The big myth about nonverbal communication

By Kim Harrison,

Consultant, Author and Principal of www.cuttingedgepr.com

You have probably heard this type of statement: “Effective personal communication is 55% body language, 38% tone of voice and only 7% content of the words you use.” This is an actual quote from a website.

These percentages are used over and over by communication consultants, body language ‘experts,’ media interview trainers, speech delivery coaches and HR instructors. How comforting it must be for them to quote such exact and scientific figures when this type of information is usually quite general or occurs in the narrow confines of an experiment.

Unfortunately, the figures are just an urban myth. For example, when you think about it, the words in personal communication logically should carry much more weight than a mere 7%. But this formula has been twisted and distorted, and has become a factoid, which is a false statement asserted as a fact.

Regrettably, the 7% 38% 55% statements continue to pop up in published works:

• “Only 7 percent of face-to-face communication is actual words.”
• “Studies in communication have shown that the verbal aspect – the basic content – only comprises 7% of the total message that we send or another person receives.”
• “One study at UCLA indicated that up to 93 percent of communication effectiveness is determined by nonverbal cues. Another study indicated that the impact of a performance was determined 7 percent by the words used, 38 percent by voice quality, and 55 percent by the nonverbal communication.”

Do a Google search and you can find variations on the same statement in many locations.

So, what is the truth?

The two original research projects on which this information is based, actually found something decidedly different. UCLA psychologist, Dr Albert Mehrabian, and fellow researchers came up with quite narrow and limited findings, as many research projects do, in their experiments going back to 1967.

The findings only relate to inconsistent communication - where contradictory messages are being conveyed simultaneously by words and other behaviors of a speaker. We may express something verbally while our facial expressions, postures and positions, tone of voice or gestures indicate the opposite.

Further, the findings:

1. only relate to an audience that doesn’t know the speaker,
2. apply in situations in which “the cues are limited to feeling (pleasure, arousal, dominance) and like/dislike,” according to Dr Mehrabian (he only tested 9 words in the original experiment).

As a communicator by profession I was determined to find out what the facts were, and so I went to the trouble of buying Mehrabian’s book, Silent Messages, directly from him. 1

Sure enough, Mehrabian’s claims were much more modest than the sweeping conclusions many others have drawn from his work.

He said, “Is there a systematic and coherent approach to resolving the general meaning or impact of an inconsistent message? [my emphasis] Indeed there is. Our experimental results show:
 
“Total liking = 7% verbal liking + 38% vocal liking + 55% facial liking” [page 76]
 
“This can also be:
 
“Total feeling = 7% verbal feeling + 38% vocal feeling + 55% facial feeling” [page 77]

“These assertions...are limited to feelings (pleasure, arousal, dominance) and like-dislike.” [page 79]

But “Numerical values in this equation are only approximate.” [page 77] “Implicit cues have about 12 times the power of verbal cues.” [page 78]
 
“In a recorded message or phone conversation, if the vocal expression happens to contradict the words, then the former determines the total impact. This can work either way: the words may be positive and the vocal expression negative, or the vocal expression may be positive and the words negative.” [page 76]
 
“Obviously implicit expressions are not always more important than words,” stated Dr Mehrabian on page 79. Implicit communication deals mainly with feelings and like/dislike or attitudes.

In many conversations, implicit messages are not even present, eg “I will meet with you at 2 pm next Wednesday.” However, if you say “I’m looking forward to meeting with you again at 2 pm next Wednesday,” with a pained facial expression or if you avoid looking at the person when saying the words, your expression will convey a stronger implicit message than your explicit message (your words).

From all this, when you hear someone self importantly quoting spurious interpretations of Dr Mehrabian’s work, just laugh in their face. I’m sure your facial expression and tone of voice will be consistent with your words.

References

1. Albert Mehrabian. Silent Messages. Second edition. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company 1981.

About the Author

Kim Harrison is a recognized authority in the public relations field. His website, www.cuttingedgepr.com, provides a wealth of informative articles and resources on public relations techniques and management.

 

Click here to go to the Free Articles Index