in Superior-Subordinate
Communications.
Mary Bordelon Blalock
Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses
Recommended Citation
Blalock, Mary Bordelon, "The Use of Kinesics in Establishing and Determining Meaning in Superior-Subordinate Communications."
(1973). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 2517.
http://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/2517
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in
LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact
[email protected].
INFORMATION TO USERS
This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While
the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original
submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.
I.The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent
pages to insure you complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it
is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have
moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a
good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being
photographed the photographer followed a definite method in
"sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper
left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to
right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is
continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until
complete.
4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value,
however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from
"photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver
prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing
the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and
specific pages you wish reproduced.
5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as
received.
Xerox University Microfilms
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
74-18,313
BLALOCK, Mary Bordelon, 1942THE USE OF KINESICS IN ESTABLISHING AND
DETERMINING MEANING IN SUPERIOR-SUBORDINATE
COMMUNICATIONS.
The Louisiana State University and Agricultural
and Mechanical College, Ph.D., 1973
Business Administration
University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, A n n Arbor, Michigan
©
1974
MARY BORDELON BLALOCK
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED.
THE USE OF KINESICS
IN ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING MEANING
IN SUPERIOR-SUBORDINATE COMMUNICATIONS
A Dissertation
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
Louisiana State University and
Agricultural and Mechanical College
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in
The Department of Management
by
Mary Bordelon Blalock
B.S., University of Southwestern Louisiana, 1963
B.S., Louisiana State University, 1967
M.S., Louisiana State University, 1967
December, 1973
THE USE OF KINESICS
IN ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING MEANING
IN SUPERIOR-SUBORDINATE COMMUNICATIONS
For my parents;
for TNB who was there,
and
for PJB, who should have been.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
More individuals have assisted me in arriving at this state in
life than I can possibly cite here.
To all of them, I extend sincere
appreciation, and I give an especial expression of gratitude where it
is exceedingly due:
to my major professor, Dr. Raymond V. Lesikar, who not only was
a tremendous chairman, but who patiently guided me through just about
every crisis a graduate student can have;
to Drs. Edmund R. Gray, Eugene C. McCann, Frank D. Ferguson, and
S. Lee Richardson, for their advice and helpful recommendations of
tremendous value that aided in giving this dissertation life;
to W. L. McDermott and Dow Chemical Company who so generously
offered their valuable time and personnel for the original data, and
without whose cooperation this study could not have been completed/
to Dr. T. Win Welford for his valuable assistance in not only
locating the right kinesic variables to use, but who also condescended
to act in the video-tape;
to Messrs. Ralph M. Newell and Frank Majers who provided
technical assistance for, and who filmed the experiment;
to Drs. Joseph G. Dawson and Caesar B. Moody for assistance in
selecting and interpreting the psychology test administered in this
study;
to Dr. Kenneth L. Koonce, who struggled with me from designing
the questionnaire all the way through interpreting what seemed a maze
of data;
V.
to Mr. Phillip Hart, who lent me his expensive equipment with
which to conduct the experiment;
to Dean and Mrs. Herbert A. Hamilton, Miss Hulda O. Erath, and
all of my teachers, who from the very beginning gave me confidence
and convinced me I could succeed;
to Thomas N. Brandon III, a very dear friend, who gave me a
stupendous amount of his personal time in tutelage and encouragement;
to my parents, whose advice and understanding from my earliest
recognition nurtured in me a respect for a good education, and whose
untimely deaths prevented them from witnessing my terminal degree;
to my husband, Paul, to whom I am indebted most of all, whose
personal sacrifices and affectionate nagging induced the culmination
of this study;
to my Creator, who gave me health, and a reasonable amount of
intelligence—and a country in which I am free to exercise it.
These acknowledgments are not intended as alibis.
The responsi-
bility for all shortcomings and heresies rests squarely upon the
shoulders of the author—and are probably due to good advice unheeded.
M.B.B.
Louisiana State University
October 25, 1973
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
iv
LIST OF TABLES
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
xi
ABSTRACT
xii
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
1
Statement of the Problem and Hypotheses
6
Purpose, Scope, and Limitations of the Study
8
Method of Analysis
10
The Video-tape
10
The Pre-test
13
The Questionnaire
13
Experimental Groups
13
The Experiment
17
Data Preparation
19
Preview
19
CHAPTER II. ANALYSIS OF MESSAGE PERCEIVED BY DEMOGRAPHICS,
PERSONALITY FACTORS, AND MESSAGE TYPES
21
Background of the Study
22
Method of Analysis
27
The "Source of Variation" Column
The "F Value" Column
The "Probability of F" Column
27
,
31
31
vii.
Demographics and Personality Compared to Message Perceived . . .
32
Perception of Message "Favorability"
32
Perception of Message "Truthfulness"
34
Perception of Message "Believability"
34
Perception of Message "Reputability"
37
Perception of Message "Reliability"
37
Perception of Message "Pleasantness"
40
Perception of Message "Informability"
40
Summary of bindings
40
CHAPTER III. ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF MESSAGE PERCEIVED BY
TYPE OF MESSAGE EXPERIENCED
44
Method of Analysis
44
Kinesics and Vocalization Compared to Message Perceived
46
Perception of Message "Favorability"
47
Perception of Message "Truthfulness"
50
Perception of Message "Believability"
53
Perception of Message "Reputability"
57
Perception of Message "Reliability"
60
Perception of Message "Pleasantness" . . . . .
63
Perception of Message "Informability"
66
Summary of Findings
CHAPTER IV.
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
69
71
Summary
71
Conclusions
75
viii.
Recommendations for Further Study
BIBLIOGRAPHY
.78
79
APPENDIX A.
Text of Message Experiment
APPENDIX B.
Experiment Packet
103
APPENDIX C.
Video-tape
109
APPENDIX D.
Sample-size Requirements Calculations
110
APPENDIX E.
Cumputer Print-out Reduction
112
VITA
99
119
LIST OF TABLES
Table
I.
Page
Statistical Breakdown of Employees by Demographics and
Personality
II.
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Favorability by
Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type . . . .
III.
48
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Truthfulness by
Message Type, Demographics, and Personality Factors. . . .
XI.
42
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Favorability by
Message Type, Demographics, and Personality Factors. . . .
X.
41
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Informability by
Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type . . . .
IX.
39
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Pleasantness by
Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type . . . .
VIII.
38
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Reliability by
Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type . . . .
VII.
36
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Reputability by
Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type . . . .
VI.
35
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Believability by
Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type . . . .
V.
33
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Truthfulness by
Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type . . . .
IV.
26
51
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Believability by
Message Type, Demographics, and Personality Factors. . . .
54
X.
XII.
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Reputability by
Message Type, Demographics, and Personality Factors, . . .
XIII.
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Reliability by
Message Type, Demographics, and Personality Factors. . . .
XIV.
61
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Pleasantness by
Message Type, Demographics, and Personality Factors. . . .
XV.
58
64
Analysis of Variance Table of Message Informability by
Message Type, Demographics, and Personality Factors. . . .
67
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
1.
Body Language by Voice for Message Favorability
49
2.
Body Language by Voice for Message Truthfulness
52
3.
Age by Voice for Message Truthfulness
55
4.
Voice by Marital Status for Message Believability
56
5.
Body Language by Voice for Message Reputability
59
6.
Body Language by Voice for Message Reliability
62
7.
Body Language by Voice for Message Pleasantness
65
8.
Body Language by Voice for Message Informability
68
ABSTRACT
The objective of this study was to identify and
analyze positive and negative kinesics (body movements), and
to determine what, if any, effect they lent to message perception, in the hope of answering specifically these
questions:
1.
What, if any, are the benefits of management
concentrating on positive kinesics to coincide
with positive verbal communication?
2.
How can management develop, from the use of data
gathered in the experimental process of the study,
an awareness of the necessity of communication—
both verbal and non-verbal—and a means for
determining kinesic effectiveness?
The hypotheses under consideration in this study were:
there is no difference to response to messages whether negative or positive body language is used; there is no difference in response to messages whether kinesics are congruent
with verbal message content; and the effect of body language
on message perception is constant regardless of personality
type or demographic characteristics.
A random sample of 292 employees, consisting of nine
groups, from eight different companies was selected with the
assistance of Dow Chemical Company.
xiii.
A demographic questionnaire and personality inventory
was administered to these employees.
Each group was sub-
jected to a different message form, and then the employees
were asked to fill out a semantic differential questionnaire
giving their perception of seven message concepts.
Data coding and analysis was performed, and some
groups were "collapsed" where needed.
Analysis of the data
revealed that there were differences in message perception,
but that these differences could not be attributed to demographic characteristics or personality type except in very
limited instances.
Subsequent analysis indicated that different types
of communication (oral, visual, or written) did not influence how a message was perceived.
First, the effect of
body language on message perception is not very great when
using positive vocalization.
Secondly, positive kinesics
does increase credibility of messages, and therefore,
negative verbalization can be overcome to a degree.
Thirdly,
when using negative body language, message perception is
adversely affected.
Finally, any body language (positive or
negative) enhances message acceptance.
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
During t h e l a s t few y e a r s , a s c i e n t i f i c
kinesics
(body language)
study of
has been pursued from many a n g l e s .
Doctors of Medicine have i n v e s t i g a t e d k i n e s i c s
relation to physiology,
such a s F i n l e y ' s
A n a l y s i s o f Human Locomotion,
Kinesiology:
The S c i e n t i f i c
in
Kinesiological
and J e n s e n ' s Applied
Study of Human P e r f o r m a n c e . 2
In these manuels of structural kinesiology, much attention
i s paid to applied anatomy, 3 w i l l and unwilled movement,4
and motor s k i l l s in a medical c o n t e x t . 5
x
Ray F. Finley, Kinesiological Analysis of Human Locomotion
(Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon Press, 1961).
2
Clayne R. Jensen, Applied Kinesiology: The S c i e n t i f i c Study of
Human Performance (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, I n c . , 1970).
^Phillip J . Rasch and Roger K. Burke, Kinesics and Applied
Anatomy: The Science of Human Movement (third edition; Philadelphia:
Lea & Febiger, 1971).
4
A. J. Buller, 0. C. J. Lippold, and A. Taylor, "Discussion on
Normal and Abnormal Willed Movement," Procedures of the Royal Society
of Medicine, 54:199-203, 1961.
H. W. Brosin, "Studies i n Human Communication i n C l i n i c a l
Settings Using Sound Film and Tape," Wisconsin Medical Journal, 63:
503-506, 1964; and Albert E. Scheflen, "Non-Language Behavior in
Communications," (Address to the New York Chapter of American Academy
of P e d i a t r i c s ) , September 2, 1969.
2
P s y c h o l o g i s t s and p s y c h i a t r i s t s have s t u d i e d body
language f o r mental i l l n e s s c l u e s
(as i n B e r g e r ' s
Communication i n Group P s y c h o t h e r a p y " ) ;
age,
i.e.,
"Nonverbal
and a s p a r a l a n g u -
a means of g i v i n g depth t o v e r b a l communication.
Some o f t h e s e s t u d i e s d e a l p r i m a r i l y w i t h e m o t i o n s , such a s
"The K i n e s i c L e v e l i n t h e I n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h e Emotions" 8
w h i l e o t h e r s c o n c e n t r a t e on p a t h o l o g i c a l i l l n e s s e s . 9
of t h e i r information, while h e l p f u l ,
Much
i s of l i m i t e d v a l u e
to
businessmen.10
°Gordon W. Allport and P. E. Vernon, Studies i n Expressive Movement (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1933); and Jurgen Ruesch,
Communication: The Social Matrix of Psychiatry (New York: Norton Press,
1951); and M. M. Berger, "Nonverbal Communications i n Group Psychotherapy," International Journal of Group Psychotherapists, 8:161-178,
1958.
7
M. C. Bateson, "Kinesics and Paralanguage," Science, 139:200,
1963; D. A. Barbara, "The Value of Nonverbal Communication i n Persona l i t y Understanding," Journal of Nervous Disorders, 123:286:291, 1956;
William Austin, "Some Social Aspects of Paralanguage," CJL/RCL 11,
1:31-39, 1965; and G. L. Trager, "Paralanguage: A F i r s t Approximation,"
Studies of L i n g u i s t i c s , 13:1-12, 1958.
8Ray L. Birdwhistell, "The Kinesic Level in the Investigation of
the Emotions" i n Expression of the Emotions i n Man (P. H. Knapp, e d . , )
(New York: International U n i v e r s i t i e s Press, 1963), pp. 123-139; and
Rudulf Arnheim, "The Gestalt Theory of Expression," Psychological Review,
56:156-171, 1949.
9
S , E, J e l l i f f e , "The Parkinsonian Body Posture: Some Considerat i o n s i n Unconscious H o s t i l i t y , " Psychoanalysts Review, 27:467-479, 1940;
and Authur Steindler, Kinesiology of the Human Body Under Normal and
Pathological Conditions (Springfield, I l l i n o i s : C. C. Thomas, 1955).
10
P . L. Wachtel, "An Approach to the Study of Body Language i n
Psychotherapy," Psychotherapy, 4 : 3 , 1967.
3
Physical therapists and physical educationalists have
explored and choreographed body movement11
aesthetic reasons12
for health and/or
with still less significance for the
business practitioner.
Sociologists and anthropologists have expounded on the
differences and similarities13
of gestures in communica-
tion in various societies and environments.14
This material
has valuable potential for businessmen once it can be
dredged through and gleaned as to what is significant.
John Barclay, Muscular Motions of the Human Body (Edinburgh:
W. Laing & A. Constable & Company, 1808); Ellen Neall Duvall, Kinesiology: The Anatomy of Motion (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: PrenticeHall, inc., 1959); Michael Aloysius MacConaill, Muscles and Movements:
A Basis for Human Kinesiology (Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins Company,
1969); Congresses International Seminar on Biomechanics, Technique of
Drawings of Movement and Movement Analysis.
l^susanne Hirt, "What is Kinesiology?," Physical Therapists
Review, 35:419-426, 1955; L. F. Locke, "Kinesiology and the Profession,"
Johper, 36:69, 1965; and Physical Education Division, Council on
Kinesiology, Kinesiology Review (Washington, D. C , 1968).
13
Ray L. Birdwhistell, "Some Body Motion Elements Accompanying
Spoken American English," in Communication: Concepts and Perspectives
(London: Macmillan; Washington, D. C : Spartan Books, 1967), Chapter
II, p. 53-76; M. Benesh, E. Kramer, and H. Lane, "Recognition of Portrayed Emotion in a Foreign Language," in Experimental Analysis of the
Control of Speech Production and Perception: III (Ann Arbor, Michigan:
university of Michigan Office of Research Administration, 1963); and Ray
L. Birdwhistell, "Some Relationships Between Kinesics and Spoken American English," (Presented before Section H., A.A.A.S., Cleveland, 1963),
pp. 27-28.
l4
David Efron, Gesture and Environment (New York: Kings Crown
Press, 1942);
and J. P. Foley, "Gestural Behavior and Social Setting", in Readings in Social Psychology (T. L. Newcombe and E. L.
4
A c t o r s " and s p e e c h - m a k e r s X b have pondered t h e b e s t
way t o u s e n o n - v e r b a l communication
though much of
their
work i n v o l v e s mimic s t e r e o t y p i n g .
Most of t h e s e s t u d i e s have been e x t r e m e l y l i m i t e d
in
s c o p e , however, and of a l m o s t no w o r t h t o a b u s i n e s s m a n
b e c a u s e of t h e sometimes v e r y t e c h n i c a l n a t u r e of
the
treatise.17
H a r t l e y , e d s . ) , (New York: Ronald P r e s s , 1947); Thomas A l b e r t Sebeok,
Approaches t o Semiotics (Alfred S. Hayes and Mary Catherine Bateson,
e d s . ) , (The Hague: Mouton, 1964); and L. D. B a t t l e , "New Dimensions i n
C u l t u r a l Communications," P u b l i c a t i o n s of ttie_ Modern Language Associat i o n , 78(2):15-19, 1963.
15Ray L. B i r d w h i s t e l l , Communication Without Words i n L'Aventure
Humaine, Encyclopedic des Sciences de 1'Homme (Kister S. A. P a r i s : De
La Grange B a t e l i e r e S. A . ) , Volume 4, 1968; 0 . P. Gately, "If You Don't
Speak t h e Language, Play Charades," Harvest Years, 8:16-17, 1968; and
Macdonald C r i t c h e l y , Kinesics: Gestural and Mimic Language—An Aspect
of Non-Verbal Communication i n Problems of Dynamic Neurology: An I n t e r n a t i o n a l Volume (Lipman Halpern, e d . ) , (Jerusalem, I s r a e l : Hebrew
U n i v e r s i t y , 1963), pp. 181-200.
16
Ray L. B i r d w h i s t e l l , Kinesics and Communication i n Explorat i o n s i n Communications (E. Carpenter and M. McLuhan, e d s . ) , (Boston:
Beacon P r e s s , 1960), p p . 56-64; H. Campbell, e t . a l . Voice, Speech,
and Gesture: Elocutionary Art (Edinburgh, England: John Grant, 1912);
and Ray L. B i r d w h i s t e l l , The Kinesic Level i n the I n v e s t i g a t i o n of
t h e *ft""tions i n Expression of the Emotions i n Man (P. H. Knapp, e d . ) ,
(New York: I n t e r n a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t i e s P r e s s , 1963), p p . 123-139.
17
E . I . Corbin, "Muscle Action as Nonverbal and Preverbal Communication," Psychoanalysts Q u a r t e r l y , 31:351-353, 1962; S. G. E s t e s ,
"Judging P e r s o n a l i t y from Expressive Behavior," J o u r n a l of Abnormal
Social Psychology, 3:217-236, 1938; and J u d i t h I . Laszio and P. J .
Bainstow, "Journal of Motor Behavior, Accuracy of Movement, P e r i p h e r a l
Feedback and Efference Copy," Journal Publishing A f f i l i a t e s , 3 ( 3 ) : 2 4 1 252, 1970.
5
More recently, most magazines—both scholarly 18 and
otherwise 1 9 —have some article suggesting how much we can
learn 2 0 (or tell about ourselves 21 ) through the use of kinesics.
These articles often are of an extremely "slick
cover" nature, and usually do little more than give the
reader an amused sixty seconds of reading pleasure. 22
Writers of business literature—and most especially
those concerned with management and communication—have
seemingly ignored and neglected this new body of knowledge.
18
Ray L. Birdwhistell, "Background to Kinesics," ETC., Review
General Semantics, 13:10-18, 1955; and
, "Communication Without
Words," loc. cit.
19
Julius Fast, "Body Language," Newsweek, 75-87, 1970; and B.
Ford, "Body Language: What It Reveals About You," Science Digest, 68:1621, August, 1970.
20
Ray L. Birdwhistell, Kinesics and Context (Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press, 1970); "Parting Shots: What Our
Politicians Are Really Saying," Life, 82-84, 1970; Physical Education
Division, Council on Kinesiology, Kinesiology Review (Washington, D. C ,
1968); and Gerald I. Nierenberg and Henry H. Calero, How to Read a Person
Like a Book (New York: Pocket Books, 1973).
21
Julius Fast, loc. cit.; Gerald I. Nierenberg and Henry H. Calero, "Watch Your Body Language," Sales Management, 40, 1971; and David
Gunston, "Our Eyes Reveal Our True Feelings," Modern Secretary, July, 1973.
22R. W . Brunson, "Perceptual Skills in Corporate Jungle," Personnel Journal, J51:50-53, January, 1972; F. Davis, "Way We Speak Body
Language," New York Times Magazine, 65:89+, March 31, 1970; M. L. Fiel,
"What His Hands Tell That He's Not Saying," Mademoiselle, 158-9, 1970;
F. Hughes, "So You Think You're a Good Judge of Character," The Director,
24:202+. 1972; Lloyd Shearer (ed.), "Body Language," Parade Magazine,
Spril 8, 1973; and "Gestures Reveal Your Thoughts," National Enquirer,
12, April 23, 1972.
6
As managers spend t h e l a r g e s t amount of t h e i r t i m e i n v o l v e d
i n c o m m u n i c a t i o n , 2 3 i t a p p e a r s k i n e s i c s c a n n o t be d i s r e garded.
I.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND HYPOTHESES
Body l a n g u a g e i s b a s e d upon t h e b e h a v i o r a l p a t t e r n s of
nonverbal communications.
C l i n i c a l s t u d i e s have r e v e a l e d
e x t e n t t o which body l a n g u a g e can a c t u a l l y c o n t r a d i c t
the
verbal
communications.24
K i n e s i c s can i n c l u d e any n o n - r e f l e x i v e o r
reflexive
movement of a p a r t , o r a l l of t h e body, u s e d by a p e r s o n t o
communicate an e m o t i o n a l message t o t h e o u t s i d e w o r l d .
