Chapter 5: Nonverbal Communication in Teaching

Abstract

Research in many settings outside the classroom has indicated that nonverbal communication can serve a wide range of functions in human interaction. These include: (1) supplementing, reinforcing, or regulating verbal exchanges (Ekman & Friesen, 1969); (2) revealing emotional states or personality traits (Ekman & Friesen, 1975; Exline, Ellyson, & Long, 1975; Scherer, 1974); (3) providing cues for impression formation (Imada & Hakel, 1977; Wexley, Fugita, & Malone, 1975); (4) indicating liking or disliking for individuals, situations, or ideas (Mehrabian, 1972); (5) communicating relative status of interactants (Henley, 1977; Mehrabian, 1972); (6) being persuasive (Albert & Dabbs, 1970; McGinley, LeFevre, & McGinley, 1975); and (7) influencing the performance of others (Imada & Hakel, 1977; Word, Zanna, & Cooper, 1974). (A more complete discussion of the many possible functions of nonverbal behavior can be found in LaFrance & Mayo, 1978.) It is likely that nonverbal communication functions similarly in the classroom. In fact, many educators have presented cogent arguments for the importance of nonverbal communication in teaching (e.g., Beebe, 1981; Galloway, 1972; Grant & Hennings, 1971; Richey & Richey, 1978; Wolfgang, 1977). However, until quite recently, educational researchers have neglected the systematic study of this topic. The research that has been carried out consists predominantly of scattered, isolated studies without a common theoretical basis. This lack of internal coherence in previous research on nonverbal communication in teaching probably has been

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 41 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.