Human Communication. A Publication of the Pacific and Asian Communication Association. Vol. 13, No. 1, pp

Transcription

1 Human Communication. A Publication of the Pacific and Asian Communication Association. Vol. 13, No. 1, pp Positive and Negative Nonverbal Behaviors in Relationships: A Study of Relationship Satisfaction and Longevity Jessica Spott Colleen Pyle Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter Texas Tech University

2 30 Nonverbal Behaviors in Relationships Abstract The majority of research that has been previously conducted has focused on the use of nonverbal behaviors, in marriages, as a way to maintain stable relationships. In this study the researchers focus is on whether there is a positive correlation between positive nonverbal behaviors and the duration of dating, committed, and martial relationships. Moreover, the researchers are examining the relationship between overall satisfaction of the relationship and the use of positive nonverbal behaviors. The research found significant findings in two factors, longevity of the relationship and overall relationship satisfaction, which are positively correlated to the use of positive nonverbal behaviors. The findings of this study are significant and pertinent to the field communication studies because it shows that an increased use in positive nonverbal behaviors will help increase relationship satisfaction.

3 Jessica Spott, Colleen Pyle, & Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter 31 Activities, in which people in committed non-marital, romantic relationships engage in order to achieve liking, satisfaction, and immediacy, have been the focus of recent communication studies (Dainton, 2009). There has been a major gap in the focus of nonverbal behaviors in relationships, the duration of the relationship because of these liking behaviors, and the overall satisfaction of the relationship. The goal of this research is to find a direct correlation between perceived positive nonverbal behaviors and the duration of dating, committed, and marital relationships. Given that nearly half of all marriages end in divorce (Goldstein, 1999), a better understanding of how couples can maintain healthy, happy marriages is critical (Weigel & Ballard-Reisch, 2008, pp.220). The majority of research that has been previously conducted has focused on the use of nonverbal behaviors, in marriages, as a way to maintain stable relationships. In this study the researchers focus is on whether there is a positive correlation between positive nonverbal behaviors and the duration of dating, committed, and martial relationships. Moreover, the researchers are examining the relationship between overall satisfaction of the relationship and the use of positive nonverbal behaviors. Relationship maintenance is defined as behaviors enacted by relational partners in order to sustain desired relational characteristics such as satisfaction (Dainton, 2008, pp. 35), and nonverbal communication is defined as the use of interacting sets of visual, vocal, and invisible communication systems and subsystems by communicators with systematic encoding and decoding of symbols and signs for the purposes of exchanging consensual meanings in specific communicative contexts (Leathers & Eaves, 2008, pp. 11).Relational satisfaction is determined by what an individual actually experiences and what he or she expects to experience (Dainton, 2000). It is beneficial to the field of Communication Studies to determine whether there is a correlation between the longevity and the use of positive nonverbal behaviors in order to see whether positive nonverbal behaviors result in an increase in overall relationship satisfaction. This paper hopes to prove that longer the relationship, the more those within the relationship will use positive nonverbal behaviors, and that there is a positive correlation between the use of positive nonverbal behaviors and overall relationship satisfaction. Various methodologies have previously been utilized to measure nonverbal behaviors. For instance, Sabatelli et al. (1982) found that women were more accurate senders of nonverbal messages, using a method based on Buck s Communication of Affect Receiving Ability Test (1976), (Noller & Feeney, 1994, pp. 200). Moreover, the work of Gottman and Porterfield (1981) looked at the correlation between marital satisfaction and the nonverbal accuracy of husbands (Noller & Feeney, 1994, pp. 200). Various methodologies have pointed to the correlation in nonverbal maintenance behaviors and the satisfaction of the relationship; This paper hopes to provide one step further to analyze the correlation between the uses of positive nonverbal behaviors and the duration, and satisfaction of the relationship. Research has primarily focused on whether or not participants used nonverbal behaviors such as touching, smiling, and making eye contact (Hinkle, 1998, p82) within their relationships. According to Weiner and Mehrabian (1968) there is a strong observed relationship between immediacy behaviors and liking (Hinkle, 1998). This paper will examine the relationship between nonverbal behaviors and overall satisfaction of the relationship to see if there is a correlation between nonverbal behaviors that increase liking and longevity of the relationship. Recent research proves that the more an individual perceived his or her partner as using maintenance behaviors relative to his/her own expectations, the more satisfied the individual was with the relationship (Dainton, 2000, pp. 831). This research validates a