To
u n d e r s t a n d unspoken body l a n g u a g e , one must t a k e i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n e m o t i o n a l and e n v i r o n m e n t a l d i f f e r e n c e s . 2 5
The
a v e r a g e b u s i n e s s m a n , u n s c h o o l e d i n c u l t u r a l n u a n c e s of k i n e s c i s , o f t e n m i s i n t e r p r e t s o r m i s r e p r e s e n t s what he s e e s o r
communicates.
T h e r e f o r e , he may n e g a t e a p o s i t i v e message
t o h i s s u b o r d i n a t e s by t h e u s e of n e g a t i v e body movements.
23
Raymond V. Lesikar, Business Communication: Theory and
Application (Homewood, I l l i n o i s : Richard D. Irwin, I n c . , 1968), pp. 3-4.
24
Helen Flanders Dunbar, Emotions and Bodily Changes (fourth
edition; New York: Columbia University Press, 1954); David Efron, loc.
c i t . ; and David Efron and J . P. Foley, loc. c i t .
25
Ray L. Birdwhistell, Kinesics and Context, loc. c i t . : And C.
Wolff, Psychology of Gesture (translated from the French by A. Tennant;
London: Methuen, 1945).
7
In reviewing the literature, the author could find no
study that has been done relating to the use of kinesics in
establishing and determining meaning in superior-subordinate
communication, although there is a growing wealth of publications relative to the introduction of the use of kinesics in
all fields.
Extensive search of the traditional media of
dissertation listings was made:
Research Studies in Educa-
tion, Dissertation Abstracts, the Phi Delta Kappan, as well
as Business Periodical's Index and the Reader's Guide to
Periodical Literature.
Such research brought nothing to
light which would indicate that the study undertaken has been
previously attempted, either in private or public education.
Considering the amount of time managers expose themselves in non-verbal communication daily (you cannot "not
communicate" even though you do not speak), it would seem
proper to attempt to ascertain if, in fact, kinesics does
affect message perception.
The objective of this study, therefore, was to
identify and analyze positive and negative body movements and
to determine what, if any, effect they lent to message perception.
Specifically, some questions under consideration
were:
1.
What, if any, are the benefits of management contrating on positive kinesics to coincide with
positive verbal communication?
8
2.
How can management develop, from the use of data
gathered in the experimental process of this
study, an awareness of the necessity of communication—both verbal and non-verbal—and a means for
determining kinesic effectiveness?
The null hypotheses under consideration in this study
were:
1.
There is no difference in response to messages
whether negative or positive body language is
used;
2.
There is no difference in response to messages
whether or not kinesics are congruent with verbal
message content;
3.
The effect of body language on message perception
is constant regardless of personality type or
demographic characteristics.
If any or all of these null hypotheses are rejected;
by default, the working hypothesis must be accepted, which is:
at least to some degree, kinesics does affect response to
messages.
II.
PURPOSE, SCOPE, AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study was to obtain information
which would contribute to the body of knowledge already
9
accumulated in the fields of management and communications.
In addition, the dissertation was intended to furnish
management—both practitioners and academicians—with information for evaluating and orienting themselves toward
successful communication of ideas.
The scope of this study was restricted to a sample
of industrial employees.
This restriction was imposed by
the desire to analyze one group well rather than to incompletely cover a broader area.
Notwithstanding the customary limitations of time
and money, another possible cause of discrepancy lies in
the reaction of the individual subject towards the questions
asked in the experiment.
The respondents may have had
difficulty in answering questions thoughtfully and honestly,
no matter how careful the examiner may have been to put them
at ease and explain the purpose of the study.
There is no
way to avoid receiving answers which the respondent feels
ought to be given rather than those which are first hit upon.
It is a partial answer to say that similar questionnaires
have been successful with other occupational groups when
used by researchers in psychology and sociology.
One limitation may have been not restricting the
scope of the experiment to the study of employees on a single
management level on the hierarchy rather than a plethora of
10
management l e v e l s .
Or t h e s t u d y might have been l i m i t e d
in
e x p e c t i n g t h o u g h t f u l and h o n e s t a n s w e r s from h u r r i e d and
sometimes s u s p i c i o u s s u b j e c t s .
Perhaps r e s t r i c t i n g
the
s t u d y f u r t h e r would have g i v e n more u n i f i e d a n s w e r s .
Since
t h e r e a r e no m a t e r i a l s a t hand w i t h which t h e h y p o t h e s e s can
be t e s t e d , t h e y must be l e f t f o r s u b s e q u e n t
III.
investigators.
METHOD OF ANALYSIS
The m a j o r i t y of i n f o r m a t i o n p r e s e n t e d i n t h e s t u d y
was o b t a i n e d t h r o u g h an e x p e r i m e n t u s i n g employees
(the
s e l e c t i o n of which w i l l be more f u l l y d e t a i l e d i n C h a p t e r I I ) .
The V i d e o - t a p e .
With t h e c o o p e r a t i o n of Dr. T. Win
W e l f o r d , 2 6 a v i d e o - t a p e was p r o d u c e d t o p r o j e c t p o s i t i v e and
n e g a t i v e body m o t i o n s a l o n g w i t h p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e
vocalization.
To p r o j e c t t h e s e d i f f e r e n t meanings ( v i a body
l a n g u a g e ) , t h e o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n of g e s t i c u l a t i o n was
e m p l o y e d ; 2 7 i . e . , u s e of eye c o n t a c t , 2 8
head and hand
26
Dr. Welford teaches k i n e s i c s in Speech and Drama a t Southe a s t e r n Louisiana U n i v e r s i t y , Hammond, Louisiana.
27
A l b e r t Mehrabian, I n t r o d u c t i o n : A Semantic Space for Nonv e r b a l Behavior i n Advances i n Communication Research (C. David Mortensen and Kenneth K. Sereno, e d s . ) , (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), p p .
277-287.
28
R. W. Exline and L. C. Winters, Affective Relations and Mutual
Glances i n Dyads i n Affect, Cognition, and P e r s o n a l i t y ( s . S. Tomkins and
11
m o t i o n s , 2 9 p o s t u r e , 3 0 and p r o x i m i t y 3 1 were varied t o change
k i n e s i c meanings.
For purposes of d i f f e r e n t v e r b a l messages,
r e p e t i t i o n , h e s i t a t i o n , and mispronounciation 3 2 were used.
Dr. Welford, who i s c u r r e n t l y preparing a t e x t on the use of
k i n e s i o l o g y i n speech, not only suggested the above as t h e
b e s t v a r i a b l e s t o employ t o p r o j e c t d e s i r e d meaning, but a l s o
i n d u l g e n t l y acted as t h e "employer" i n t h e v i d e o - t a p e .
C. E. Izard, eds.), (New York: Springer Press, 1965), p. 319; and A.
Kendon and M. Cook, "The Consistency of Gaze Patterns in Social Interaction," British Journal of PsjrchologY., 60:481-494, 1969.
29
Albert Mehrabian, Silent Messages (Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1971), p. 67; Allen T. Dittman and L. G.
Llewellyn, "Body Movements and Speech Rhythm in Social Conversation,"
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 11:98-106, 1969; and Paul
Ekman, "Differential Communication of Affect by Head and Body Cues,"
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2:726-735, 1965.
30
Albert Mehrabian, "Influence of Attitudes From the Posture,
Orientation and Distance of a Communicator," Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 32:292-308, 1968; Albert E. Scheflen, "Significance of Posture in Communications Systems," Psychiatry, 27(4):316-331,
1964; B. Christiansen, Thus Speaks the Body: Attempts Toward a Personology From the Point of View of Respiration and Postures (Oslo: Institute for Social Research, 1963); and F. Deutsch, "Analysis of Postural
Behavior," Psychoanalysts Quarterly, 16:195-213, 1947.
3lEdward T. Hall, The Silent Language (New York: Fawcett Premier, 1959), pp. 146-164; and Mehrabian, Silent Messages, op. cit., pp.
76-86.
32
G. R. Miller and M. A. Hewgill, "The Effect of Variations in
Nonfluency on Audience Ratings of Source Credibility," Quarterly Journal
of Speech, L:36-44, February, 1964; Kenneth K. Sereno and G. J. Hawkins,
The Effects of Variations in Speaker's Nonfluency Upon Audience Ratings
of Attitude Toward the Speech Topic and Speakers' Credibility in Speech
Monograph (n.p.), 1967:3_4, pp. 58-64; and F. H. Silverman and D. E.
Williams, "Loci of Disfluences in the Speech of Non-Stutterers During
Oral Reading," Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 10:790-794, 1967.
12
A test was prepared (Appendix A) and the following
four video-tape sequences were shot (Appendix C) which were:
Take 1:
Positive kinesics, positive vocalization
Take 2:
Negative kinesics, positive vocalization
Take 3:
Negative kinesics, negative vocalization
Take 4:
Positive kinesics, negative vocalization
Mr. Ralph M. Newell33 and Mr. Frank Majers 3 4 both provided the technical advice as well as the filming for the
experiment.
The camera was located 18 feet away from Dr. Welford
with a telephoto reading of 30. An F=15-64 mm lens was used
at "wide away".
For negative proximity, the lens was zoomed
completely back so as to get the whole.body and give the
audience (employees) a feeling of separation.
Positive prox-
emics zoomed in to 30 wide to show only a "bust" of Dr.
Welford.
Each take lasted approximately three minutes.
To ensure the exact wording would always be used, it
was arranged so that Dr. Welford could read the message (out
of the range of the camera eye.)
33Director of Recording Services at Louisiana State University,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
^information Representative for Recording Services at
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
13
The Pre-Test.
A pre-test was conducted using a few
sympathetic friends and colleagues of the author, showing the
experiment exactly as it would be conducted.
This pre-test
resulted in the researcher adding a "canned" speech to present to the employee groups to initiate the experiment.
The Questionnaire.
Using the assistance of Dr. Kenneth
L. Koonce35 the questionnaire design and sample were determined.
It was decided to use as many demographic variables
as feasible to determine if they were relevant.
The reasons
for this decision were:
1.
This information is not presently available in
literature in the area;
2.
One can only speculate as to whether or not there
are differences in kinesic perception between
sexes, ages, marital status, religions, education,
and personality types.
Further employing Dr. Koonce's advice, there was no
attempt to balance demographically the different participating groups, as is explained in the section on "Experimental
Groups" below.
Instead, a sufficiently large number of parti-
cipants was obtained for each group to obtain a well-rounded
3
5oepartment of Experimental Statistics, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
14
sample.
(The minimum was set a t twenty-five participants
per group for nine groups.)
Also, no subject was allowed
to p a r t i c i p a t e in more than one group so as to eliminate r e i n forcement or bias for the second message by repeated expressions, e t c .
Dr. Joseph G. Dawson36 provided assistance in s e l e c t ing the psychological t e s t used in the experiment—Cattell's
Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (Appendix B).
This
t e s t i s not designed to measure neurotic or psychotic condit i o n s , but attempts to assess the e n t i r e personality.
As
described by C a t t e l l and Eber:
The 16 P.F. i s the psychologists' answer, in the
questionnaire realm, to the demand for a t e s t giving
fullest information in the shortest time about most personality t r a i t s . I t i s not merely concerned with some
narrow concept of neuroticism or "adjustment," or spec i a l kind of a b i l i t y , but sets out to cover planfully
and precisely a l l the main dimensions along which people
can differ, according to basic factor analytic research.37
C a t t e l ' s P.F. has been used in many cross-cultural
surveys, and has been translated into French, I t a l i a n , German, and Japanese among other languages; and therefore,
seemed especially appropriate, since one factor the author
was attempting to measure was the ethnic background effect.
3
%ead, Clinical Psychology Department, Louisiana State Univers i t y , Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
37
Raymond B. Cattell and Herbert W. Eber, Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (Champaign, I l l i n o i s : I n s t i t u t e
for Personality and Ability Testing, 1957), p. 1.
15
For measurement of message perception, seven concepts
of the message relating to message content were placed upon a
five-point, equal-interval ordinal scale.
Specifically, the
scales are five-step, bipolar, adjectival scales representing
linear functions and passing through a common origin.
Pre-
pared as advised by Smith,38 adverb modifiers qualify each
step on the scale; the greater the intensity of the association, the more extreme the displacement towards one or the
other polar terms.
With several of these various dimensions
measured, it is assumed that the meaning of the message will
be accurately located.
Experimental Groups.
Through the cooperation of W. L.
McDermott,39 the employees participating in this study were
chosen to get a wide cross-section of companies.
were:
Represented
Dow Chemical Company; H. E. Wiese, Inc.; Nichols Con-
struction Corporation; National Maintenance Corporation;
Industrial Electrical Constructors; The McCarty Corporation;
Sline Industrial Painters Company; and Barnard and Burk, Inc.
38
Raymond G. Smith, Development of a Semantic Differential for
Use with Speech Related Concepts in Speech Monographs, 4_, (n.p.), 1959,
p. 263.
39
Manager, Choralkali Production, Engineering Maintenance, Construction and Plant Technical Services; Dow Chemical Company, U.S.A.,
Plaquemine Division.
16
The eight companies represented encompassed the functions of engineering, production, maintenance, technical,
and staff, through all levels of management.
Illustrative of
these functions were such job categories as operators (both
technical and non-technical Shift Supervisors through Junior
Operators and Technicians); union and non-union craftsmen of
all trades (such as boilermakers, electricians, millwrights,
painters, pipefitters, etc.); engineers of all disciplines
(such as electrical, chemical, mechanical, instrument, and
civil); both instrument and electrical technicians; computer
experts; economic evaluators; and secretaries.
Utilizing the advice of Dr. Koonce, the author requested that Dow personnel get as random an assignment of
subjects to groups as possible so that, as nearly as possible,
bias would be eliminated.
On the morning of the study, the author arrived early
to complete final preparations in the conference room which
had been provided at the Dow Louisiana site.
Chairs were
already arranged in rows facing the front of the room, where
a large table was standing.
Upon this table, the Ebcor
Recorder-Monitor (which resembles almost exactly a black-andwhite television set with tape recorder attached) was placed.
Employees had been previously notified of their time of
experiment, and arrived at thirty minute intervals, beginning
at 9:00.
17
There were nine separate groups employed in the
experiment, which were divided as follows:
Group A -
Saw positive kinesics; heard positive vocalization
Group B - Saw negative kinesics; heard positive vocalization
Group C - Saw negative kinesics; heard negative vocalization
Group D - Saw positive kinesics; heard negative vocalization
Group E - Heard positive vocalization; saw nothing
Group F - Heard negative vocalization; saw nothing
Group G - Saw positive kinesics; heard nothing
Group H - Saw negative kinesics; heard nothing
Group I - Read the message (neither saw nor heard the message)
The situation (message) for each group was the same;
i.e., a neutral one so as to focus on the message interpretations.
Group I only read the message, and as such, served as
a control group in case the message itself was biased.
The Experiment.
for any late-comers.
Five minutes were allowed to elapse
As each group was assembled, the author
gave a "canned" speech about the purpose of the experiment.
The employees were told that the author was in the process of
a dissertation and was endeavoring to discover more meaningful ways to clarify communications between management and
employees.
The employees were informed that, although there
was no real "personal" information requested, that all material would be held confidential.
18
Next, the groups were told that the message was quite
short, so to please give full attention from the beginning.
Finally, they were requested not to discuss the experiment
with other participants who had not yet been interviewed.
Using the advice of Dr. Koonce, no mention was made at any
time concerning body language as this might bias the participants .
Feeling some participants might have trouble with
Cattell's Sixteen P.F. Questionnaire, a brief explanation and
illustration on the chalk board of how to check off the
desired answer on the scale was given.
Experiment packets (Appendix B) were then distributed,
and pencils were made available if necessary.
Each partici-
pant was instructed to read the letter, check off the demographic information on page 2, and the personality evaluation on page 3.
Employees were requested to stop, and not
turn the page, when the blank sheet was reached.
Using the Sony 3600 recorder and monitor, with a halfinch tape,40 the groups saw, heard, and/or read their portion
of the experiment as described above.
Participants were then
requested to turn to the last page and check off their
40
Scotch video-tape Cat. No. 361-1/2-1200-R148B; 1/2 in. x 1200
ft. (12.7 mm x 365 m.
19
appropriate message perception for each of the seven concepts
listed.
Each group was then thanked and told a copy of the
completed dissertation would be made available through both
Dow and L.S.U. libraries.
Data Preparation.
Coding of the questionnaires was
performed on an IBM code sheet, according to program format
used by the L.S.U. computer center, under the direction of
Dr. Koonce.
Data was coded in order to facilitate the
analytical methods as discussed in the "Preview" section
below.
IV.
PREVIEW
Chapter II is devoted to the presentation of the findings from the questionnaire to the employees.
Included in
this section is the discussion of the employees' sex, marital
status, ethnic background, age, religion, education and personality evaluation in relation to their message perception.
These factors are analyzed in Phase I first by frequency
distribution within each group.
After that, the groups are
"collapsed" with attendant explanation.
Means, standard devia-
tions, and analysis of variance follow in Phase II of the
analysis.
!
20
In Chapter III (following the procedures outlined
above) personality and demographic factors are correlated.
This analysis compares the variables given by the employees
concerning themselves; stressing not only the similarities,
but the differences as well.
This system of analysis pro-
vides a sort of "checks and balances" concerning any meaningful variables affecting message perception such as age,
marital status, personality type, etc.
Chapter IV is a brief summary of the study, a check
of the hypotheses, and some conclusions and recommendations
for further study.
CHAPTER II
ANALYSIS OF MESSAGE PERCEIVED BY
DEMOGRAPHICS, PERSONALITY FACTORS, AND MESSAGE TYPES
In seeking to isolate what factors contribute to an
awareness of message nuances, the employees studied were
analyzed by demographic characteristics and personality factors, and subjected to varying forms of the same message to
ascertain the discrimination between messages these subjects
could discern.
Chapter II is an analysis of the effects on
message perception of personality factors as well as the
demographic factors of age, marital status, ethnic background, religion, and education; consistent with testing
and/or developing the third hypothesis, which is:
The effect of body language on message
perception is constant regardless of personality type or demographics.
In order to test the hypothesis, several steps were
necessary.
Demographic characteristics such as age, educa-
tion, marital status, sex, religion, and ethnic background,
were compared with message discrimination to discover any
possible relationships.
Then, personality characteristics
such as whether a person is an introvert, ambivert, or extrovert were contrasted with message perception to gain insight
into possible recurring patterns.
22
This chapter will attempt to draw a profile, based
upon the findings of the above-mentioned data, so that a
guide might be given toward employing kinesics as an aid in
fostering better communications between employers and their
workers.
I.
BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Through the cooperation of Dow Chemical Company U.S.A.,
the employees participating in this study were chosen to get
a wide cross-section of companies.
The experiment was
carried out as described in the preceding chapter.
To obtain a perfectly balanced, random striated sample
would mean all people would have to be identified first, and
then assigned to each group.
for several reasons.
This method was impractical
First of all, it would have been
nearly impossible to obtain access to personnel files of
eight companies.
Secondly, employees would not have had the
anonymity promised them.
Also, with a random assignment of
a large enough number of employees to different groups (such
as was made by Dow), theoretically, a random assignment is
the final result anyway.
employees was tested.
Therefore, an initial group of 292
Due to faulty or incomplete informa-
tion, the group was reduced to 227 persons to be coded.
23
The sample sizes required to be 99 percent certain
that the standard error of the mean values of the messages
was no greater than .1 are shown in Appendix D.
The table
in Appendix D indicates the sample size need be no greater
than 222 employees for the largest standard deviation which
was obtained, and on some questions the responses required
dropped to 148. As a result, the mean interpretation of the
messages resulting from this experiment are considered very
reliable representations of the employee's message perception.
After receiving Phase I from the computer and tabulating the results, the author found that the data, in some
instances, needed to be "collapsed".
Collapsing means that
data is combined into smaller categories, or in some
instances, eliminated altogether.
The rationale behind, and
justification for, this statistical procedure is that, when
inaugurating a study, certain categories are artifically
established by the author during the preparation and writing
of the questionnaire (such as this author established six
possible age intervals), but author establishment does not
make these categories exist per se.
Phase I data indicated
that some artificial cells had been created in initiating
the study, hence the following collapsing was performed:
1.
Marital Status was collapsed from four groups to
two groups due to insufficient numbers of people
24
in the "widow" and "divorced" categories.
The
new categories were established as "currently
married or widowed" and "single or divorced".
2.
Under the heading of "Religion", there was one
person of the Jewish faith, and three persons
specifying "none".
Statistically, one person
should not comprise a cell.
Therefore, these four
individuals were dropped from the sample as it did
not disturb the sample size to do so.
Also, one
Church of Christ member, one Mormon, seven Baptists, and one Presbyterian did not classify themselves as Protestants, but chose to write in their
religious preference.
Using the definition of a
protestant found in Webster ("any Christian not
belonging to the Roman Catholic or Orthodox
Eastern Church"), 41 the author coded these individuals as protestants.
3.
The original eight categories for ethnic background
were collapsed to four categories:
(a) Afro-
American (which includes those persons who specified "black" under the "other" category; (b)
- -Joseph H. Friend and David B. Guralnik (eds.), Webster's New
World Dictionary of the American Language (New York; The World Publishing Company, 1957), p. 1171.
