1970/09/01 by Michael Argyle, Veronica Salter, Hilary Nicholson +2 · 242 citations
Psychology · Decision Sciences · #Psychological and Temporal Perspectives Research #Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics #Nonverbal communication #Psychology #Cognitive psychology #Developmental psychology
paper · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8260.1970.tb00668.x
published in British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 9(3), 222-231 (Wiley)
openalex publication_date 1970/09/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/22
Ratings were made by 120 subjects of 18 video‐tapes in which verbal and non‐verbal cues for Inferior, Equal and Superior were varied and combined in a 3 times 3 design. The typed messages (verbal alone) were rated by further subjects, as were video‐tapes of a performer reading numbers (non‐verbal alone); the two sets of cues alone had identical effects on ratings. In combination, both kinds of cue had a reduced effect, but it was found that non‐verbal cues now had 4.3 times the effect of verbal cues on shifts of ratings, and accounted for 10.3 times as most variance; verbal cues were only able to act as multipliers of consistent nonverbal cues. There was little evidence of double‐bind effects. Analysis of individual differences showed that females were relatively more responsive to non‐verbal compared with verbal cues, and that more neurotic subjects found the combination of Superior (non‐verbal) with Inferior (verbal) unpleasant, and responded more to verbal cues for Inferior‐Superior.