4 32 Nonverbal Behaviors in Relationships correlation between reciprocity and liking within a relationship, it is not necessarily the goal of this particular study to elaborate upon the notion of reciprocity and liking but it is mentioned here as a priority for future research in determining a possible correlation between reciprocity and longevity of relationships. Literature Review Past research has studied the different maintenance strategies within romantic relationships that prompt relational satisfaction, based on nonverbal communication and cues between the couple (Dainton, 2009). The focus of this paper is not only to focus on nonverbal behaviors that support relational satisfaction, but decipher whether there is a positive correlation between the use of positive nonverbal behaviors and the length and overall satisfaction of the relationship to help those in dating, committed, and marital relationships measure value of their relationship. According to the Theory of Planned Behavior, the desire and efficacy of communication can lead to prediction of people s desire to talk about an underlying issue in the relationship (Jang & Yoo, 2007). This implies that the more people in relationships discuss those things they want to avoid; the more likely they are to value the relationship as important. Research on the value of a relationship is vital to this study because of the attitude towards the behaviors of the other person in the relationship. Dainton (2008) noted that individuals should pay more attention to maintenance because romantic relationships have not received enough attention. The objective of this study is to analyze how couples engaging in dating, committed, and/or marital relationships will be equipped with the insight to recognize they can use nonverbal behaviors to increase the overall satisfaction of a relationship. According to the article, Maintenance behaviors, Expectations for Maintenance & Satisfaction: linking comparison levels to relational maintenance strategies relational satisfaction was calculated by the difference of an experience versus what the person is expecting the experience to be. The five maintenance techniques that are used in this study are positivity, openness, assurances, social networks and sharing tasks (Dainton, 2000).From these measures of relational maintenance the researcher used the notion of positivity in the current study to show how positive nonverbal behaviors result in successful relationships. Furthermore, this study will help people in relationships recognize the importance in the use of positive nonverbal behaviors as a tool in increasing the overall satisfaction within dating, committed, or marital relationships. This study focused on whether or not people in relationships use positive and negative nonverbal behaviors. The main goal of this study is to see the use of positive and negative nonverbal behaviors in various situational instances. Research have been done analyzing the use of immediacy in romantic relationships; however, nonverbal communication in dating, committed, or marital relationships, regarding longevity and the overall satisfaction of the relationship, is not abundantly found. In an article called, Patterns of Nonverbal Behavior and Sensitivity in the Context of Attachment Relationships, the researchers look primary at the attachment of infants to adults, as well as assessing interpersonal sensitivity, instead of the actual nonverbal behaviors that were used (Schacher, Shaver, & Mikulincer, 2005). The article also discusses the need for future research on adult s nonverbal behaviors when it says, Research should also explore the effects of a partner s nonverbal expression skills and sensitivity on a person s own sense of attachment security, in the short run and over time, as the relationship develops. (Schacher, Shaver & Mikulincer, 2005, pp. 164). This information is essential in understanding the rational for the current study. The researchers are following up on the research that Schacher, Shaver and Mikulincer began.