25
Northern European, which is defined as Anglo-Saxon,
German, Scandinavian, and Slavic; (c) Southern
European, which is defined as French, Italian, and
Spanish; and Other, which includes persons of
greatly mixed ancestry.
(There were no Orientals
participating in the study.)
4.
As there were no participants under eighteen years
of age, this category was dropped.
Also, due to
the small number of participants in the "18 to 21"
and "22 to 25" years of age categories, these two
classifications were combined to read, "18 to 25".
5.
There were only three people with post-graduate
degrees (two with Ph.D.'s); so the last two categories of "some post-graduate work" and "postgraduate degree" were combined.
These above-mentioned manipulations left 223 employees
for the study, and are broken down in Table I.
After these data were ready, Phase II of the computer
was run.
First, raw means were calculated for each category.
It was felt that perhaps this data was insufficient alone,
because when classifications are not equal (example 22 females
and 201 males) a true (raw) mean may not tell the whole story.
An adjustment made because of unequal numbers is called an
Table I
STATISTICAL BREAKDOWN OF EMPLOYEES BY DEMOGRAPHICS AND PERSONALITY
Sex
Female Male
22
Marital Status
Single or Divorced Married or Widowed
201
19
18 to 25
26 to 30
25
40
Afro-Am.
204
Age
31 to 35
36 or older
57
16
Religion
Catholic Protestant
101
98
125
Ethnic Background
N'n Europ. S'n Europ.
120
59
Introvert
47
Other
28
Personality
Ambivert Extrovert
123
53
Education
less than
high school
9
Source:
high school
diploma
73
Appendices B and E
some college
77
college degree
40
post-graduage work
24
t^o
27
adjusted mean.
Adjusted means were computed, and in this
instance, there was no real difference.
Therefore, raw means
were used, as they may be more significant.
II.
METHOD OF ANALYSIS
In interpreting the tables in this chapter, a few
explanatory remarks should be made to facilitate understanding of the analysis.
This commentary is sub-divided into
what the columnar headings mean.
The "Source of Variation" Column.
The Source of
Variation Column lists the factors under consideration (sex,
marital status, ethnic background, age, religion, education,
and personality).
The demographic variables are very
straightforward, and are, after collapsing:
A.
B.
C.
Sex
1.
Female
2.
Male
Marital Status
1.
Never Married or Divorced
2.
Currently Married or Widowed
Ethnic Background
1.
Afro-American
2.
Northern European
28
D.
E.
F.
3.
Southern European
4.
Other
Age
1.
18 to 25 years of age
2.
26 to 30 years of age
3.
31 to 35 years of age
4.
36 years or older
Religion
1.
Catholic
2.
Protestant
Education Completed
1.
Less than high school
2.
High school diploma
3.
Some college
4.
College degree
5.
Post graduate work
The p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s from the 16 P . F . t e s t were
scored and i n t e r p r e t e d with the advise of Dr. Dawson and Dr.
Caesar B. Moody. 42 Rather than undertake a complete persona l i t y inventory (which was not the i n t e n t of t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n ) , a s i m p l i f i e d e v a l u a t i o n was made as described below:
4lHead, Psychology Department, Southeastern Louisiana University,
Hammond, Louisiana.
29
The closer to "1" checked for the following variables, the more introverted the personality;
A.
Reserved, detached, critical, aloof
B.
Less intelligent, concrete-thinking
C.
Affected by feelings, emotionally less stable, easily
upset
D.
Humble, mild, accommodating, conforming
E.
Sober, prudent, serious, taciturn
G.
Shy, restrained, timid, threat-sensitive
I.
Trusting, adaptable, free of jealousy, easy to get along
with
J.
Practical, careful, conventional, regulated by external
realities, proper
M.
Conservative, respecting established ideas, tolerant of
traditional difficulties
P.
Relaxed, tranquil, unfrustrated
The closer to "10" checked for the following
variables, the more introverted the personality;
F.
Conscientious, perservering, s t a i d , moralistic
H. Tender-minded, clinging, over-protected, sensitive
K.
Shrewd, calculating, worldly, penetrating
L.
Apprehensive, self-reproaching, worrying, troubled
N.
Self-sufficient, prefers own decisions, resourceful
O. Controlled, socially precise, following self-image
The closer to " 1 " checked for the following
variables, the more extroverted the personality;
30
4.
F.
conscientious, persevering, s t a i d , moralistic
H.
Tender-minded, clinging, over-protected, sensitive
K.
Shrewd, calculating, worldly, penetrating
L.
Apprehensive, self-reproaching, worrying, troubled
N.
Self-sufficient, prefers own decisions, resourceful
0.
Controlled, socially precise, following self-image
The c l o s e r t o "10" checked for t h e
following
v a r i a b l e s , t h e more e x t r o v e r t e d t h e p e r s o n a l i t y ;
A.
Reserved, detached, c r i t i c a l , aloof
B.
Less i n t e l l i g e n t , concrete-thinking
C.
Affected by feelings, emotionally less stable, easily
upset
D.
Humble, mild, accommodating, conforming
E.
Sober, prudent, serious, taciturn
G.
Shy, restrained, timid, threat-sensitive
1.
Trusting, adaptable, free of jealousy, easy to get along
with
J.
Practical, careful, conventional, regulated by external
r e a l i t i e s , proper
M. Conservative, respecting of established ideas, tolerant
of traditional d i f f i c u l t i e s
P . Relaxed, tranquil, unfrustrated
After mathematically coding t h e columns, a mean score
was computed for each p a r t i c i p a n t .
Based upon t h e score
they r e c e i v e d , an employee was d e s i g n a t e d as f o l l o w s :
31
1-5
Introvert
5-6
Ambivert
6 - 10 Extrovert
A complete listing of all answers for every employee
used in this study can be seen in Appendix E.
The "F Value" Column.
The "F Value" is a value calcu-
lated which is derived from statistical distribution if the
null hypothesis is true.
(This is the most important
statistic calculated in the entire study.)
If a null hypoth-
esis is rejected, by default, the working hypothesis must be
used.
The "Probability of F" Column.
The "Probability of F"
column is added for those less mathematically inclined individuals.
It is significant only at certain confidence
levels, as indicated:
1.
One can be 90% confident a statement is true if
the probability is less than .10;
2.
One can be 95% confident a statement is true if
the probability is less than .05;
3.
One can be 99% confident a statement is true if
the probability is less than .01.
32
III.
DEMOGRAPHICS AND PERSONALITY
COMPARED TO MESSAGE PERCEIVED
In seeking to determine what, if any, effect body
language has on communications, it was necessary to isolate
and examine demographics and personality to insure that any
differences in message perception found were, in fact, due to
kinesics and not something else.
Therefore, seven measures
of message perception were evaluated using demographics and
personality factors as the sources of variation.
These
factors were favorability, truthfulness, believability,
reputability, reliability, pleasantness, and informability;
and Tables II through VIII examine each of these elements in
turn.
Perception of Message "Favorability".
As can be seen
in Table II, the probability that differences observed in
message favorability were due to chance was .99, or in other
words, there was no significant difference in message perception due to sex.
Going down the list of factors, favor-
ability of message perceived was likewise not affected
significantly by marital status, ethnic background, age,
religion, education, or personality.
This table illustrates
the point that apparently, whether or not a person perceives
a message as favorable has little to do with demographics or
personality.
33
TABLE II
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE FAVORABILITY
BY DEMOGRAPHICS, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND MESSAGE TYPE
Source of
Variation
Degrees of
Freedom
F Value
Probability of F
Sex
1
0.01
0.99
Marital Status
1
2,87
0.09
Ethnic Background
3
0.01
1.00
Age
3
0.64
0.59
Religion
1
0.01
0.97
Education
4
1.71
0.15
Personality
2
0.88
0.59
ERROR#
Source:
139
Appendix B
#There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom
34
Perception of Message "Truthfulness".
Table III,
which concerns message truthfulness, likewise indicates
similar findings; i.e., whether or not a message is considered truthful has no apparent bearing on whether or not
a person is female or male; married or not; Catholic or
Protestant; well-educated or barely literate; or comes from
any especial ethnic origin.
Likewise, it made little
difference in gleaning this perception whether or not a person's personality was outgoing, withdrawn, or somewhere in
between.
Most significant of the factors under considera-
tion was age, although not much conclusive can be said
about this finding either.
Persons under 25 and over 35
tended to be more favorably disposed to perceive a message
as concerns truthfulness, regardless of what medium was
used.
Perhaps this is the age where youthful naivete has
vanished and a philosophic viewpoint has not yet been
established.
Perception of Message "Believability".
Message believ-
ability is dealt with in Table IV, and marital status is the
main factor studied which seemed to affect a person's message
perception (5% level).
It would appear that being in close
union with another individual may make a person more attuned
to pursuit of what is, or is not, believable.
Personality
35
TABLE III
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE TRUTHFULNESS
BY DEMOGRAPHICS, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND MESSAGE TYPE
Source of
Variation
Degrees of
Freedom
F Value
Probability of F
Sex
1
0.30
0.59
Marital Status
1
2.89
0.09
Ethnic Background
3
0.51
0.68
Age
3
2.42
0.07
Religion
1
0.06
0.80
Education
4
0.74
0.57
Personality
2
1.95
0.14
ERROR#
Source:
139
Appendix B
#There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom
36
TABLE IV
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE BELIEVABILITY
BY DEMOGRAPHICS, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND MESSAGE TYPE
Source of
Variation
Degrees of
Freedom
F Value
Probability of F
Sex
1
1.22
0.27
Marital Status
1
3.34
0.07 *
Ethnic Background
3
0.23
0.87
Age
3
2.05
0.11
Religion
1
0.11
0.74
Education
4
0.38
0.82
Personality
2
4.42
0.01 *
ERROR#
Source:
139
Appendix B
#There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom
*Five percent level
37
also seemed to have a small bearing (5% level) on whether
or not a message is believed, with introverts tending to
disbelieve more than ambiverts or extroverts.
A person's
gender, lineage, generation, or formal instruction seemed not
to influence his degree of perceived believability.
Perception of Message "Reputability".
Table V, treat-
ing whether or not the message was reputable, offered no
measurably significant message perception differences on any
of the demographics:
sex, marital status, ethnic background,
age, religion, or education.
In examining personality type,
persons designated as ambiverts were slightly more predisposed to perceive a message as reputable, but not enough so
to be statistically conclusive.
Perception of Message "Reliability".
Whether or not a
message was perceived by the employees studied as reliable
was independent of the demographic characteristics and personality factors under consideration.
As Table VI demon-
strates, the reliability content these people evidenced was
not guided by their lifespan, place of worship, degree of
literacy, nationality, conjugal state, or sex.
Their type of
personality did not affect their judgment of whether or not a
message could be classified as reputable, either.
38
TABLE V
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE REPUTABILITY
BY DEMOGRAPHICS, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND MESSAGE TYPE
Source of
Variation
Degrees of
Sex
Freedom
1
F Value
2.14
Marital Status
1
0.57
Ethnic Background
3
0.51
Age
3
2.24
Religion
1
0.75
Education
4
0.58
Personality
2
2.79
Probability of F
0.14
0.54
0.68
0.09
0.61
0.68
0.06
ERROR#
Source:
139
Appendix B
#There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom
39
TABLE VI
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE RELIABILITY
BY DEMOGRAPHICS, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND MESSAGE TYPE
Source of
Variation
Degrees of
Freedom
Sex
1
Marital Status
1
Ethnic Background
3
Age
3
Religion
1
Education
4
Personality
2
ERROR#
Source:
F Value
0.06
0.81
2.14
0.14
0.26
0.85
1.03
0.38
0.01
0.96
0.20
0.93
1.84
0.16
139
Appendix B
#There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom
i
Probability of F
40
Perception of Message "Pleasantness".
The message
variable of "pleasantness" was unaffected by any of the factors studied.
It can be stated (Table VII) that ambiverts,
introverts, and extroverts were all equally likely to find
a message pleasant.
Similarly, whether or not a message was
deemed pleasant could not be attributed to an employee's
gender, connubial condition, lineage, age, religious beliefs,
or schooling.
Perception of Message "Informability".
In deciding
whether or not a message source was informed, the marital
status of a person did affect message acumen a little (5%
level) as is evidenced in Table VIII.
Once more, it can be
speculated that perhaps living with another person in close
communion might tend to make an individual more attuned to
whether or not a message source is indeed informed.
As with
the preceding six message meanings tested, whether an employee
perceived a message source as being informed seemed independent of his personality type.
Furthermore, the subject's
education, age, religion, ethnic background, and sex did not
affect how he judged a message on informability.
IV.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Chapter II, dealing with how an employee's demographic
characteristics and personality affects message perception
41
TABLE VII
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE PLEASANTNESS
BY DEMOGRAPHICS, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND MESSAGE TYPE
Source of
Variation
Degrees of
Freedom
F Value
Probability of F
Sex
1
0.06
0.80
Marital Status
1
1.67
0.20
Ethnic Background
3
0.74
0.54
Age
3
0.71
0.55
Religion
1
0.16
0.69
Education
4
0.31
0.87
Personality
2
0.77
0.53
ERRORff
Source:
139
Appendix B
#There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom
42
TABLE VIII
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE INFORMABILITY
BY DEMOGRAPHICS, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND MESSAGE TYPE
Source of
Degrees of
Variation
Freedom
F Value
Probability of F
Sex
1
0.40
0.53
Marital Status
1
5.29
0.02 *
Ethnic Background
3
0,55
0.66
Age
3
1.15
0.33
Religion
1
1.50
0.22
Education
4
0.30
0.88
Personality
2
1.62
0.20
ERROR*
139
Source: Appendix B
#There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom
43
indicates conclusively that for at least these 223 employees,
demographic characteristics such as age, religion, sex,
ethnic background, and education do not materially affect
how a message is perceived.
Marital status alone affects
message perception, and then, only to a slight degree, and
only on certain message aspects.
Additionally, type of
personality, i.e., whether a person is an introvert, ambivert, or extrovert, does not affect message perception.
As Chapter II was the discussion of how demographic
characteristics and personality factors affected message
discrimination (Hypothesis three), the next step in this
study was the analysis of if, and how, kinesics qualifies
message perception.
This, then, is the topic of Chapter III.
CHAPTER III
ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF MESSAGE PERCEIVED
BY TYPE OF MESSAGE EXPERIENCED
Chapter III is a parallel analysis of Chapter II.
How demographic characteristics, personality factors, and
type of message related to message perception was analyzed
in Chapter II to test the third hypothesis, which stated:
the effect of body language on message perception is constant regardless of personality type or demographics.
It
was determined that the effects due to these characteristics
are negligible.
As these characteristics are, for the most
part, inconsequential as message affectors, the focus of the
entire study rests on how different types of communication—
written, oral, and visual—affect message perception.
There-
fore, it is the objective of this chapter to measure and
evaluate hypotheses one and two concerning how different types
of communication affect message perception.
I.
METHOD OF ANALYSIS
The two hypotheses treated in this chapter are:
1.
There is no difference in response to messages
whether negative or positive body language is
used.
45
2.
There is no difference in response to messages
whether or not kinesics are congruent with verbal
message content.
In order to test these hypotheses, five steps were
necessary, as follows:
1.
Body language used alone as a variable was
measured as an affector of message perception.
2.
Vocalization used alone as a variable was measured
as an affector of message perception.
3.
Voice and kinesics used together were measured
as affectors of message perception as a main
effect, and for interaction.
4.
Demographic characteristics and personality factors were compared with use of body language to
discover any possible relationships as a main
effect and for interaction.
5.
Demographic characteristics and personality factors were compared with the use of vocalization
to discover any possible relationships as a main
effect and for interaction.
In interpreting the tables in this chapter, the
reader is invited to return to the preceding chapter for a
description and statistical explanation of these columnar
headings:
of F".
"Source of Variation", "F Value", and "Probability
46
The most important sources of variation (5?. or less
chance of the variation being due to chance) for each table
is graphed for the purpose of allowing closer scrutiny of
possible variation causation.
These graphs use as their
axes the two elements which were the sources of variation
and make it pictorially easy to see how the mean of one
variable changed for each shift in the other variable.
Because of unequal number of participants falling into each
classification, means are adjusted for sex, marital status,
ethnic background, age, religion, education, personality,
personality by body language, personality by voice, sex by
body language, marital status by body language, ethnic
background by body language, age by body language, religion
by body language, education by body language, sex by voice,
marital status by voice, ethnic background by voice, age by
voice, religion by voice, and education by voice.
II.
KINESICS AND VOCALIZATION
COMPARED TO MESSAGE PERCEIVED
Chapter II showed that the differences in message
perception were not attributable to personality or demographics.
In endeavoring to discover what, if any, effect
kinesics has on communications, it was indispensable that
written, oral, and visual characteristics be separated and
47
scrutinized to make certain what discrepancies in message
perception were, in actuality, due to body language and not
anything else.
Accordingly, seven gauges of message per-
ception were assessed using the written word, speech, and
body language as the sources of variation.
These gauges were
favorability, truthfulness, believability, reputability,
reliability, pleasantness, and informability; and Tables IX
through XV investigate each of these elements in turn.
Perception of Message "Favorability".
The most
important variable for message favorability appears to be
due primarily to a combination of body language and voice,
as is seen in Table IX.
Voice or body language analyzed
alone, or voice and body language in combination with any
demographic characteristic or personality factor, did not
produce any discernible fluctuation in message perception.
Figure 1 (which is a graphic picture of the asterisked
column) shows that when no vocalization or body language at
all is used (written medium), the lowest message favorability
of all results.
Body language alone or voice alone
apparently did not affect how favorably a message was perceived (probability of F scores of .2 and .6 respectively),
but when kinesics and voice were employed together, a great
deal of significance (.0013) is found.
Or, in other words,
48
TABLE IX
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE FAVORABILITY
BY MESSAGE TYPE, DEMOGRAPHICS, AND PERSONALITY FACTORS
Source of Variation
Body Language
Voice
Body Language by Voice
Personality by Body Language
Personality by Voice
Sex by Body Language
Marital Status by Body Language
Ethnic Background by Body Language
Age by Body Language
Religion by Body Language
Education by Body Language
Sex by Voice
Marital Status by Voice
Ethnic Background by Voice
Age by Voice
Religion by Voice
Education by Voice
ERROR #
Source:
F
Degrees of
Freedom
Value
2
2
4
4
4
2
2
6
6
2
8
2
2
6
6
2
8
1.43
0.86
4.92
1.07
1.33
2.29
1.65
1.01
0.80
0.04
0.52
0.98
0.51
1.42
1.81
0.45
0.30
Probability
of F
0.24
0.57
0.01 **
0.37
0.26
0.10
0.19
0.42
0.58
0.96
0.84
0.62
0.61
0.21
0.10
0.64
0.97
139
Appendix B
# There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom.
* There is a 95% confidence level that there was a causation variation
associated with the variable.
49
FIGURE 1
BODY LANGUAGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE FAVORABILITY
3.5
H
3.O..
H
m
2.5.,
No Vocalization
2.a.
Positive Vocalization
«
o
>
1.5.
W
1.0-
Negative Vocalization
w
to
W
S
.5.
•4-
Positive
BODY
Source:
Note:
4-
Neutral
4-
Negative
LANGUAGE
Appendix B
Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age,
religion, education, personality, personality by body language, personality by voice, sex by body language, marital status by body
language, ethnic background by body language, age by body language,
religion by body language, education by body language, sex by
voice, marital status by voice, ethnic background by voice, age by
voice, religion by voice, and education by voice.
50
there are only 13 times in 10,000 that this combination can
be attributed to chance alone.
Perception of Message "Truthfulness".
Table X,
which concerns message truthfulness, likewise indicates
similar findings.
Again, the one most significant factor
affecting perceived truthfulness was a combination of
vocalization and kinesics.
In this instance, there were
only 4 cases out of 10,000 in which the difference could be
attributed to chance!
This finding is visually depicted in
Figure 2.
From the data presented in Figure 2, it is evident
that positive vocalization overcomes negative body language
or no body language as the probability figures never fell
below 2.5.
Furthermore, neither positive nor negative body
language affects negative voice to much extent.
When no
verbalizing is heard, however, body language becomes more
critical as concerns truthfulness.
Both positive and
negative body language were found to evidence truthfulness
better than the written word alone.
From these findings the
practical conclusion appears to be clear:
if employers wish
to get a favorable or unfavorable message to appear truthful,
they should confront their employees on a face-to-face
basis.
51
TABLE X
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE TRUTHFULNESS
BY MESSAGE TYPE, DEMOGRAPHICS, AND PERSONALITY FACTORS
Source of Variation
Body Language
Voice
Body Language by Voice
Personality by Body Language
Personality by Voice
Sex by Body Language
Marital Status by Body Language
Ethnic Background by Body Language
Age by Body Language
Religion by Body Language
Education by Body Language
Sex by Voice
Marital Status by Voice
Ethnic Background by Voice
Age by Voice
Religion by Voice
Education by Voice
ERROR #
Source:
Degrees of
Freedom
F
Value
2
2
4
4
4
2
2
6
6
2
8
2
2
6
6
2
8
0.02
2.60
5.83
0.28
1.49
0.24
1.75
0.20
1.17
0.05
0.53
0.81
0.59
1.48
2.62
0.33
0.58
Probability
of F
0.98
0.08
0.01 **
0.89
0.21
0.79
0.18
0.97
0.33
0.95
0.83
0.55
0.56
0.19
0.02 *
0.72
0.79
139
Appendix B
# There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom.
* There is a 95% confidence level that there was a causation variation
associated with the variable.
** There is a 99% confidence level that there was a causation variation
associated with the variable.
52
FIGURE 2
BODY LANGUAGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE TRUTHFULNESS
3.5
w 3.0
w
2
*
2.S
D
fa
a
2.0
D
«
1.5
Positive Vocalization
No Vocalization
w 1.0-
Negative Vocalization
o
<
w
en
w
.5-
0
Positive
BODY
Source:
Note:
Neutral
Negative
LANGUAGE
Appendix B
Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age,
religion, education, personality, personality by body Inaguage, personality by voice, sex by body language, marital status by body
language, ethnic background by body language, age by body language,
religion by body language, education by body language, sex by voice,
marital status by voice, ethnic background by voice, age by voice,
religion by voice, and education by voice.
53
In attempting to account for the reason why seeing
equates with truthfulness, it appeared that kinesics or
vocalization by themselves or in conjunction with any other
demographic or personality factor did not influence an
employee's degree of perceived truthfulness as the probability of F did not rise above .2 on most variables.
Table X does indicate, though somewhat less emphatically, that age plays a meaningful relation if vocalization
alone is used.
Respondent age affected message perception
little whether voice and/or body language were employed
except in the group aged 26 to 30.
Then, the absence of
body language appeared to cause somewhat deviate replies,
in that this age group tended to believe as truthful,
messages which were written only.
(Figure 3). Perhaps it
is at this age that employees realize superiors cannot be
taken strictly at "face value" but have not yet acquired the
sophistication to come up with a workable model which denotes
truthfulness by voice or actions alone.
Perception of Message "Believability".
In Table XI,
which treats message believability, vocalization and marital
status were important factors as is indicated by the statistically significant figures of .0558 and .0431 respectively.
A pictorial display of this fact, shown in Figure 4, indicates
54
TABLE XI
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE BELIEVABILITY
BY MESSAGE TYPE, DEMOGRAPHICS, AND PERSONALITY FACTORS
Source of Variation
Body Language
Voice
Body Language by Voice
Personality by Body Language
Personality by Voice
Sex by Body Language
Marital Status by Body Language
Ethnic Background by Body Language
Age by Body Language
Religion by Body Language
Education by Body Language
Sex by Voice
Marital Status by Voice
Ethnic Background by Voice
Age by Voice
Religion by Voice
Education by Voice
ERROR #
Source:
Degree of
Freedom
2
2
4
4
4
2
2
6
6
2
8
2
2
6
6
2
8
F
Value
0,94
2,92
1.76
0.31
1.39
0.20
1.36
0.53
0.62
1.31
0.80
1.15
3.18
1.18
1.29
0.84
0.82
Probability
of F
0.60
0.06 *
0.14
0.87
0.24
0.82
0.26
0.79
0.71
0.27
0.60
0.32
0.04 *
0.32
0.26
0.56
0.59
139
Appendix B
# There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom.
* There is a 95% confidence level that there was a causation variation
associated with the variable.
55
FIGURE 3
AGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE TRUTHFULNESS
3.5..
CO
w
W
Z
3.0.2.5..
fa
2.0..
EH
No V o c a l i z a t i o n
Positive Vocalization
D
«
1.5.fa
O
«fl
Negative V o c a l i z a t i o n
1.0._
10
.5.-
CO
H
18-25
rf:
26-30
-h
31-35
35 up
AGE
Source:
Note:
Appendix B
Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age,
religion, education, personality, personality by body language, personality by voice, sex by body language, marital status by body
language, ethnic background by body language, age by body language,
religion by body language, education by body language, sex by voice,
marital status by voice, ethnic background by voice, ago by voice,
religion by voice, and education by voice.
I
56
FIGURE 4
VOICE BY MARITAL STATUS FOR MESSAGE BELIEVABILITY
En
3.5..
No Vocalization
Positive Vocalization
3.a.
n
<
>
w
2.SNegative Vocalization
H
i4
2.a.
H
m
l.S-
w
V)
<
l.a.
CO
CO
fa
S
.a.
-4-
Never Married
or Divorced
M A R I T A L
Source:
Note:
-4-
Currently Married
or Widowed
S T A T U S
Appendix B
Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age,
religion, education, personality, personality by body language, personality by voice, sex by body language, marital status by body
language, ethnic background by body language, age by body language,
religion by body language, education by body language, sex by voice,
marital status by voice, ethnic background by voice, age by voice,
religion by voice, and education by voice.
57
that when no, or negative vocalization, is used, people never
married or divorced have a low believability score as compared to those married or widowed.
These unmarried people
tend to put full credibility in a message when positive
vocalization is applied, however.
Perhaps this fact may be
attributed to the fact that in a close relationship, like
marriage, one discovers that voice alone does not do all of
the communicating, and a person learns to seek other communication clues for complete message believability.
Other
demographic factors such as gender, religious beliefs, age,
learning, lineage, and personality did not affect the perception of believability in this experiment.
These findings noted above suggest to employers that
employees tend to believe with their ears rather than their
eyes, as what was audile in this experiment was most significant for the factor of believability.
Perception of Message "Reputability".
Table XII,
dealing with whether the message was reputable, shows most
differences appear when both kinesics and voice are employed
as is indicated by a probability of F figure of .0247.
Expanded in Figure 5, this finding indicates that with negative vocalization, neither positive nor negative body
language improves how reputable an employee perceives his
58
TABLE XII
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE REPUTABILITY
BY MESSAGE TYPE, DEMOGRAPHICS, AND PERSONALITY FACTORS
Source of Variation
Body Language
Voice
Body Language by Voice
Personality by Body Language
Personality by Voice
Sex by Body Language
Marital status by Body Language
Ethnic Background by Body Language
Age by Body Language
Religion by Body Language
Education by Body Language
Sex by Voice
Marital Status by Voice
Ethnic Background by Voice
Age by Voice
Religion by Voice
Education by Voice
ERROR #
Source:
Degrees of
Freedom
2
2
4
4
4
2
2
6
6
2
8
2
2
6
6
2
8
F
Value
0.11
2.79
2.88
'0.34
0.32
0.09
0.80
0.31
0.34
0.09
0.87
0.45
0.01
1.19
1.36
0.37
0.60
Probability
of F
0.90
0.06
0.02 *
0.85
0.87
0.92
0.55
0.93
0.91
0.91
0.54
0.64
0.99
0.32
0.23
0.70
0.78
139
Appendix B
# There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom.
* There is a 95% confidence level that there was a causation variation
associated with the variable.
59
FIGURE 5
BODY LANGUAGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE REPUTABILITY
3.5
*
En
Positive Vocalization
3.0
m
<
No Vocalization
2.5
EH
D
ft
fa
Pi
2.0._
1-5. _
fa
Negative Vocalization
0
<
l-0._
CO
CO
fa
s
•5._
4-
Positive
BODY
Source:
Note:
4-
Neutral
4-
Negative
L A N G U A G E
Appendix B
Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age,
religion, education, personality, personality by body language, personality by voice, sex by body language, marital status by body
language, ethnic background by body language, age by body language,
religion by body language, education by body language, sex by voice,
marital status by voice, ethnic background by voice, age by voice,
religion by voice, and education by voice.
60
superior's message.
In fact, the best way to exude message
reputability is apparently through written messages alone.
The fact that a message is in print apparently makes it
reputable to many employees.
Employers should bear in mind, therefore, that for
making employees judge a message as reputable, the best way
to penetrate with this factor is to use a written medium,
although positive body language can enhance reputability
in an employee's mind.
Whether or not a message is con-
sidered reputable has no apparent bearing on whether or not
a person is married, male or female, well-educated or
functionally literate, Protestant or Catholic, or comes from
any particular racial background.
Furthermore, it makes
little difference in perceived reputability whether an
employee's personality is introspective, extrospective, or
anywhere in between.
Perception of Message "Reliability".
In Table XIII,
which pertains to message reliability, the important factors
once again were either voice alone (probability of F figure
of .0378) or a kinesic-vocal combination arrangement (.0219).
An expansion of this finding on message reliability (Figure
6) indicates that negative vocalization seriously hampers
message reliability regardless of the type of body language
61
TABLE XIII
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE RELIABILITY
BY MESSAGE TYPE, DEMOGRAPHICS, AND PERSONALITY FACTORS
Source of Variation
Body Language
Voice
Body Language by Voice
Personality by Body Language
Personality by Voice
Sex by Body Language
Marital Status by Body Language
Ethnic Background by Body Language
Age by Body Language
Religion by Body Language
Education by Body Language
Sex by Voice
Marital Status by Voice
Ethnic Background by Voice
Age by Voice
Religion by Voice
Education by Voice
ERROR #
Source:
Degrees of
Freedom
F
Value
2
2
4
4
4
2
2
6
6
2
8
2
2
6
6
2
8
0.39
3.32
3.30
0.12
0.84
0.72
1.75
0.57
0.28
0.30
0.72
0.54
0.31
1.02
1.22
0.12
1.04
Probabili
of F
0.68
0.04 *
0.01 *
0.97
0.51
0.51
0.18
0.76
0.94
0.74
0.68
0.59
0.74
0.41
0.30
0.89
0.41
139
Appendix B
# There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom.
* There is a 95% confidence level that there was a causation variation
associated with the variable.
62
FIGURE 6
BODY LANGUAGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE RELIABILITY
EH
3.5-.
H
•J
H
n
<
3.0-
P o s i t i v e Vocalization
2.5..
"^
H
fa
«
fa
o
CO
CO
2.O..
1.5.
1.0..
Negative Vocalization
.5
fa
s
4-
Positive
BODY
Source:
Note:
No Vocalization
Neutral
Negative
LANGUAGE
Appendix B
Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age,
religion, education, personality, personality by body language, personality by voice, sex by body language, marital status by body
language, ethnic background by body language, age by body language,
religion by body language, education by body language, sex by voice,
marital status by voice, ethnic background by voice, age by voice,
religion by voice, and education by voice.
63
which is employed, when communicating reliability.
In fact,
using negative vocalization with positive body language
received the lowest possible reliability rating.
Perhaps the
incongruency in body language and voice was sufficient in
itself to place a severe strain on perception of reliability.
Kinesics combined with positive verbalization garnered
high reliability ratings.
The reliability content these
employees evidenced was not guided by their lifespan, degree
of literacy, conjugal state, gender, nationality, or place of
worship.
The type of personality these people had did not
affect their discrimination of whether or not a message could
be called reputable, either.
Perception of Message "Pleasantness".
Whether or
not the message was perceived as pleasant is shown in Table
XIV.
As might well be expected by now, both kinesics and
voice are very significant when measuring this variable.
There were but 31 cases in 10,000 that this finding could
be due to chance alone.
Apparently, body language really
makes a significant contribution to whether or not an
employees think
a message is pleasant. (Figure 7 ) .
If management is so inclined, unpleasant messages
can be given a "sugar coating" by use of positive gesticulation.
More than any other gauge of message perception,
body language had an absolutely positive correlation with how
64
TABLE XIV
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE PLEASANTNESS
BY MESSAGE TYPE, DEMOGRAPHICS, AND PERSONALITY FACTORS
Source of Variation
Body Language
Voice
Body Language by Voice
Personality by Body Language
Personality by Voice
Sex by Body Language
Marital Status by Body Language
Ethnic Background by Body Language
Age by Body Language
Religion by Body Language
Education by Body Language
Sex by Voice
Marital Status by Voice
Ethnic Background by Voice
Age by Voice
Religion by Voice
Education by Voice
ERROR #
Source:
F
Degrees of
Freedom
Value
2
2
4
4
4
2
2
6
6
2
8
2
2
6
6
2
8
2,08
1.12
4.28
0.60
0.11
0.28
1.23
0.41
0.71
0.04
1.73
0.98
0.75
1.27
1.05
0.06
1.91
Probability
of F
0.13
0.33
0.01 **
0.66
0.97
0.76
0.30
0.87
0.64
0.97
0.10
0.62
0.52
0.27
0.40
0.94
0.06
139
Appendix B
# There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom.
** There is a 99% confidence level that there was a causation variation
associated with the variable.
I
65
FIGURE 7
BODY LANGUAGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE PLEASANTNESS
CO
3.5..
to
fa
3.a.
Z
EH
Z
<
2.5,-
CO
<
fa
2.a.
Positive Vocalization
No Vocalization
cu
1.5..
fa
o
<
Negative Vocalization
1.0-.
co
CO
fa
.5..
S
4-
Positive
B O D Y
Source:
Note:
Neutral
4-
Negative
L A N G U A G E
Appendix B
Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age,
religion, education, personality, personality by body language, personality by voice, sex by body language, marital status by body
language, ethnic background by body language, age by body language,
religion by body language, education by body language, sex by voice,
marital status by voice, ethnic background by voice, age by voice,
religion by voice, and education by voice.
66
a message was perceived as concerns pleasantness.
This
fact seemed to hold true in all cases, Ambiverts, introverts,
and extroverts were all equally likely to determine a message
was pleasant.
Moreover, whether or not a message was thought
pleasant could not be attributed to a person's sex, age,
marital status, ethnic background, religion, or education.
Perception of Message "Informability".
In deciding
whether or not a message source was informed (Table XV), the
employment of vocalization alone (probability of F figure
of .0404) or more significantly a combination of voice and
body language (.0055) affected perception, as the latter
finding shows only 55 in 10,000 chances of error.
Moreover,
Figure 8 indicates positive kinesics absolutely cannot overcome negative vocalization as far as whether or not informability is concerned, as is indicated by a negative informability perception of -.0803 (the only negative figure in
the entire study).
But employees are still inclined to feel
that a source, for the most part, is more informed when body
language is used in addition to voice.
Hence, employers
should be aware that to appear informed to their subordinates,
their voice must exude confidence.
As with the previous six message gauges tested,
whether an employee perceived a message source as being
67
TABLE XV
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE INFORMABILITY
BY MESSAGE TYPE, DEMOGRAPHICS, AND PERSONALITY FACTORS
Source of Variation
Body Language
Voice
Body Language by Voice
Personality by Body Language
Personality by Voice
Sex by Body Language
Marital Status by Body Language
Ethnic Background by Body Language
Age by Body Language
Religion by Body Language
Education by Body Language
Sex by Voice
Marital Status by Voice
Ethnic Background by Voice
Age by Voice
Religion by Voice
Education by Voice
ERROR #
Source:
Degrees of
Freedom
2
2
4
4
4
2
2
6
6
2
8
2
2
6
6
2
8
F
Value
0.67
3.25
3.87
0.20
0.61
0.10
1.90
1.45
0.55
1.19
0.76
0.05
0.42
1.05
1.23
0.33
0.55
Probabilit;
of F
0.52
0.04 *
0.01 **
0.94
0.66
0.90
0.15
0.20
0.77
0.31
0.64
0.95
0.66
0.40
0.30
0.73
0.82
139
Appendix B
# There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom.
*
There is a 95% confidence level that there was a causation variation
associated with the variable.
* There is a 99% confidence level that there was a causation variation
associated with the variable.
68
FIGURE 8
BODY LANGUAGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE INFORMABILITY
3.5..
EH
3.0,.
H
Positive Vocalization
H
2.5,.
m
<
No Vocalization
S
«
2.O..
o
fa
z
1.5..
H
1.0,.
Negative Vocalization
CO
• 5,_
CO
fa
Positive
BODY
Source:
Note:
Neutral
Negative
L A N G U A G E
Appendix B
Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age,
religion, education, personality, personality by body language, personality by voice, sex by body language, marital status by body
language, ethnic background by body language, age by body language,
religion by body language, education by body language, sex by voice,
marital status by voice, ethnic background by voice, age by voice,
religion by voice, and education by voice.
69
informed seemed independent of personality type.
Addition-
ally, the subject's age, education, ethnic background,
religion, and sex did not influence how he regarded a
message on reliability,
III.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Chapter III, dealing with how different types of
communication affect message perception, decisively evidences that the communication medium chosen "(whether written,
oral, or visual) does substantially influence how a
message is perceived.
In comparing the results of the
experiment answers, the overall findings indicated that there
is a high degree of similarity in how messages are perceived
by employees regardless of demographic characteristics or
personality factors.
The variability seems to be found
primarily in message medium chosen.
1.
Specifically:
When using positive vocalization, the effect
of body language does not have very much effect
on message perception;
2.
When using negative vocalization, positive
kinesics will increase message positiveness as
concerns believability, reliability, reputability,
informability, pleasantness, truthfulness, and
favorability;
70
3.
When using positive kinesics, a negative vocalization can be somewhat overcome;
4.
When using negative body language, message perception is adversely affected;
5.
Any body language--negative or positive—
increases message acceptability, whether used
with positive or negative vocalization.
When no
vocalization is used at all, messages are often
perceived unfavorably.
Therefore, it might be stated that the effect of
vocalization or body language is dependant on the presence
of the other variable.
CHAPTER IV
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary.
Communications of all types are of paramount
importance for one to achieve one's goals and purposes.
While kinesics (a form of intended or unintended communication)
has been studied from the viewpoints of physiology,
anatomy, medicine, psychology, therapy, health, sociology,
anthropology, and speech, surprisingly, no studies could be
located which related body language to a field that is constantly involved in communications—business administration.
As managers spend the greatest portion of their day engaged
in communications, it appears kinesics cannot be ignored
lest a distorted message be received.
This study has concentrated on whether, and how,
body language modifies message perception in a superiorsubordinate context.
Specifically, the null hypotheses
considered were:
1.
There is no difference in response to messages
whether negative or positive body language is
used;
2.
There is no difference in response to messages
whether or not kinesics is congruent with
verbal message content;
72
3.
The e f f e c t of body language on message percept i o n i s c o n s t a n t r e g a r d l e s s of p e r s o n a l i t y type
or demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .
The method employed i n developing t h i s study was t o
use a v i d e o - t a p e experiment to t e s t whether, and t o what
d e g r e e , d i f f e r e n t forms of messages would a f f e c t an
employee's message p e r c e p t i o n .
of
first,
This experiment c o n s i s t e d
administering a demographic q u e s t i o n n a i r e , person-
a l i t y f a c t o r t e s t , and experimental message t o a l a r g e number
of employees p a r t i t i o n e d i n t o nine random groups from e i g h t
d i f f e r e n t companies, chosen with the cooperation of Dow
Chemical Company.
The employee groups were divided as
follows:
Group A - Saw p o s i t i v e k i n e s i c s ; heard p o s i t i v e v o c a l i z a t i o n
Group B - Saw negative k i n e s i c s ; heard p o s i t i v e v o c a l i z a t i o n
Group C - Saw negative k i n e s i c s ; heard negative v o c a l i z a t i o n
Group D - Saw p o s i t i v e k i n e s i c s ; heard negative v o c a l i z a t i o n
Group E - Heard p o s i t i v e v o c a l i z a t i o n ; saw nothing
Group F - Heard negative v o c a l i z a t i o n ; saw nothing
Group G - Saw p o s i t i v e k i n e s i c s ; heard nothing
Group H - Saw negative k i n e s i c s ; heard nothing
Group I - Read t h e message ( n e i t h e r saw nor heard t h e message)
A n e u t r a l message c o n t e n t was used for every group
i n order t o reduce b i a s as much as p o s s i b l e .
73
The purpose of the demographic characteristic
questionnaire used in the experiment was to determine
whether or not the effect of body language on message
perception was affected by a person's age, sex, education,
ethnic background, religion, or marital status.
The intent
of employing the personality test was to discover if there
is any difference in response to messages according to
whether an employee is an extrovert, ambivert, or introvert
type of personality.
The above factors had to be isolated -
and analyzed before it could be stated whether any variances
in message perception discovered were due to demographic
characteristics, personality factors, or a combination of
both; or in fact, if these variations were due to the
different kinesic messages used in the experiment.
Message perceptions were tested on the factors of
favorability, truthfulness, believability, reputability,
reliability, pleasantness, and informability.
It was
assumed that with several of these message dimensions
measured on an ordinal scale the meaning of the message
would be accurately located.
Data coding and analysis were performed under the
auspices of the L.S.U, Computer Center.
Phase I rendered
frequency distributions within each group and revealed where
74
data collapsing was required.
Phase II yielded adjusted
means, standard deviations, and analysis of variance.
The analysis of the data (Chapter II) indicated
that there were differences in message perception for the
seven message factors, but that these differences could not
be attributed to demographic characteristics or type of
personality except in rare instances, and with trivial
degrees of probability.
Therefore, it could be assumed
that any differences exposed were, in fact, due to something
else.
Further investigation (Chapter II) revealed that
different communication media (written, oral, or visual)
did influence how a message was perceived.
To allow for
closer scrutiny of these sources of variation, graphs were
used to magnify the areas of message discrepancy.
These
analyses yielded several important facts:
1.
The effect of kinesics on message perception is
not very great when using positive verbalization.
2.
Positive body language does increase message
believability, favorability, informability,
pleasantness, reliability, reputability, and
truthfulness if negative vocalization is used;
i.e., when employing positive kinesics, negative
verbalization can be overcome to a degree.
75
3.
When employing negative kinesics, message perception is adversely affected,
4.
Any body language (negative or positive)
increases message acceptance.
Messages are
often interpreted unfavorably when only vocalization is used, whether that vocalization is
positive or negative.
Conclusions.
The starting point in reaching any
conclusions in primary research is the statement of one or
more hypotheses.
hypothesis.
The type hypothesis used is called a null
Such a hypothesis is a statement of no differ-
ence, and is stated as such so that it can be tested.
It is customary for the researcher to state the
level at which the hypotheses will be tested.
For this
study, .05 (the alpha level) was chosen as the level of
significance.
When a null hypothesis is rejected at the
five percent level, there are five chances in one hundred
that there is a chance the null hypothesis will be rejected
when it
is actually true.
Using the .05 level of significance, all three
hypotheses had to be rejected.
Hence, by default, (as
stated in Chapter I) the working hypothesis had to be
accepted, which was:
76
At least to some degree, kinesics does
affect response to messages.
More specifically, it can be stated that although
body language does not overcome the more powerful medium
of vocalization, kinesics can enhance or distort verbal
meaning.
The effect of verbalization on kinesics is
dependant upon the presence of the other variable.
Also,
employees feel more inclined to give weight and validity
to messages when seeing something in addition to just
hearing a message.
Management should bear in mind the following
specifics to enhance their effectiveness in getting across
desired communications:
1.
Almost all people react more favorably to
messages when they can employ both vision and
sound.
2.
Truthfulness is enhanced when a face-to-face
method is utilized.
3.
For perception of believability, employees tend
to give most
credence
to what they hear rather
than what they see.
4.
For purposes of reputability, written messages
appear to be most effective.
77
5.
Employees tend not to accept as reliable messages
which use negative body language.
But even more
important, when incongruent kinesics and vocalzation are employed, message perception as concerns reliability drops drastically.
6.
Although other message perceptions may be distorted by the use of body language, the perception of pleasantness has a direct correlation
with the use of positive kinesics.
7.
While body language alone does not ensure a
subordinate will accept a message as informed,
it does enhance verbalization.
These findings are not conducive to simple reading
by employers.
For effective use of these findings, they
should be read, discussed, elaborated on, and practiced—
perhaps first in role-playing sequences.
In larger
companies, it may be expedient to hire an expert to teach
employers how to overcome negative body language and
replace it with positive kinesic habits.
Considering the
amount of time managers expose themselves in non-verbal
communications daily and the misconceptions which result,
it would appear that no company is immune to heeding a
kinesic audit of its employees.
78
Recommendations for Further Study.
The author makes
these recommendations for further study:
1.
A similar experiment of other occupational groups
(teachers, physicians, attorneys, etc.) would
help to determine the validity of this industrial
study.
Many such studies will be necessary if
parsimony is to be practiced in learning to use
kinesics effectively both in a superior-subordinate
context and for effective communications in general.
2.
A similar study, isolating each of the body language
differences employed in the experiment,
would help to determine which are the most
important kinesic factors in message perception.
Such a study would be invaluable to management
academicians and practitioners endeavoring to
project their intended message to employees.
3.
A "before-and-after" study of employee message
perception should be executed to ascertain if
measurable results can be obtained when management is taught to use favorable body language.
4.
Finally, the same study done with similar industrial institutions would be most helpful in
establishing the validity of this study.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
80
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A.
BOOKS
Adler, Sol, The Non-Verbal Child.
C. C. Thomas Pub., 196#.
Springfield, 111.:
Allport, Gordon W. and B. E. Vernon. Studies in Expressive
Movement.
New York: Hafner, 1967.
Aubert, Charles. The Art of Pantomine.
Blom, Inc., 1970.
New York:
Austin, Gilbert. Chironomia. Carbondale, 111.:
Illinois University Press, 1966.
Benjamin
Southern
Baldwin, Gordon Cortis. Talking Drums to Written Words;
How Early Man Learned to Communicate. New York:
Norton & Co., Inc., 1970.
Barclay, John.
Edinburgh:
Muscular Motions of the Human Body.
W. Laing & A. Constable & Company, 1808.
Barthes, Roland. Elements of Semiology.
Wang, Inc., (n.d.)
New York:
Hill &
Bastian, J. Primate Signaling Systems and Human Languages
in Primate Behavior: Field Studies of Monkeys and Apes.
L Devore (Ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston,
1965.
Birdwhistell, Ray L. Communication Without Words in L'Aventure Humaine, Encyclopedic des Sciences de 1'Homme.
Geneva! Kister S.A. Paris; De La Grange Batelidre S. A.
Volume 4, 1968.
. Introduction to Kinesics.
of Louisville Press, 1952.
Louisville:
University
. Kinesics and Communication in Explorations in
Communications". E. Carpenter and M. McLuhan Eds.).
Boston: Beacon Press, 1960.
. Kinesics and Context. Philadelphia:
of Pennsylvania Press, 1970.
University
81
. The Kinesic Level in the Investigation of the
Emotions in Expression of the Emotions in Man. P. H.
Knapp (Ed.). New York: International Universities
Press, 1963.
. Some Body Motion Elements Accompanying Spoken
American English in Communication: Concepts and Perspectives . Lee Thayer (Ed.) London: Macmillan; and
Washington, D.C.: Spartan Books, 1967.
. Kinesics in International Encyclopedia of Social
Sciences. David L. Sills (Ed.). New York: Macmillan
and the Free Press, 1968.
. Communication: A Continuous Multichannel Process
in Conceptual Bases and Applications of the Communicational Sciences. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1968.
Bosmajian, Haig A. The Rhetoric of Non-Verbal Communication.
Glenview, 111.: Scott, Foresman & Co., 1971.
Broer, Marion Ruth. Human Mechanics.
N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1968.
Englewood Cliffs,
. An Introduction to Kinesiology.
N. J.: Prentice-Hall,"T9681
Broodbent, R. A History of Pantomine.
Blom, Inc., 1964.
Bruford, Rose.
Teaching Mime.
London:
Englewood Cliffs,
New York:
Benjamin
Methuen, 1964.
Campbell, H., et al. Voice, Speech, and Gesture: Elocutionary Art. Edinburgh, England: John Grant, 1912.
Cataldo, John W. Graphic Design and Visual Communication.
Scranton, Pa.: International Textbook Co., 1966.
Cattell, Raymond 3., and Herbert W. Eber. Handbook for the
Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. Champaign,
111.: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing,
1957.
Christiansen, B. Thus Speaks the Body: Attempts Toward a
Personology From the Point of View of Respiration and
Postures. Oslo: Institute for Social Research, 1963.
Condon, J. C. Semantics and Communication.
Macmillan, 1966.
i
New York:
82
Conference on Paralinguistics and Kinesics (Ed.). Indiana
University Approaches to Semiotics. The Hague: Mouton,
1954.
Cooper, John M., and Ruth B. Glassaw. Kinesiology. Third
edition, revised. St. Louis, Missouri: C. V. Mosby
Company, 1972.
Critchley, Macdonald. Kinesics: Gestural and Mimic
Language—An Aspect of Non-Verbal Communication in
Problems of Dynamic Neurology: An International
Volume. lEd. Lipman Halpern). Jerusalem, Israel:
Hebrew University, 1963.
. The Language of Gesture.
Company, 1939.
London:
E. Arnold &
Cundiff, Merlyn. Kinesics: The Power of Silent Command.
New York: Parker Publishing Company, 1972.
Davitz, Joel Robert. The Communication of Emotional
Meaning. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc.,
1964.
. The Language of Emotion.
Press, Inc., 1969.
New York:
Academic
Disher, Maurice Willson. Clowns and Pantomines.
Benjamin Blom, Inc., 1968.
New York:
Dunbar, Helen Flanders. Emotions and Bodily Changes.
Fourth edition. New York: Columbia University Press,
1954.
Duvall, Ellen Neall. Kinesiology: The Anatomy of Motion.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.,
1963.
Efron, David. Gesture and Environment.
Crown PressT 1941.
New York;
King's
, and J. P. Foley. Gestural Behavior and Social
Setting in Readings in Social Psychology. (Eds, T. L.
Newcombe and E, L. Hartley), New York; Ronald Press,
1947.
Eisenberg, Aline M., and Ralph R. Smith. Nonverbal Communications. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merill Company, 1971.
83
Ekman, Paul. Communication Through Nonverbal Behavior:
h Source of Information About an Interpersonal Relationship in Affect, Cognition and Personality. (Eds. S. S.
Tomkins and C. E. Izard. New York: Springer Press,
1965.
, Wallace Friesen, and Phoebe Ellsworth. Emotion in
the Human Face. New York: Pergamon Press, Inc., 1971F7
Enters, Agna. On Mime. Middletown, Connecticut:
University Press, 1965.
Wesleyan
Exline, R. W., and L. C. Winters. Affective Relations and
Mutual Glances in Dyads in Affect, Cognition, and~
Personality. (Eds. S. S. Tomkins and C. E. Izard).
New York: Springer Press, 1965.
Fast, Julius. Body Language. New York:
Company and Pocket Books, 1970.
M. Evans and
Feldman, S. S. Mannerisms of Speech and Gestures in Everyday Life. New York: International Universities Press,
Finley, Ray F. Kinesiological Analysis of Human Locomotion.
Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon Press, 1961.
Fisher, Seymour and Sidney Cleveland. Body Image and
Personality. Princeton, New Jersey: Van Nostrand
Press, 1958.
Foster, G. Allen. Communication: From Primitive Tom-Toms
to Telstar. New York: Criterion Books, Inc.,1965.
Friend, Joseph H. and David B. Guralnik (Eds.). Webster's
New World Dictionary of the American Language. New
York: The World Publishing Company, Inc., 1957.
Gaeth, John H. Verbal and Nonverbal Learning in Children,
Including Those with Hearing Losses. Detroit: Wayne
State University Press, 1964.
Gorehouse, L. E. and J. M. Cooper.
C. V. Mosby Company, 1950.
Kinesiology.
St Louis:
Hackett, Herbert. Understanding and Being Understood.
New York: Longmans, Green & Company, Inc., 1957.
84
Hall, Edward T. The Silent Language.
Premier, 1959.
New York:
Fawcett
Hangen, Eva Catherine. Symbols: Our Universal Language.
Wichita, Kansas: Mccormick-Armstrong Publishing
Company, Inc., 1962.
Hinde, Robert A. (Ed.). Papers by Members of the Royal
Society Study Group on Nonverbal Communication.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.
Hjortsjo, Cark-Herman. Man's Face and Mimic Language.
Lund: Studentlifteratur, 1969.
Hoggart, Richard. On Culture and Non-Verbal Communication.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1971.
Hunt, Douglas. Pantomine: The Silent Theater.
Atheneum Publishers, 1964.
New York:
Hutchison, John Alexander. Language and Faith: Studies in
Sign, Symbol, and Meaning. Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1963.
Jensen, Clayne R. and Gordon W. Schultz. Applied Kinesiology: The Scientific Study of Human Performance. New
York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1970.
Jurgen, Ruesch. Nonverbal Communication:
Visual Perception of Human RelationsT
University of California Press, 1956.
Notes on the
Berkeley:
Kantner, Claude E. and Robert William West. Phonetics:
An Introduction to the Principles of Phoentic Science
from the• Point~~of View of English Speech. Third
edition. Madison, Wisconsin: College Typing Company,
1936.
Kelley, David L. Kinesiology: Fundamentals of Motion
Description. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: PrenticeHall, Inc., 1971.
Kelly, Ellen Davis. Teaching Posture and Body Mechanics.
New York: A. S. Barnes, 1949.
Kranz, Leon George. Kranz Manual of Kinesiology. Sixth
edition. St. Louis: C. V. Mosby Company, 1969.
85
Kurnow, Ernest, Gerald J. Glasser, and Frederick R. ottman.
Statistics for Business Decisions. Homewood, Illinois:
Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1959.
Lander, Herbert Jay. Language and Culture.
Oxford University Press, 1966.
New York:
Lawson, Joan. The Theory and Practice of Expression
Gesture With a Description of its Historical Development. London: Pittman, 1957.
Lesikar, Raymond V. Business Communication: Theory and
Application. Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin,
Inc., 1968.
Linsky, L. (Ed.). Semantics and the Philosophy of Language . Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois
Press, 1970.
Liu, Herman Chan-En. Non-Verbal Intelligence Test for Use
in China. New York! Teachers College, Columbia
University Press, 1922.
Logan, Gene Adams and Wayne C. McKinney. Kinesiology.
Dubuque, Iowa: W. C. Brown Company, 1970.
MacConaill, Michael Aloysius and J. V. Basmajean. Muscles
and Movements: A Basis for Human Kinesiology.
Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins Company, 1969.
Mackworth, Jane F.
tion Approach.
Vigilance and Attention: A Signal DetecBaltimore: Penguin Books, Inc., 1970.
Maurer, Edward Rose. Kinematics. Fifth edition.
John Wiley & Sons., Inc., 1925.
McLuhan, Herbert M. The Medium is the Message.
Random House, 1967.
New York:
New York:
Mehrabian, Albert. Introduction: A Semantic Space for
Nonverbal Behavior in Advances in Communication Research.
(Eds. C. David Mortensen and Kenneth K. Sereno). New
York: Harper & Row, 1973.
. Non-Verbal Communications.
Atherton, 1972.
Chicago: Aldine-
. Silent Messages. Belmont, California:
Publishing Company, 1971.
Wadsworth
86
Middleman, Ruth R. The Non-Verbal Method in Working with
Groups. New York: Association Press, 1968.
Mitchell, M. E. How to Read Language of the Face.
York: The Macmillan Company, 1968.
New
Montagu, Ashley. Touching: The Human Significance of the
Skin. New York: Columbia University Press, 197T7
Morehouse, Lawrence Englemohi, and John M. Cooper.
Kinesiology. St. Louis, Missouri: C. V. Mosby Company, 1950.
Morris, Desmond.
House, 1971.
Intimate Behavior.
New York:
Naess, Arne. Elements of Applied Semantics.
Jersey: Bedminster Press, 1956.
Random
Totowa, New
Nierenberg, Gerald I. and Henry H. Calero. How to Read a
Person Like a Book. New York: Pocket Books, 1973.
Petersen, Hans. Banderkinematik. Heidelberg:
Winters Universitatsbuchhandlung, 1918.
Carl
Pickersgill, Mary Gertrude. Practical Miming.
Sir I. Pitman & Sons, Ltd., 1947.
New York:
Poiret, Maude.
Body Talk.
New York:
Award Books, 1970.
Rasch, Phillip J. and Roger K. Burke. Kinesics and Applied
Anatomy: The Science of Human Movement. Lea & Febiger,
1971.
Ruesh, Jurgen. Communication: The Social Matrix of
Psychiatry. New York: Norton Press, 1951.
. Semiotic Approaches to Human Relations.
York: Humanities Press, Inc., 1972.
New
and Weldon Kees. Nonverbal Communication: Notes
on the Perception of Human Relations. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1971.
Saloman, Louis Bernard. Semantics and Common Sense.
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., 1966.
New
87
Scheflen, Albert E. Body Language and the Social Order:
Communications as Behavorial Control. Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972.
Scott, M. G. Analysis of Human Movement: A Textbook in
Kinesiology. Second edition. New York: AppletonCentury-Crofts, 1963.
Sebeok, Thomas Albert. Approaches to Semiotics. (Eds.
Thomas Albert Sebeok, Alfred S. Hayes and Mary Catherine
Bateson). The Hague: Mouton, 1964.
and Alfred S. Hayes. Conference on Paralinguistics
and Kinesics. BloomingtonT Indiana: Indiana State
University Press, 1962.
Sereno, Kenneth K. and G. J. Hawkins. The Effects of Variations in Speaker's Nonfluency Upon Audience Ratings of
Attitude Toward the Speech Topic and Speakers' Credibility Tn Speech Monograph (n.p.), 1967.
Shands, Harley C. Semiotic Approaches to Psychiatry.
York: Humanities Press, Inc., 1970.
New
Smith, Raymond G. Development of a Semantic Differential
for Use with Speech Related Concepts in Speech Monographs , XXVI, (n.p.), 1959.
Steindler, Authur. Kinesiology of the Human Body Under
Normal and Pathological Conditions. Springfield,
Illinois: C. C. Thomas, 1955.
Stokoe, William C. Semiotics and Human Sign Language.
York: Humanities Press, Inc., 1972.
New
Thayer, Lee 0. Communication: General Semantics Perspectives . New York: Spartan, 1970.
Todd, Mabel Elsworth. The Thinking Body: A Study of the
Balancing Forces of Dynamic Man. New York: Paul B.
Holber, Inc., 1937.
Warman, Edward Barrett. How to be an Absolutely Smashing
Public Speaker Without Saying Anything. New York:
American Heritage Press, 1970.
88
Washington Council on Kinesiology. Kinesiology Review,
1968. Washington, D. C.: Physical Education Division,
Council on Kinesiology: American Association for
Health and Physical Education, 1968.
Wells, Katharine. Kinesiology: The Automatic and Mechanical Fundamentals of Human Motion. Fourth edition.
Philadelphia: wT B. Saunders, 1963.
. Kinesiology: The Scientific Basis of Human
Motion" Fifth Edition. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders,
1971.
West, Robert William. Kinesiologic Phoenetics.
Harper & Brothers, 1941.
New York:
Wilson, Albert Edward. King Panto: The Story of Pantomine.
New York: E. P. Dutton & Company, Inc., 1935.
Wolff, C. Psychology of Gesture. (Translated from the
French by A. Tennant). London: Methuen, 1945.
Worman, Edward Bonet. Gestures and Attitudes.
Lee & Shepard, 1892.
B.
(n.p.)
PERIODICALS
Anderson, J. D. "The Language of Gesture," Folklore,
31:70, 1920.
Andrew, R. J. "Evolution of Facial Expression," Science,
142:103401041, 1963.
Angell, M. "Nonverbal Communication: Play it Straight With
Your Children," Parents Magazine, 46:49-51+, October,
1970.
Argyle, M. and J. Dean. "Eye Contact, Distance and Affiliation," Sociometry, 28:289-304, 1965.
Arnheim, Rudulf. "The Gestalt Theory of Expression,"
Psychological Review, 56:156-171, 1949.
"Art of Not Listening: A. Kaplan's Idea of Duologues,"
Time, 93:52-53, January 25, 1969.
89
Austin, William. "Some Social Aspects of Paralanguage,"
CJL/RCL, 11, 1:31039, 1965.
Barbara, D. A. "The Value of Nonverbal Communication
Personality Understanding," Journal of Nervous Disorders , 123:286-291, 1956.
Bateson, M. C. "Kinesics and Paralanguage," Science,
139:200, January 18, 1963.
Battle, L. D. "New Dimensions in Cultural Communications,"
Publications of the Modern Language Association, 78(2):
15-19, 1963.
Beegle, B. B. "Message That is Sent Without Words,"
Supervisory Management, 16:12-14, February, 1971.
Berger, M. M. "Nonverbal Communications in Group Psychotherapy ," International Journal of Group Psychotherapists, 8:161-178, 1958.
Birdwhistell, Ray L. "Background to Kinesics," ETC., Review
General Semantics * 13:10-18, 1955.
"Birth of a New Science: Non-Verbal Communication, or
Comingling," America, 120:236-7, March 1, 1969.
"Bodyspeak:
The Way You Move," Vogue, 156:389-390, 1970.
Boomer, D. S. "Hesitation and Grammatical Encoding,"
Language and Speech, 8:148-158, 1965.
and Allen T. Dittman. "Speech Rate, Filled Pause,
and Bodily Movement in Interviews," Journal of Nervous
Mental Disorders, 139:324-327, 1964.
Brosin, H. W. "Studies in Human Communication in Clinical
Settings Using Sound Film and Tape," Wisconsin Medical
Journal, 63:503-506, 1964.
Brown, Raymond Lamont. "Are You a Good Judge of Character,"
Modern Secretary, May, 1973.
Brunson, R. W. "Perceptual Skills in Corporate Jungle,"
Personnel Journal, J51:50-53, January, 1972.
Buller, A. J., O. C. J. Lippold, and A. Taylor. "Discussion
on Normal and Abnormal Willed Movement," Procedures of
the Royal Society of Medicine, 54:199-203, 196.1.
90
Chernus, Jack. "How Your Posture Can Reveal Your Personality," National Enquirer, 47:35, 14, April 29, 1973.
Corbin, E. I. "Muscle Action as Nonverbal and Preverbal
Communication," Psychoanalysts Quarterly, 31:351-353,
1962.
Cutner, M. "On the Inclusion of Certain 'Body Experiments'
in Analysis," British Journal of Medical Psychologists,
26:263-277, 1953.
Daniel, J. "Novsie Metbdy Analyzy Pr§covnych Pohybov,"
(New Method of Motion Analysis), Ceskoslovenska
Psychologie, 3:256-264, 1964.
Davis, F. "How to Read Body Language," Reader's Digest,
95:127-30, December, 1969.
. "Way We Speak Body Language," New York Times
Magazine, 65:89+, March 31, 1970.
Delahunty, D. "Three Aspects of Non-verbal Communication
in an Interview," Personnel, J49:757-9, September,
1970.
Deutsch, F. "Analysis of Postural Behavior, (Thus Speaks
the Body, I)," Psychoanalysts Quarterly, 16:195-213,
1947.
Dittman, Allen T. "The Relationship Between Body Movements
and Moods in Interviews," Journal of Consulting
Psychologists, 26:480, 1962.
and L. G. Llewellyn. "Body Movements and Speech
Rhythm in Social Conversation," Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 11:98-106, 1969.
, M. B. Parloff, and D. S. Boomer. "Facial and
Bodily Expression: A Study of Receptivity of Emotional
Cues," Psychiatry, 28:239-244, 1965.
Duel, H. S. "Pitfalls of Non-verbal Communication,"
Supervision, 21:10-12, November, 1959.
Duncan, Jr., Starkey. "Nonverbal Communication," Psychological Bulletin, 72:118-137, 1969.
91
Ekman, Paul. "Differential Communication of Affect by Head
and Body Cues," Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 2:726-735, 1965.
. "A Methodological Discussion of Nonverbal Behavlor," Journal of Psychology, 43:141-149, 1957.
and V. Wallace. "Hand Movements," Journal of
Communications, 22:4, 353-374, December, 1972.
. "Nonverbal Leakage and Clues to Deception,"
Psychiatry, 32:88-106(a), 1969.
Ellsworth, Phoebe C. and Linda M. Ludwig. "Visual Behavior
in Social Interaction," Journal of Communication, 22:4,
375-402, December, 1972.
Engen, T., N. Levy, and Harold Schlosberg. "A New Series of
Facial Expressions," American Psychology, 12:264-266,
1957.
Estes, S. G. "Judging Personality from Expressive Behavior,"
Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 3:217-236, 1938.
Farr, N. N. "How to Communicate With Silence," Nations
Business, 50:96-97, June, 1962.
Fast, Julius.
"Body Language," Newsweek, 75-87, 1970.
. "How Well Do You Read Body Language?," Sales
Management, 105:27-29, December 15, 1970.
Feinberg, M. R. "Getting Personal: Sabotage by Body Language," Business Management, 39:6, 1971.
Fenner, M. S. "Editor's Notebook: Gestural Language,"
National Education Association Journal, 57:72, March,
1968.
Fiel, M. L. "What His Hands Tell That He's Not Saying,"
Mademoiselle, 158-9, 1970.
Flick, F. "Visual Aids Can Tell a Complicated Pay Story,"
American Business, 27:21-22, December, 1957.
Ford, B. "Body Language: What It Reveals About You,"
Science Digest, 68:16-21, August, 1970.
92
Frijda, N. H. "The Understanding of Facial Expression of
Emotion," Acta. Psychologia, 9:294-362, 1953.
Galloway, Charles M. "Teaching is Communicating: Nonverbal
Language in the Class Room," Association for Student
Teaching Bulletin, No. 29, 1970.
et. al. "Body Language," Today's Education, 61:4546+, December, 1972.
Garner, C. W. "Non-verbal Communication and the Teacher,"
Biology School & Society, 98:363, 1970.
Gately, O. P. "If You Don't Speak the Language, Play Charades," Harvest Years, 8:16-17, 1968.
Geldard, F. A. "Some Neglected Possibilities of Communication: Messages the Skin Offers," Science, 131:1583-1588,
May 27, 1960.
"Gestures Reveal Your Thoughts," National Enquirer, 12, April
23, 1972.
Gittleson, N. "Whatever Happened to Words?," Harper's
Bazaar, 101:27, January, 1968.
Gombrick, E. H. "Visual Image," Scientific American, 227:
82-86, September, 1972.
Gunston, David. "Our Eyes Reveal Our True Feelings,"
Modern Secretary, July, 1973.
Haley, J.
"Our Silent Language," Americas, 14(2):5-8, 1962.
Hall, Edward T.
1968.
"Proxemics," Current Anthropology, 9:83-108,
Harrison, Randall P. and Mark L. Knapp. "Toward an Understanding of Nonverbal Communication Systems," Journal of
Communication, 22:4, 339-353, December, 1972.
Hirt, Susanne. "What is Kinesiology?," Physical Therapists
Review, 35:419-426, 1955.
Hughes, F. "So You Think You're a Good Judge of Character,"
The Director, 24:202+, 1972.
93
"Human Potential: The Revolution in Feeling," Time, 96:L>458, November 9, 1970.
Irvins, W. M. "Prints and Visual Communications," Art in
America, 57:29, September, 1969.
James, W. T. "A Study of the Expression of Bodily Posture,"
Journal of Genetic Psychologists, 7:405-437, 1932.
Jelliffe, S. E. "The Parkinsonian Body Posture: Some
Considerations in Unconscious Hostility," Psychoanalysts
Review, 27:467-479, 1940.
Kendon, A. and M. Cook. "The Consistency of Gaze Patterns
in Social Interaction," British Journal of Psychology,
60:481-494, 1969.
Khalchadourian, H. "Gestures as Self-Expression and
Communication," International Philosophical Quarterly,
11:153-164, 1971.
King, A. S. "Pupil Size, Eye Direction and Message Appeal:
Some Preliminary Findings," Journal of Marketing, 36:
55-58, July, 1972.
King, Jane. "Expert Says Women Are Superior to Men at Using
'Body Language'," National Enquirer, 47(52):24, August
26, 1973.
Krim, A. "A Study in Non-verbal Communication: Expressive
Movements During Interviews," Smith College Studies
Social Works, 24:41-80, 1953.
"Language of Signs,: Science Digest, 72:32-33, 1972.
Laszio, Judith I. and P. J. Bainstow. "Journal of Motor
Behavior, Accuracy of Movement, Peripheral Feedback and
Efference Copy," Journal Publishing Affiliates, 3(3):
241-252, 1970.
Laurie, Doug. "How Unconscious Habits Reveal Your Personality," National Enquirer, 47(43):16, July 24, 1973.
Locke, L. F. "Kinesiology and the Profession," Johper,
36:69, 1965.
94
Lorenz, M. "Language as Expressive Behavior," American
Medical Association Arch. Neurological Psychiatrists,
70:277-285, 1953.
Maranon, G. "The Psychology of Gesture," Journal of Nervous
Mental Disorders, 112:469-497, 1950.
Marty, M. E. "Body Language: The Uptight WASP," Christian
Century, 10:111, January 24, 1973.
Mehrabian, Albert. "Communication Without Words," Psychology
Today, 2:52-55(d), 1968.
. "Influence of Attitudes From the Posture, Orientation and Distance of a Communicator," Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 32:292-308, 1968.
Miller, G. R. and M. A. Hewgill. "The Effect of Variations
in Nonfluency on Audience Ratings of Source Credibility,"
Quarterly Journal of Speech, L:36-44, February, 1964.
Morris, Desmond.
March, 1972.
"Intimate Behavior," McCalls, 99:75-77+,
Needles, W. "Gesticulation and Speech," International
Journal of Psycho-Analysts, 40:291-294, 1959.
Nierenberg, Gerald I. and Henry H. Calero.
Language," Sales Management, 40, 1971.
"Watch Your Body
"Non-Verbal Communication and the Teacher," School and
Society, 98:363-364, 1970.
Paget, R. A. S.
198, 1937.
"Gesture Language," Nature (London), 139:
"Parting Shots: What Our Politicians are Really Saying,"
Life, 69:82-84, September, 1970.
Price, W. E. "Visual Communications Gap," Office, 69:100101, January, 1969.
Ralston, R. M. "Quest for Silence," Vital Speeches, 32:726731, August 17, 1966.
Rosenfeld, Howard M. "Instrumental Affiliative Functions of
Facial and Gestural Expressions," Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 4:65-72, 1966.
95
Savage, W. G. "Sure, Listen: But Watch Their Gestures,
Too," Administrative Management, 33:33-34, August, 1972.
Scheflen, Albert E. "Significance of Posture in Communications Systems," Psychiatry, 27(4)316-331, 1964.
Shearer, Lloyd (Ed.),
April 8, 1973.
"Body Language," Parade Magazine,
Silverman, F. H. and D. E. Williams. "Loci of Disfluences
in the Speech of Non-Stutterers During Oral Reading,"
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 10:790-794, 1967.
Singer, Jane Sherrod. "What Your Posture Tells," Modern
Secretary, March, 1973.
Skinner, J. Ross. "Those Telltale Executive Gestures,"
Duns, 95:66-67, March, 1970.
Sklarewitz, N. "When They Talk With Their Hands, What Are
They Saying?," Popular Mechanics, 135:72-73, May, 1971.
Sombrich, E. H. "Visual Image," Scientific American. 227:
82-96, September 19, 1972.
Steiner, G.
1967.
"Language and Silence," Time, 89:112, April 28,
Sugarman, D. A. and R. Hochstein. "Getting Your Message
Across," Seventeen, 28:467-571, September, 1969.
Trager, G. L. "Paralanguage: A First Approximation,"
Studies of Linguistics, 13:1-12, 1958.
Trost, C. H. "Color—A Way to Emphasize a Message," Bests,
N69:74-76, July, 1968.
"Your Eye Movements Reveal Your Nature," National Enquirer,
August 12, 1973.
Wachtel, P. L. "An Approach to the Study of Body Language in
Psychotherapy," Psychotherapy, 4(3), 1967.
Watson, O. Michael. "Conflicts and Directions in Proxemic
Research," Journal of Communication, 22 (4):443-459,
December, 1972.
96
Weiss, P. "The Social Character of Gestures," Philosophy
Review, 52:182-186, 1943.
"Why Best Managers are Best Communicators," Nation'3 Business,
57:82-83+, March, 1969.
Wiener, Morton et. al. "Nonverbal Behavior and Nonverbal
Communication," Psychological Review, 79:185-214, 1972.
Winick, C. and H. Holt. "Seating Position as Nonverbal
Communication in Group Analysis," Psychiatry, 24:171-182,
1961.
Zaidel, S. F. and Albert Mehrabian. "The Ability to Communicate and Infer Positive and Negative Attitudes Facially
and Vocally," Journal of Experimental Research in
Personality, 3:233-241, 1969.
C.
THESES
Adams, Arthur. "A Test Construction Study of Sport-Type
Motor Educability for College Men." Unpublished thesis,
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 1954.
Birdwhistell, Ray L. "Introduction to Kinesics: An Annotation System for Analysis of Body Motion and Gesture."
Unpublished thesis, University of Louisville, Louisville,
Kentucky, 1952.
Clapper, Dorothy Jean. "Measurement of Selected Kinesthetic
Responses." Unpublished thesis, State University of Iowa,
Iowa City, Iowa, 1954.
Dial, Betty Ann. "The Effect of Arm Fatigue on Kinesthetic
Performance." Unpublished thesis, University of Iowa,
Iowa City, Iowa, 1955.
Hollingsworth, Luthur Travis. "A Complete Study of Growth
and General Motor Capacities." Unpublished thesis,
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 1947.
Horton, Doris Ann. "The Effect of Gravity, Resistance, and
Knowledge on the Results of Performance of a Kinesthetic
Arm Positioning Task." Unpublished thesis, University
of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, 19G6.
97
Johnson, Judith Royce. "Measure of Kinesthesis in Space
Orientation." Unpublished thesis, University of Towa,
Iowa City, Iowa, 1968.
Lancey, Barbara. "Kinesiological Analysis of Selected Fitness Tests." Unpublished thesis, University of Oregon,
Eugene, Oregon, 1966.
Lyon, Muriel Joan. "Effect of Practice on Three Dynamic
Components of Kinesthetic Perception." Unpublished
thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles,
California, 1966.
Magruder, Mary Alice. "An Analytical Study of Testing for
Kinesthetics." Unpublished thesis, University of Oregon,
Eugene, Oregon, 1963.
Phillips, Bernath Eugene. "Relationship Between Certain
Phases of Kinesthesis and Performance During the Early
Stages of Acquiring Two Perceptuo-Motor Skills."
Unpublished thesis, Pennsylvania State College,
University Park, Pennsylvania, 1941.
Pinholster, Garland Folsom. "Analysis of Generality and
Specificity of Kinesthetic Performance in Gross Motor
Skills." Unpublished thesis, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 1968.
Renshaw, Morton J. "The Effects of Varied Arrangements of
Practice and Rest on Proficiency in the Acquisition of
Motor Skills." Unpublished thesis, Stanford University,
Stanford, California, 1947.
D.
UNPUBLISHED ARTICLES, PAPERS, AND SPEECHES
Argyle, M., F. Alkema, and R. Gilmour. "The Communication
of Hostile Attitudes by Verbal and Nonverbal Signals."
Institute of Experimental Psychology, Oxford University,
1971.
Benesh, M., E. Kramer, and H. Lane. "Recognition of Portrayed Emotion in a Foreign Language." Office of Research
Administration, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
Michigan, 1963.
98
Birdwhistell, Ray L. "Some Relationships Between American
Kinesics and Spoken American English." Paper presented
before Section H., A. A. A. S., Cleveland, 1963.
Exline, R. V. and C. Eldridge. "Effects of Two Patterns of
a Speaker's Visual Behavior Upon the Perception of the
Authenticity of His Verbal Message." Paper presented
at the meetings of the Eastern Psychological Association,
Boston, Massachusetts, April, 1967.
Scheflen, Albert E. "Non-Language Behavior in Communication."
Address to the New York Chapter of American Academy of
Pediatrics, September 2, 1969.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Appendix A is the text of the experiment which was
used for all of the groups participating in the study.
It
was read by Dr. welford (out of view of camera eye) for the
video-tape.
Group I, the control group, also read the
message for their part in the experiment.
101
The following is the text of a speech tecently delivered to a
group of employees. Please read it one, time and then turn it over.
Thank you.
I'm certainly happy that you employees could meet with
me today to discuss a matter of interest to all of us.
As you know, for the last two years, both management
and employees have expressed concern and dissatisfaction relating to our current group insurance program.
The committee, which has investigated various group
programs during the last six months, has recommended that we
switch as of June 1 of this year to the Mutual Insurance
Company located in Dallas.
You are aware that our present health insurance policy
permits a maximum of $14.00 a day to be paid for hospitalization.
With the new policy that we have adopted, the
amount will be extended to $32.00 a day with no additional
premium.
No major benefits have been eliminated from the
new policy.
In addition, should you desire coverage for
dread diseases, such as cancer, it will cost only an additional $1.00 per month for family coverage.
Another interesting feature of this new program is
that it can cover any family member living under your roof
(including married children and elderly parents) and also is
convertible to a private policy upon retirement.
102
A brochure explaining the new policy will be distributed at the end of the meeting today.
Should there be
any questions concerning this change, please see me, or Mr.
Smith in Personnel.
Thank you for your time.
APPENDIX B
Appendix B is a copy of the experiment packet which
each participant was given.
The results obtained from the
analysis of these packets formed the basis for the tables,
text, and illustrations of this dissertation.
104
College of Business; Administration
Department of Management
Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
May/June, 1973
Dear Participant:
For many years now, communication of messages has been pursued
from the perspective of many different areas. As managers spend the
largest amount of their time involved in communications, we are
constantly striving to find better ways to "get our messages across."
What impression do you have of the message you will get as
concerns meaning and believability? Please be as honest as you can
in checking off all answers.
Who knows, perhaps a workable model will be discovered. If
this is so, a significant contribution to the fields of management
and communications will have been made, and you will be partially
responsible.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely yours,
Mary B. Blalock
105
PLEASE CHECK CHECK THE ONE BLANK IN EACH CATEGORY THAT MOST ACCURATELY
DESCRIBES YOU:
AGE
SEX
Female
Male
JUnder 18 years
18 years to 21 years
_22 years to 25 years
OCCUPATION
_26 years to 30 years
Employee
_31 years to 35 years
Student
_36 years or older
MARITAL STATUS
RELIGION
never married
Catholic
currently married
Jewish
divorced
Protestant
widowed
other (specify)
ETHNIC BACKGROUND
EDUCATION COMPLETED
Afro-American
less than high school
Anglo-Saxon
high school diploma
French
some college
_German
college degree
Italian
some post-graduate
Oriental
sst-graduate degree
Spanish
other (specify)
PERSONALITY EVALUATION
DIRECTIONS:
The purpose of this test is to measure your impression of your own personality.
concept—NO NOT OMIT ANX. Never put more than one mark on a single scale.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Please mark every scale for every
10
A.
RESERVED, detached, critical
OUTGOING, warmhearted, easy going
B.
LESS INTELLIGENT, concrete thinker
MORE INTELLIGENT, abstract thinker
C.
AFFECTED BY FEELINGS, easily upset
EMOTIONALLY STABLE, faces reality
D.
HUMBLE, mild, conforming
ASSERTIVE, aggressive, stubborn
E.
SOBER, prudent, serious, taciturn
HAPPY-GO-LUCKY, gay, enthusiastic
F.
EXPEDIENT, disregards rules
CONSCIENTIOUS, perservering, moralistic
G.
SHY, restrained, timid
VENTURESOME, uninhibited, spontaneous
H.
TOUGH-MINDED, realistic, no-nonsence
TENDER-MINDED, over-protective, sensitive
I.
TRUSTING, adaptive, no jealousy
SUSPICIOUS, hard to fool, opinionated
J.
PRACTICAL, careful, conventional
IMAGINATIVE, careless of practicalities
K.
FORTHRIGHT, natural, unpretentious
SHREWD, calculating, worldly
L.
SELF-ASSURED, confident, serene
APPREHENSIVE, worrying, troubled
M.
CONSERVATIVE, respects old ideas
EXPERIMENTING, liberal, free-thinking
N.
GROUP-DEPENDENT, a "joiner"
SELF-SUFFICIENT, prefers own decisions
0.
UNDISCIPLINED, follows own urges
CONTROLLED, follows self-image
P.
RELAXED, tranquil, unfrustrated
TENSE, frustrated, overwrought
O
107
(In the original questionnaire
packet, this page was blank.)
106
PLEASE FILL IN THE FOl.T .OWING BIANKS CONCERNING TIIK MKKSAGK.
•p
.c
tn
The message
appeared to be
It appears
the message was
I felt the
message was
>
favorable
truthful
•H
03
0)
(0
U
0)
s
+J
.c
•H
rH
>
unfavorable
untruthful
believable
unbelievable
The message
seemed to be
reputable
disreputable
After experiencing the
message, I
would rate it
reliable
unreliable
The message
apparently was
pleasant
unpleasant
The source of
the message
seemed
informed
uninformed
109
APPENDIX C
Appendix C, the video-tape, could not be bound with
the text.
Therefore, this material is put in the pocket
inside the cover boards.
The brand name and type of equipment needed to show
this video-tape is listed in Chapter I, pages 16 and 18, and
is available to qualified personnel through the library at
Louisiana State University.
The video-tape may also be
obtained by writing to the author at 12991 Highland Road,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 70810.
110
APPENDIX D
Appendix D calculates the sample sizes required to be
99S certain that the standard error of the mean values of
the messages was no greater than .1.
i
Ill
Sample-size Requirements
s = Standard deviation
x = Standard error of the mean
'
(= .103)
s
„
n = (?_!_§) ^
Where:
E
Z
E
= 2.58 = 99£ confidence level
= .265 = 2.56 • s~
n
= participants needed
Messages
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
1.34
1.36
1.43
1.25
1.39
1.35
1.53
n
170
175
197
148
183
173
222
This table indicates the sample size need be no greater
than 222 employees for the largest standard deviation obtained
and on some questions, the response requirement dropped to
148 participants needed.
As a result of these calculations, the mean interpretation of the messages resulting from this experiment are
considered very reliable representations of the employee's
message perception; i.e., of all possible samples, there is
a 99% confidence level that the point estimate of the mean
is within .1 of the true mean. 42
42
Ernust Kurnow, Ceroid .J. (ilassor, .nuJ Fn.-dor i ck K. oLlm.iri,
Statistics Cor Husinesu Deris, ions (Homewood, Illinois: l:i<:h.inl I). I twin.
The. , "T757),"")>.~2TT."
112
APPEND]X E
Appendix E is a reduction of the computer prinL-oul
listing all answers for all remaining participants after
collapsing was performed.
These are included in the event
a future researcher desires to calculate any additional data
from this study.
The coding at the top of the columns can be read as
follows:
OBS - observation number (for computer coding purposes only)
ID - original number of participant after collapsing
TYPE - whether student or employee (Note:
all were employees)
GROUP - refers to message in which they participated (see
Chapter II)
SEX -
(1) female, (2) male
MS - marital status (see Chapter II)
ETH - ethnic background (see Chapter II)
AGE - (see Chapter II)
RELIGION - (see Chapter II)
ED - refers to educational level (see Chapter II)
A through P - refers to how they scored themselves on 16 PF
(Appendix B)
MSG 1 through MSG 7 - refers to answer they gave concerning
message variables (Appendix B)
MEAN - participants mean score.1 on 16 PF
113
PRSN - refers to type of personality, i.e., introvert, extrovert or ambivert; derived from MEAN above.
(Chapter
ID.
BL and VC - Refers to what the participant saw, heard, and/or
read as part of the experiment.
GROUP above can be
found in Chapter II to give complete explanation of
each group.
S T A T I
!
S T I C A L
A N A L
Y S
I S
S Y S T E M
J«
H
S
G
S
C
1
1
9
2
1
3
5
1
2
2
e
a
4
2
5
2
S
4
2
9
S
6
3
5
6
1
1
1
3
3
3
1
2
2
2
2
9
?
1
2
6
3
2
3
3
6
6
4
3
3
4
6
4
7
6
4
4
4
5
1
1
5
3
9
2
i
3
5
3
1
5
5
5
4
6
4
5
6
5
6
7
5
5
6
4
5
1
2
2
4
5
3 " 2
2
2
1
I
1
2
2
2
2
3
*5
4
9
1
l
2
2
3
2
7
5
4
4
5
b
6
6
5
3
5
4
6
7
S
6
2
2
2
2
2
5
9
2
2
2
5
3
3
6
a
9
3
6
5
8
3
6
8
S
3
3
5
1
1
2
2
2
6
6
9
2
2
1
5
3
2
b
T
a
7
9
2
1
9
5
6
7
7
4
2
2
1
4
J
2
3
6
4
1
5
9
1C
a
7
5
9
4
a
a
a
9
2
2
6
2
1
3
5
7
9
5
4
3
3
6
9
9
9
2
2
3
4
1
3
9
1C
4
4
2
9
3
1
a
a
5
1
2
7
2
3
9
4
2
7
2
5
3
3
1
1
1
I
1
2
1
2
3
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
12
9
2
2
3
6
1
2
5
3
•*
4
3
2
10
6
8
2
2
T
a
4
3
7
2
7
a
1
2
3
2
2
li
13
9
2
2
2
5
3
3
2
2
2
12
14
9
1
2
3
2
1
3
2
2
2
13
15
4
2
2
2
6
3
S
2
2
2
1 *
16
9
2
2
2
6
3
2
2
2
2
IS
17
9
2
2
6
4
3
2
2
2,
2
16
18
9
2
2
2
5
3
2
3
1
2
2
2
2
2
><•
1
I t
8
9
a
9
7
7
a
a
7
9
3
4
a
2
4
4
9
3
4
a
a
4
5
1
3
6
3
5
5
5
3
3
9
10
3
s
9
o
3
3
9
4
6
3
3
2
1
2
4
3
4
5
3
a
3
7
9
5
9
1
5
6
3
2
1
1
1
1
a
3
a
a
a
2
9
2
2
9
6
5
3
9
2
1
1
5
6
5
3
10
3
6
6
3
5
6
a
1
5
7
5
3
8
9
7
1
6
6
7
3
6
i
3
5
1 J
a
17
19
9
2
2
2
6
3
2
7
a
9
7
5
2
7
4
10
2
9
4
2
2
1
6
1
1
18
20
9
2
?
2
6
3
2
3
6
7
7
2
4
5
3
2
2
7
9
4
3
6
5
2
1
14
21
9
2
1
4
3
2
5
9
4
8
9
2
7
a
5
7
8
6
a
10
3
7
2-
1
23
22
9
2
2
3
4
1
2
a
5
a
7
9
2
6
7
4
2
a
8
5
1
3
6
3
2
21
23
9
2
2
2
5
3
3
4
6
7
a
4
6
3
4
4
4
7
7
7
3
6
5
1
2
22
24
9
2
2
2
6
1
2
7
6
5
7
7
2
8
5
a
2
9
4
4
3
3
7
1
1
23
25
1
2
J
b
1
4
B
8
6
2
7
4
4
6
6
6
6
5
4
4
1
2
26
2
2
3
2
1
5
5
s
4
2 *
7
5
3
3
7
7
5
7
8
5
5
6
7
4
4
as
26
2
2
a
6
1
b
3
9
4
2
2
3
9
3
4
8
a
2
3
3
2
4
4
8
2
1
2
S
3
3
li.
9
7
3
3
5
2
7
6
9
13
5
6
1
4
4
27
29
2
2
3
4
1
2
7
!•
a
a
a
3
2?
4
a
a
6
9
b
2
t
9
4
5
6
4
10
3
6
3
5
4
4
2
2
3
3
7
7
6
4
28
1
28
30
3
4
6
5
S
6
7
5
5
6
4
5
6
4
29
31
a
a
a
2
2
2
1
3
s
6
a
5
6
6
2
5
5
9
4
6
3
3
4
3
32
8
2
2
3
6
1
3
3
6
5
o
7
3
3
6
5
6
2
5
5
2
5
S
31
33
8
2
2
2
5
3
7
a
11
5
5
3
4
6
9
7
a
6
6
3C
2
8
10
3
4
4
2
4
3
32
34
2
2
2
6
1
3
3
D
6
6
3
2
4
6
5
5
9
6
8
3
3
2
3
3
33
35
2
2
2
2
4
6
9
2
7
1
1
1
3
5
3
5
4
2
1
1
3
36
2
2
2
$
3
3
34
a
a
a
a
3
2
4
4
5
7
6
b
6
5
5
5
5
6
6
5
5
6
6
2
1
2
1
5
4
b
5
b
5
4
1U
3
6
7
1
1
6
5
4
3
5
5
4
5
3
7
5
3
1
4
5
?
1'
3
6
3
7
4
5
5
1.
6
7
4
7~
4
1
6
4 "4~
3
4
5
4
7
4
b
2
1.
6
b
6
9
4
3
3
2
5
9
4
7
4
6
5
9
3
2
1
" 3
4
3
5
5
b
6
a
6
9
3
7
3
7
8
4
3
7
4
3
3
3
a
1 •
7
7
3
3
a
3
3
i:
a
1
1
i
i
35
37
36
38
it
39
i
L
2
2
2
a ~2
a
2
8
2
a
2
2
a
38
4
39
41
4*
4£
41
»3
42
44
43
45
44
1
-1
45
4b
47
i
4b
4 8
l
4 7
4 9
43
5J
4 9
51
5
r
51
52
i l
L
1
3
3
3
3
6
3
2
3
2
1
5
6
o
2
2
J
b
I
?
d
1
1
2
6
3
3
i
5
1
5
1.
3
8
1
1
3
b
1
2
I
5
1
6
li
1
°
b
5
5
2
2
p
1
7
a
o
7
5
4
5
a
2
2
3
n
2
2
~ 4~
3
a
1
"2
1
a
2
2
3
a
1
1
7
6
o
If
1?
1C
1
1
4
3
4
8
6
a
5
6
6
5
5
l
l
7
4
6 ~5"
6
7
o ~
c
a
a
o
4
5
6
5
4
2
a
3
3
5
2
5
a
5
4
7
2
4
7
2
2
a
•'5 .
7
7
7
o
6
o
4
5
4
5
4
b
7
»
2
2
2
3
3
5
4
3
1
7
7
2
2
6
6
1
2
1
?
2
1
5
1
1
1 ••
7
1
I
5
2
6
—"5~~ 2 ~ ~ 6
2
2
5
5
o
4
1
2
o
D
7
5~~
a
^
7
9
6
9
4
4
4
6
7
3
6 ~3
b
=
1
7
4
b
b
f
5
1
a
a
3
9
5
1 )
3
7
5
~ 5~
a
" a "
b
b
7
6 '~
6
6
4
7~~
S
5
7
2
6
o
6
7
6
6
3
I5
2
3
4
5
1
5
4
5
~"2
6
4
1
J
b
b
5
5
S
5
4
3
4
3
4
2
3
1
4.75C0
4.50C0
5.1875
2
2
2
2
2
5.1875
1
1
1
2
1
5.75C3
1
1
1
1
1
6.3125
4
3
4
2
1
5.7503
5
2
1
1
1
4.7500
4
4
3
1 " 1 " 4.8125
2
2
2
1
2
6.4375
2
2
2
1
1
S.12S0
3
3
2
1
2
5.75C0
S
4
3
1
5
5.3125
5
5
1
1
1
5.3125
5
3
3
1
1
5.5625
4
4
4
4
4
4.8750
1
1
1
I
1
5.3125
3
2
1
1
2
4.6875
1
1
1
1
1
6.5625
3
3
3
2
2
5.4375
1
2
2
1
1
5.3125
5.4375
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
5.6250
4
3
S
5.6875
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4.5625
4
4
4
3
3
6.6250
4
4
4
4
5
5.3753
3
3
4
4
3
5.5000
4
3
3
S
1
5.3750
1
5
5
5
5
5.1875
4
4
4
b
5.7503
4
4
2
4
3
4.812S
1
1
1
1
1
3.4375
3
3
3
3
3
5.5625
b
b
b
5
b
4.8125
5
5
5
5
5_^ 4 . 9 3 7 5
3
2 ~ ~ 5 ~ " 2 ~ 2~ 5 . 1 8 7 5
4
4
4
2
2
4.3750
4
4
4
3
5
6.1875
2
2
1
1
2
5.6875
4
4
6.4375
3 3
3
4
5
5
3
1
6.12SC
I
1
1
I
1
S.9375
4
4
5
5
5
6.:ccc
5 ~5~ 3
1~ 4
5.6875
3
4
1
1
5
.4.6875
i
i
J
b
3
5.5625
3
4
4
4
3
5.3125
2
1
2
1
6.-"125
1
4
4
4
3
4
5.4375
3
3
1
6.3125
3" 5
»
—
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2 '
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
3
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
2
2~
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
3
1
2
3
2
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
3
2
3
1
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
eH
it*
S T A T I
5 3
54
55
5 4
5 6
5 2
t
'
-
Y
S
I S
S Y
S T E
«
2
,3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
9
2
e
9
9
5
8
6
7
3
2
8
2
2
2
2
a
a
9
IC
a
3
9
a
7
8
2
9
8
2
2
2
1
5
7
6
6
4
5
b
5
6
5
8
4
6
3
6
7
3
4
7
7
6
7
2
2
6
6
3
3
7
2
2
3
5
7
2
2
6
6
!
3
A N A L
8
5 5
57
7
2
2
2
6
3
3
4
7
6
4
5
4
4
6
6
5
7
S
4
3
4
3
4
3
3
5 6
5 8
7
2
2
2
5
1
2
8
6
9
3
5
2
5
5
6
3
a
a
5
4
2
2
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
5 7
59
7
2
2
6
6
1
5
4
7
7
6
4
7
a
S
7
6
5
4
4
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
5 8
60
7
2
2
6
6
1
3
7
6
5
fc
4
6
4
3
5
8
9
4
5
6
7
6
7
5
4
3
4
3
4
2
2
4
5 9
61
7
2
2
2
4
3
4
4
5
9
4
2
2
7
8
3
5
4
9
5
7
3
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
5
7
2
2
2
5
3
5
4
a
S
4
4
5
4
7
4
4
6
7
4
6
5
5
3
4
4
3
4
3
4
7
2
2
6
4
1
3
6
3
9
10
7
IC
2
2
9
13
9
3
13
a
9
9
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
63
62
6 1
63
42
64
7
2
2
2
5
3
5
7
7
5
5
7
6
7
6
5
4
7
7
4
6
6
4
5
5
5
2
5
5
5
6 3
65
7
2
2
3
4
1
4
7
7
b
6
4
3
7
6
4
4
7
6
5
6
6
5
3
4
4
4
4
4
3
64
6b
7
2
2
2
4
3
4
4
7
7
S
4
6
4
a
7
5
4
5
4
3
4
5
2
3
3
2
3
2
2
6 5
6 7
7
2
2
3
5
1
2
7
a
1
3
5
2
5
3
5
3
9
7
8
5
S
3
2
2
2
4
2
3
I
6 6
68
7
2
2
2
6
3
2
8
5
8
5
2
2
4
6
5
3
a
7
2
6
2
3
3
1
2
2
2
4
2
6 7
69
7
2
2
6
6
1
4
4
S
5
b
4
S
5
5
6
6
8
7
S
3
6
5
3
2
2
2
2
3
1
68
70
7
2
2
3
6
3
3
8
7
8
7
7
2
6
4
5
5
9
9
3
3
3
5
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
6 9
7 1
7
2
2
6
6
I
3
6
7
6
7
4
3
6
6
5
4
6
6
5
5
6
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
7 "
72
7
2
2
3
5
1
2
in
3
l."
5
1}
3
9
4
9
3
8
a
3
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7 1
73
7
2
2
1
2
1
2
4
a
2
6
4
5
2
7
6
4
9
8
a
5
7
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
72
74
7
1
1
2
2
3
3
5
6
6
S
4
5
7
7
5
6
5
6
5
5
7
5
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
73
76
6
2
2
2
6
3
3
a
a
7
3
4
9
5
4
4
4
6
5
7
6
5
6
S
1
3
3
5
5
5
74
77
b
2
2
3
5
1
3
8
5
8
a
6
2
6
6
6
3
5
8
2
6
7
2
4
3
3
2
4
4
4
7 5
78
6
1
2
2
5
3
3
5
1 "
5
10
2
5
IC
1
1
13
IC
5
10
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
3
4
76
79
6
2
2
2
4
3
4
8
8
9
8
8
4
3
4
6
5
3
7
7
4
5
3
1
1
5
4
4
1
4
7 7
80
6
2
3
2
If
9
5
8
5
9
9
4
8
5
3
9
9
6
3
5
2
S
3
2
4
1
4
3
5
S
4
4
5
4
4
5
5
5
7
1
a
a
9
7
2
a
11
9
5
2
3
3
9
6
4
6~
c
31
1
6
7
7 8
2
" 2
1
13
6
1
I
4
u
a
3
7 9
B2
6
2
2
2
6
1
1
S
1
3
8
5
5
5
2
3
I
1
1
1
80
S3
6
2
2
3
6
1
3
4
4
8
3
9
6
5
ir
a
6
4
5
S
2
2
2
3
7
2
1
1
3
2
3
4
81
34
6
2
2
6
6
1
4
4
7
4
6
5
4
a
6
S
7
a
4
2
3
3
b
4
5
4
S
4
5
8 2
85
b
2
2
S
3
4
3
5
3
9
7
9
8
4
3
1
2
1
1
2
4
3
5
96
6
2
2
4
3
2
5
7
a
5
a
a
2
d3
2
2
6
2
8
5
3
4
9
7
2
3
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
8 4
87
6
?
2
6
3
5
3
7
c
5
2
3
4
4
3
3
a
8
3
3
3
2
1
1
2
2
3
2
2
8 5
88
6
2
2
2
2
*»
5
b
I
4
6
7
7
7
4
86
89
6
2
2
2
5
1
4
3
a
5
8 7
9C
8 3
°1
92
93
2
2
2
1
2
1
2
?
1
4
6" — b ~
3
3
4
1
4
1
1 ~4~
89
93
6
6~
6
6
7
a
lu
91
94
b
2
2
1
2
3
42
9S
6
2
?
2
6
3
4
4
93
94
=6
97
6
6
?
1
2
6
5
3
I
2
3
b
~5~
9 5
93
b
?
2
6
3
c
7
2
9
3
2
2
6
3
5
2
2
3
J
?
?
•*
^
*
6
o
b
5
3
3
b
1
•*
o
1
?
6
1
96
I '
9a
9°
1
1
1
1
1
I C I
1=2
I
1
99
9 7
1."
~
1
1
S T I C A L
1
1
2
3
4
5
1
I
I
5
5
b
9
o
2
b
2
2
o
1
2
1
3
2
l l
5
a
3
9
7
a
6
5
a
11
a
l
2
4 "
a
a
l
4
5
6
4
6
7
6
7
4
3
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
3
2
1
3
9
b
3
3
2
3
3
2
4
4
3
5
6
3
7
7
3
5
6
2
9
4
4~
1
3
5
7
7
~~2
2
2
1
1
•>
8
9
4
It
7
a
6
6
8
b
3
8
7
3
5
4
2
5
2
1
1
1
2
1
4
3
2"
1
5
2
2
1
3
2
2
1
2"
2
4
1
3
3
3
5
5
4
b
2
4
1 •
3
1><
1
9
5
2
S
6
i
b
6
1
a
1
3
7
a
3
B~ " 5
9
5
6
4
5
4
2
5
6
1
6
6
5
3
1
1
1
1
J
b
a
a
5
4
~S
5
3
5
8
4
5
I
1
3
5
4
5
3
4
4
5
4
4
5
5
7
4
7
7
3
5
5
2
2
2
4
3
4
5
4
4
a
2
3
5
6
4
3
2
4
4
3
4
4
4
6
4
7
6
3
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
3
5
6
4
5
5
4
4
4
6
2
3
2
2
2
5
a
4
4
9
2
2
b
1
3
5
2
3
J
Q
5
2
3
5
6
8
3
4
7
a
5
5
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
3
3
4
e
6
4
7
4
1
I
3
1
2
1
b
4
8
5
6
7
6
6
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
5
1
b
2
5
6~
b
6
4
^
<
=
a
6
b
4
7
£
8
b
4
e
a
5
9
a
?
7
7
o
c
7
b
7
6
S
b
o
4
A
J
2
7
5
9
a
a
C
a
a
3
9
7
£
c
5
•a
«
3
7
6
3
7
4
3
f-
5
3
^
1
4
2
2
7
4
•
5
1
7
l
4
.
a
~Tc~"
4
5
3
8
9
3
3
l
I f
r
4
iT
a
2
If
5.6250
6.4375
S.S625
S.4375
5.0625
5.4375
5.8125
4.9375
5.1250
7.2500
5 . SI 2 5
5.5625
S.12S0
4.9375
4.7500
5.3125
5.6875
5.9375
5.9375
5.7500
5.S62S
5.6875
5.5000
6.0000
6.0625
6.4375
6.3125
5.3125
5.1250
5.4375
5.6875
5.2500
4.375C
5.5000
5.1250
5.3750
5.5C0C
6.7500
6.0030
5.8750
4.7500
5. 3125
6.3125
6.2530
6.3750
5.687S
4.9375
o.437S
5.3125
5.312S
5 . 12SI
2
3
2
3
2
3
3
2
2
2
3
2
2
3
2
2
2
3
3
1
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
3
3
2
2
3
2
2
3
2
2
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
2
3
2
2
3
2
2
3
2
2
3
2
Z
3
2
2
3
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
3
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
3
3 "
2
2 "
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
3
2
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
3
3
2
3
2
2
3
2
2
3
2
2
3
-
Ul
S T A T I
S T I C A L
A N A L Y S I S
S Y S T E M
133
106
5
1
2
6
4
1
2
2
3
9
4
4
3
4
1
8
2
s
1
6
4
1
1
1
1
1
107
5
2
2
3
6
1
3
a
a
2
1C4
5
6
6
6
6
4
5
7
6
5
6
6
S
6
108
5
2
2
2
5
1
3
7
3
9
6
3
2
9
6
3
5
b
7
6
4
4
4
4
1
2
3
1
2
1
4
105
3
~1
106
1C9
S
2
2
2
6
1
3
7
S
6
5
6
5
5
6
7
5
7
5
4
6
4
4
1
2
2
4
2
2
1
187
ica
104
lie
5
2
2
6
5
1
4
1
6
2
S
3
3
1
6
5
4
6
1
4
4
4
10
3
1
1
3
3
3
5
111
5
2
2
2
4
3
2
9
3
9
9
1
5
4
2
6
6
6
7
2
5
5
1
4
5
4
4
1
2
1 1 2
5
2
2
2
6
1
3
a
a
4
8
8
8
3
a
5
a
6
6
7
9
3
4
5
4
4
4
2
5
3
5
113
113
S
2
1
2
6
3
4
3
a
S
5
5
4
3
7
7
111
114
5
2
2
2
5
3
5
7
7
5
6
5
3
6
4
4
6
5
6
7
3
6
5
5
3
4
6
4
8
4
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
1
2
1
2
1
1
112
U S
5
2
2
2
4
3
3
a
6
9
5
9
4
7
3
7
2
9
10
4
4
3
5
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
113
116
5
2
2
4
1
2
6
7
7
7
4
5
4
7
7
4
7
4
5
4
7
7
1
4
5
5
S
1
5
114
117
5
2
2
3
5
1
3
6
7
1<"
1
3
1
3
5
1
3
6
6
3
3
7
6
1
3
3
3
2
t
3
115
lis
5
2
2
1
2
1
3
a
6
9
7
6
b
d
B
5
3
7
8
5
9
3
5
1
3
4
4
1
2
3
4
l
4
4
1
1
1
1
2~
2
1
116
119
5
2
2
2
1
4
3
6
5
7
5
7
6
2
5
5
1
1
1
2
3
120
5
2
2
2
5
1
3
3
a
a
7
117
8
9
3
3
3
7
2
2
7
9
3
3
3
3
1
1
I
4
1
1
1
113
121
5
2
2
£
6
3
5
5
9
13
4
9
9
6
7
6
4
4
5
2
a
8
1
4
4
4
4
1
4
6
3
2
5
5
5
5
2
8
8
3
4
4
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
4
a
a
5
5
8
9
9
4
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
a
4
9
6
9
8
8
9
2
5
5
3
1
1
I
I
1
1
1
-
8
3
3
3
5
4
5
2
b
7
6
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
9
4
S
4
1
119
122
5
2
2
2
a
3
4
a
s
S
9
120
1 2 3
5
2
2
3
6
1
3
9
a
9
121
124
5
2
2
6
6
1
3
7
8
If
122
125
5
2
2
6
6
3
3
7
1
123
126
4
2
2
2
6
9
a
a
7
9
a
3
9
9
6
2
5
2
5
5
4
5
2
S
124
127
4
1
1
2
2
1
3
4
a
a
A
6
5
6
6
7
4
6
6
6
6
7
5
5
7
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
125
128
4
1
1
2
6
3
3
3
6
6
7
5
3
4
6
4
S
7
7
5
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
126
129
4
2
2
2
5
3
5
S
8
4
3
4
7
7
10
7
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
12V
13r.
4
2
2
3
6
1
I
l
3
3
2
6
b
6
6
6
6
6
5
S
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
128
131
4
2
2
3
5
1
3
5
4
a
e
a
a
a
5
4
3
4
a
8
5
7
3
5
3
6
3
4
4
4
3
3
4
129
a
3
6
n
1'
3
132
4
2
2
3
5
1
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
5
6
5
5
6
6
5
4
6
5
4
2
2
2
2
4
5
133
133
4
2
2
2
2
1
4
a
a
li-
7
b
1
9
6
3
5
10
S
2
2
2
2
1
1
3
2
3
2
131
134
4
2
2
2
6
3
3
l
l
2
2
4
6
1
9
S
7
5
3
3
3
1
a
3
1
5
b
5
b
b
132
135
4
2
2
2
5
3
3
3
5
9
4
5
4
4
8
8
S
6
4
4
4
5
4
3
5
3
3
3
3
133
136
4
2
2
6
4
4
7
t
4
4
5
4
S
5
3
a
7
5
S
4
4
3
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
5
9
6
5
3
4
6
5
4
6
6
5
6
6
6
4
2
S
4
4
S
135
138
4
2
2
2
2
1
4
5
o
2
3
2
137
1
3
4
134
1"-
7
7
7
2
a
3
7
a
8
7
1
3
T
1
3
4
4
4
3
5
136
139
4
2
2
6
4
1
5
a
5
4
4
6
3
3
5
3
6
a
3
4
7
1
3
4
4
2
5
5
137
14i'
141
142
4
t
2
6
6
3
2
2
1
4
IC
1
I
li.
IC
i
a
ir>
4
1
1
1
1
3
1
2
a
5
b
5
5
2~
9
3~
5
!-•5
i
4
2
2
2
~4 " 2 " 2
2
2
4
a~
4 ~?~
1
2
6
3
a
a
e
6
5
3
6
7
8
3
l
6
3
o
6
7
5
7
7
2
a
Q
e
2
6
6
S
8
7
7
3
4
4
7
7
7
6
4
6
4
8
3
2
6
3
3
3
5
7
6
IC
2
3
1
2
1
1
1
5
3
1
1
3
1
1
1
4
3
1
1
4
1
1
1
5
4
3
5
3
3
5
3
7
5
2
3
6
b
a
a
3
3
3
5
1
1
3
3
3
4
4
J
a
6
b
7
4
b
b
7
6
3
5
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
T
3
a
3
4
3
a
a
5
4
4
a
a
1
2
8
9
7
9
3
a
a
7
3
4
7
b
5
5~
1
5
~i" " 7
l
6
3
5
1
5
4
_
2
3
2"
I
3
3
3
1
3
2 " "2
4
4
2
V ~3~ ~2~"
3
2
4
3
3
4
3
3
2
4
3
3
3
3
4
6
1
5
4
3
4
5
B
4
3
a
4
4
5
5
4
5
4
4
133
139
1 4 :
143
141
144
142
145
L
L
I
4
2
2
143
14b
4
f
144
147
f43—
149
15
4
4~
1
2
2 " ?
143
151
149
112
3
-a
145
146
"147
153
15>
151
154
152
I b S
153
I S t
t
6
b
•5
3
4 " 1 ~2
b
?
3
a
~ 3 ~
2
1
2
2
4
2
a
«
I
6 ~3~
6
?
4
j
2
2
a
•>
2
4
Z
1
-i
Q
4
4
1'
1
9
7
3
3
3
"5
s
1'
7
3
5
6
5
5
4
5
3
6
"6
r
9
3
u
b
0
7
4
S
4
4
5
4
7
a
s
3
4
ti
9
7
7
a
4
7
4
3
9
6
3
7
3
2
1
•a
U
1
3
3
•3
2
P
5
3
?
2
6
1
3
3
2
2
2
-
?
1
4
1
5
7
a
n
7
1
1
E
1
c
1'
1
"
1
b
^
9
6
2
3
2
a
8
9
2
2
2
7
3
3
3
2
6
3
fc
4
3
5
3
2
2
5
9
8
3
3
3
2
1
1
4
S
4
5
1
7
7
4
9
3
3
1
7
1
9
1'
5~
b
3
1
7
1
b
1
H
4
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
1 '
a
"a"
1
4.1250
5.6875
5.5625
5.4375
4.062S
5.4375
6.1250
S.25C0
5.I2SC
5.9375
S.7500
4.4375
6.4375
4.8750
4.7500
6.500C
4.8750
5.9375
6.8125
4.8750
6.6875
5.6250
S.375C
6.0000
5.5625
4.8125
5.2SC0
5.5625
3.6875
5.1250
5.0625
5.5000
6.3750
5.1875
4.8750
5.3125
4.4375"
S.SO'-O
S.937S
5.0300
S.625r
5.3125
sisoco
4.6375
5.5875
4.75C0
6.3125
5.6251.
5.T"0C
4.3125
7.2C"-
1
2
3
2
2
2
"2
3
2
2
3
1
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
1
2
3
3
2
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
1
2
3
3
2
3
1
2
3
2
2
3
3
2
3
1
2
3
3
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
3
3
1
2
3
1
1
3
1
2
3
2
3
1
1
3
1
2
2
3
3
1
2
3
1
3
3
1
2
3
1
1
3
1
3
2
I " 3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
2
1
2
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
H
CTi
S T A T I
1 5 5
157
158
1 5 6
159
157
160
161
154
lis
1
I
1
1
S
E
»M
S T I C A L
A N A L Y S I S
S Y S T E M
2
2
3
2
3
2
7
5
5
6
1
6
4
7
a
4
2
8
5
2
8
5
5
5
4
4
S
5
3
2
2
2
6
3
2
3
7
S
4
2
3
3
6
7
3
9
5
5
2
4
5
3
3
2
1
2
2
3
2
1
3
6
1
3
IC
10
10
8
9
1
9
1
10
ir
2
2
3
1
5
1
3
S
2
1
2
2
3
4
3
3
8
1
1
10
3
8
1
1
IC
6
a
a
2
3
6
13
3
5
4
4
3
5
5
5
3
2
2
1
4
3
3
IC
5
9
8
1
a
s
a
4
2
2
2
9
9
9
3
3
1
4
4
4
4
4
2
S
2
3
1
1
2
1
1
3
3
I
2
3
4
5
1
3
4
3
4
4
2
2
3
2
a
IC
159
162
3
2
2
3
6
1
1
s
6
5
6
5
7
5
7
5
4
s
6
7
6
6
163
163
3
2
2
1
2
3
3
7
10
3
7
8
2
2
3
7
a
I
2
7
9
B
161
164
3
2
2
2
6
3
4
3
6
4
6
4
5
4
7
7
162
16S
3
2
2
2
4
3
5
4
7
3
4
3
6
3
5
163
166
3
1
2
6
2
1
3
a
a
7
3
4
7
5
3
164
167
3
1
1
6
5
1
3
165
168
3
1
2
2
a
1
3
166
170
3
2
2
2
b
167
171
3
2
2
3
b
158
172
3
2
2
2
IC
a
q
6
6
7
7
a
5
5
3
4
2
2
3
6
3
IC
11-
3
9
S
3
6
6
4
7
5
4
5
1
3
4
4
4
3
4
7
a
IC
6
6
3
a
5
6
2
9
7
7
4
4
7
3
1
2
3
3
4
1
7
7
7
9
7
2
9
8
5
6
5
5
6
5
5
7
2
3
2
3
3
4
4
3
4
2
7
7
9
2
2
1
a
7
I
8
13
1
1
2
I
1
5
S
5
S
1
5
1
2
6
S
a
s
5
0
6
7
6
5
6
4
6
6
5
1
3
3
1
1
1
2
6
3
4
5
7
a
a
7
3
3
7
5
5
6
6
4
a
3
3
4
4
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
a
169
173
3
2
6
3
S
4
6
7
4
2
6
5
8
5
5
4
4
S
2
2
2
2
2
1
174
3
2
2
2
2
170
2
a
3
3
S
6
9
5
6
2
6
7
7
4
9
6
4
3
4
2
2
1
I
1
1
2
1
171
175
3
2
2
3
5
1
4
IC
5
1
l^
10
1
7
a
10
4
10
1
4
3
9
7
2
1
1
3
1
1
5
172
176
2
1
2
2
4
1
3
7
7
IC
6
4
2
9
7
3
3
8
9
a
2
1
1
4
2
2
1
1
177
2
2
2
3
6
1
2
e
a
9
6
a
4
9
6
3
a
s
9
173
9
4
5
6
3
5
4
3
3
3
3
174
178
2
2
2
3
5
3
1
175
179
2
2
2
3
4
1
2
7
9
e
a
a
10
4
2
a
6
2
7
3
3
1
9
2
1
IC
4
1
2
7
2
1
3
2
I
4
1
10
6
4
6
9
6
3
5
6
7
7
3
3
1
1
3
3
2
2
3
4
5
s
s
6
4
S
5
5
3
3
8
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
2
13
5
1
3
6
1 :
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
9
a
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
17a
18C
2
2
2
2
5
3
4
6
7
4
4
177
iai
2
2
2
2
4
3
2
7
IC
5
5
178
182
2
2
2
2
6
3
2
1"<
3
8
9
3
2
7
8
3
8
1
1
1
1
179
183
2
b
6
6
7
6
5
7
3
6
3
3
8
7
5
6
5
7
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
184
2
2
2 " 2
3
189
3
5
6
7
9
e
3
3
3
5
4
4
7
4
6
5
4
7
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
181
185
2
2
2
2
5
3
3
e
7
9
5
5
4
7
8
6
3
2
a
2
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
182
186
2
?
2
?
2
1
2
4
9
5
6
10
5
a
s
6
13
10
6
5
10
6
a
5
3
2
2
2
3
2
2
183
137
5
6
4
4
7
1
4
4
7
1
4
7
2
4
1
1
I
1
I
1
1
taa
2
3
4
184
2
2
2 "2
4
3
5
3
a
5
4
2
6
9
5
4
2
1
1
3
3
3
2
1
1
1S5
1B9
2
2
6
6
a
1
7
3
6
3
8
a
5
5
6
6
5
6
5
2
a
7
7
3
6
7
7
2
4
6
2
5
3
4
1
4
2
5
1
4
3
4
1
5
4
2
5
7
6
4
6
9
4
4
5
3
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
6
1
a
9
IC
6
6
3
2
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
3
3
9
7
8
2
5
1
1
3
1
1
6
4
4
7
5
6
2
1
2
*
2
6
3
2
1
3
7
6
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
b
4
1
1
2
3
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
3
I
t
1
ir
7
If
186
I9C
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
3
4
4
8
187
191
2
2
2
2
6
3
2
5
5
a
a
a
lsa
192
2
2
2
2
6
3
2
b
5
3
3
5
3
1
3
2
1
1
1
3
2
a
7
2
8
8
K
2
1
199
1°3
2
2
2
4
1
4
4
5
5
5
2
6
4
193
194
2
o
Q
s
a
2
2
2
4
1
5
a
a
a
9
Q
4
5
5
"s
191
195
2
?
2
?
•>
3
4
6
7
9
7
6
5
7
a
7
5
5
192
196
2
2
2
2
6
3
3
5
a
a
3
5
3
4
5
4
3
6
7
6
5
193
197
2
2
2
J
3
a
6
1
1
4
9
IC
1
9
1
1
144
198
2
2
2
8
6
-1
S
6
3
7
3
b
5
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
195
199
2
9
a"
a
1
a
a
3
1
•a
a
a
4
4
7
7
1
7
3
4
4
1
1
S
2
4
2
5
4
6
1
2
1
2
2
p
2
19b
" 2">
2
2
b
3
2
197
2C1
2
1
1
3
3
3
19a
?
3
2
3
3
2
2
2
b
3
264
2 '2
y 3
2' 4
1
2
231
2 - 5
?
3
199
2" 2 ~ 2 i a
2 7
2C3
2 3
254"
2
2
2
"
b
• »
5
1
2
2
1
4
a
3
7
1
I7
1
1
5
a
a
5
S
3
3
f
1*
1
a
e
3
5
3
4
4
-
9
5
3
3
2
5
5
5
1
1
2
2
1
2
3
1
3
2
1
IC
1
2
9
9
1
1 -
1
2
1
I
4
2
I
2
3
7
5
9
3
4
a
6
2
3
9
7
7
4
1
4
3
4
2
4
1
9
7
1
5
I
1
1
1
3
1
2
1
3
3
3
3
7
4
4
4
3
b
3
2
5
3
4
1
3
2
P
1
?
3
3
1
5
3
S
5
3
3
6
5
3
7
2
5
a
a
3
6
7
8
7
7
6
4
7
3
•5
7
a
3"
b
3
7
3~
a
a
2
a
3
2
3
4
5
9
7
a
6
7
5
B
2
o
2
2
b
3
2
2
5
3
3
S
4
2
2
2
6
3
2
6
6
1
H
7
8
9
3
2
a
a
5
1
1
?
2
1
1
1
1
4
7
6
4
a
4
6
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
3
7
9
2
3
7
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
7
4
1
1 '
it
4.8750
4.6250
6.5000
5.5625
5.6875
5.5625
6.0000
4.7500
6.3750
5.8750
6.1875
6.2500
4.3125
6.1875
5.2503
4.9375
5.3125
6.2500
6.6875
6.3750
4.8750
6.3125
5.0000
5.5625
5.7S00
5.8750
5.S0C0
5.4375
6.S7SC
3.6875
5. 1250
6.C"00
s.sooo
5.1250
5.3750
5.1875
6.1875
6.000C
5.3125
5.0625
5.6250
4.87SC
5.125?
S.625C
6.6875
4.3125
4.625v
6.CCC3
5.187S
4.5<"C )
6.5625
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
3
~-
2
1
t
3
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
3
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
3
1
3
2
1
3
2
2
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
3
1
3
3
1
1
3
2
1
3
3
2
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
3
1
3
3
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
2
1
3
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
1
3
3
3
1c
3
3
2
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
VI
S T A T I S T I C A L
T
TJ
»
1
MS
2*6
2#7
MO
I
5
209
210
6
R
W
E
Y O S
E A L
P U E W T G 1 E
I
f> X S M £ G D
3
A
B
3
6
6
6
4
6
7
S
8
7
5
6
5
7
6
9
7
7
212
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
3
4
6
6
6
3
3
1
3
4
2
2
ill
C
10
10
7
a
5
III
ait
211
213
1
1
2
2
2
5
3
3
214
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
2
2
212
*13
214
216
217
210
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
6
6
1
1
3
3
3
3
21S
3
6
1
2
2
3
2
4
7
3
219
1
1
2
3
2
1
2
9
7
S
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
5
3
8
2
7
a
1
2
2
2
8
6
9
2
3
8
3
6
7
6
9
7
5
9
7
1
2
2
2
3
2
1
3
3
1
5
6
6
5
6
5
5
S
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
9
6
10
7
2IS
216
220
217
221
21S
219
220
222
221
225
222
226
1
1
1
1
223
227
1
1
223
224
1
2
2
2
2
2
6
3
3
1
3
3
3
5
3
4
3
4
5
a
7
9
4
8
3
6
6
E
F
7
7
S
3
5
3
3
7
8
a
9
S
7
7
3
2
4
5
2
4
1
8
2
6
4
4
6
8
3
3
2
5
7
8
6
6
7
7
a
5
7
5
6
6
8
10
16
7
a
4
6
3
5
7
4
10
4
A N A L Y S I S
G
10
8
6
3
6
9
7
a
5
4
9
4
.
4
4
8
a
6
9
8
S Y S T E M
N
H
S S S S S S
G G G G G G
2 3
4 5 6
7
M
m
M
m
M
H
i
J
K
L
5
N
5
P
S
G
1
9
8
7
4
5
5
6
3
S
6
6
2
3
7
9
5
3
S
3
5
3
2
3
4
9
7
7
5
S
9
4
3
4
9
4
7
7
6
6
2
4
6
S
7
5
5
3
3
5
3
6
3
6
3
6
4
6
3
2
3
5
3
4
7
6
3
5
7
1
3
1
2
2
1
3
2
3
1
4
2
1
3
2
1
2
1
1
1
3
2
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
1
3
2
1
1
2
1
2
3
3
1
3
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
3
1
3
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
3
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
•
s1
2
4
3
3
5
4
2
3
2
2
3
1
2
2
3
3
2
3
3
1
2
2
3
4
1
2
4
1
1
1
4
4
3
2
3
1
2
1
4
4
7
6
4
7
0
4
a.
8
4
4
9
8
4
7
3
3
2
7
2
8
4
6
3
4
7
7
8
4
8
9
8
6
6
6
5
6
9
4
4
4
10
1
1
id
2
1
2
7
3
7
S
7
5
9
4
4
3
4
8
4
6
8
8
4
8
4
3
6
5
9
2
7
3
4
3
7
4
3
3
5
9
3
S
6
5
8
3
7
8
5
4
4
2
3
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
3
1
I
2
*
a
s
3
7
1
3
3
4
2
4
2
M
P
E R
A S
N N
5.9375
5.6075
5.6075
4.0125
5*2500
6.1875
5*5625
5*7500
5.5000
4.7500
6*6250
5*0625
5*8125
4*6875
5*6250
6.1875
5*0625
7.6075
6.1075
2
2
2
1
2
3
2
2
2
1
3
2
2
1
2
3
2
3
3
B
L
V
C
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
T3
00
119
VITA
Mary Bordelon Blalock was born the fifth day of
February, 1941, in Alexandria, Louisiana, to Curtis Mark and
Gertrude Irving Bordelon.
She is the second of two children.
In May of 1958, she was graduated from Providence
Central High School in Alexandria, and in the fall of 1958,
she entered the University of Southwestern Louisiana in
Lafayette, Louisiana, and began work leading toward the
degree of Bachelor of Science in Business Administration.
In
August, 1959, she married Paul Joseph Blalock, Jr., and began
work at Phillips Petroleum Company in Lafayette.
February,
1962, she resumed studies at the University of Southwestern
Louisiana, and in May, 1963, received her bachelor's degree
in formal exercises.
Immediately following this, she began work at Humble
Oil & Refining Company, Lafayette, and was employed there
until February, 1964, at which time she removed to the University of Southwestern Louisiana to teach Secretarial Science
until August, 1964.
She enrolled in the Graduate School of
Louisiana State University in September, 1964, and began
graduate work toward the degree of Master of Science in the
field of Marketing.
She received a Master of Science in
Marketing,and a Bachelor of Science in Business Education and
120
Distributive Education in exercises in August, 1967.
She has worked full-time and part-time with Gulf
South Research Institute in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, in the
field of Economics.
She has taught Office Administration
at Louisiana State University first as a graduate assistant
and later as an Instructor for a total of five years.
At present, she is a candidate for a Doctor of Philosophy
degree in Management at Louisiana State University.
Currently, she is an Assistant Professor of Business Administration at Southeastern Louisiana University in Hammond,
Louisiana, where she has been since 1970.
She is also the
Co-president of International Business Consultants of Baton
Rouge.
EXAMINATION AND THESIS REPORT
Candidate:
Mary B o r d e l o n B l a l o c k
Major Field:
Management
Title of Thesis: The Use o f K i n e s i c s i n E s t a b l i s h i n g and D e t e r m i n i n g
Meaning i n S u p e r i o r - S u b o r d i n a t e Communications
Approvejj
EXAMINING COMMITTEE:
£^*^
&/yi"£
M-4_^[ ^<^Wyv^^6uy>
Date of Examination:
October 25,
1973