5 Jessica Spott, Colleen Pyle, & Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter 33 Although the present research is using a self-reflexive method of gathering information, an article about equity and interdependence shows the researchers the accuracy by which people are able to understand and interpret the nonverbal communication that another person portrays (Stafford & Canary, 2006). Stafford and Canary say, Our purpose was to discover the factor structure of relational maintenance behaviors, not the factor structure of additional items concerning equity, satisfaction, or biological sex (2006, p. 236). Where the study of Stafford and Canary are lacking, the research done by Rosip and Hall (2004) is applicable. Within this research, the participants are evaluated on how well they can identify and decode nonverbal cues. The measurement in this study was to differentiate between the use of males and females and their use of nonverbal cues. This research proves that females are better at identifying and understanding the meaning of nonverbal cues (Rosip & Hall, 2004). This study is very useful for the current researchers, because all nonverbal cues and behaviors are being measured. The present study will not focus on the differences between males and females however, the information will be gathered through the survey. If significant differences occur, this information could be used in future research or to come to more conclusions about nonverbal behaviors and communication. Rationale Research indicates that there is a correlation between nonverbal behaviors and the duration of marital relationships (Weigel & Ballard-Reisch, 1999).The researchers wish to take this further to determine the correlation between nonverbal behaviors and duration in dating, committed, or marital relationships, as well as nonverbal behaviors in relation to overall relationship satisfaction. The perceived use of nonverbal behaviors can be very different from the actual use of nonverbal behaviors, this will be important to differentiate. The more nonverbal behaviors that a couple uses, and the more often they are used, there is an expected increase of the duration of the relationship. Through this expected correlation, the researchers will be able to understand if there is a difference in dynamic between dating, non-marital relationships and marital relationships. If a difference exists in actual use of nonverbal behaviors, there should be an increase in duration of relationship. Along with this study, the differences in nonverbal behaviors should make a difference in the length of a relationship. Based on these studies, the following hypotheses were developed: H 1 : A couples perceived use of nonverbal behaviors will be positively correlated with the duration of dating relationships. H 2 : As the length of the relationship increases the use of negative nonverbal behaviors H 3 : decrease. As the longevity of the relationship increases so does the relational satisfaction. Method Participants The participants in this study were recruited from a large southwestern university through various undergraduate communication studies courses, and 219 undergraduate students 18 years or older were sampled. There were 83 males and 79 females sampled. Of those students surveyed 51 were freshmen, 39 were sophomores, 29 were juniors, and 43 were seniors. Out of students surveyed, 66 students listed their relationship status as single, 45 as dating, 48 as committed, and 3 as married. The researchers discarded 57 surveys due to the fact that they were incomplete, but received 162 valid and complete surveys. The benefit of being a participant in this study is participants became more fully aware of the importance of nonverbal relationship maintenance behaviors in relationships.

6 34 Nonverbal Behaviors in Relationships Measurements The measurement instrument was 26 questions in total, and utilized a 7-point Likert-type scale. The scale pattern is from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The participants were asked to mark the box according to how they felt about each statement. The first five questions were demographic type questions. Questions 6-24 measured nonverbal behaviors and relationship satisfaction on a Likert-type scale. The final two questions were aimed at discovering the history of the relationship. Procedures The questionnaire was administered during several different class periods for extra credit. This survey was handed out, and later collected. The students were told that participation in the survey was not mandatory, they could stop at any time, and their identities were to remain anonymous. The 26 item measurement tool is based on a study called, Measuring routine and strategic relational maintenance: Scale revision, sex versus gender roles, and the prediction of relational characteristic.(stafford, Dainton, 2000) This study looks at the different relational maintenance patterns that are being used in different dynamics, and how the participants selfreflect about the relational maintenance techniques that were used (Stafford, Dainton, 2000). After the data was collected, the researchers analyzed the data by imputing it into SPSS in order to find patterns and correlations between the data. The dependent variables measured were gender, classification, and status of relationship, living arrangement, and length of relationships. The independent variables measured were positive nonverbal behaviors, negative nonverbal behaviors and relationship satisfaction. These variables were measured to see if there was a positive correlation between the use of positive nonverbal behaviors and the duration of the relationship. Appendix A shows the breakdown of questions the researchers asked in order to determine the positive and negative nonverbal relationship behaviors used in relationships, and the overall relational satisfaction. Results It was hypothesized that couples perceived use of nonverbal behaviors will be positively correlated with the duration of dating relationships. This hypothesis was proven. Regarding research question one Pearson correlations between positive nonverbal behaviors and duration or longevity of the relationship (.230**) resulted in a significant correlation (.003). Table 1 shows the correlation between length and positive nonverbal behaviors within dating, committed and marital relationships. This is the most significant findings from the research gathered. It also shows that after six months to a year of being in the relationship more positive nonverbal behaviors are displayed. The second research hypothesis observed the phenomenon that as the length of the relationship increases the use of negative nonverbal behaviors decreases. Using the Pearson correlation there was.062 between length and negative nonverbal behaviors with.432 significance. These findings were not found to be significant. Although this specific research did not prove this research question, future research could be done to provide more information on this phenomenon. It is interesting to note that the first hypothesis is opposite of the second hypothesis, and yet only one of the hypothesis was proven to have significant findings. A questionnaire that was more focused on negative nonverbal immediacy behaviors could further validate the first research question, and could provide more information on the second research question. This would also help to triangulate the study and provide well rounded information regarding results.

7 Jessica Spott, Colleen Pyle, & Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter 35 Table 1 LENGTH POSNV Correlations LENGTH POSNV Pearson Correlation ** Sig. (2-tailed).003 N Pearson Correlation.230 ** 1 Sig. (2-tailed).003 N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Table 2 The third hypothesis observed is as stated: as the longevity of the relationship increases so does the relational satisfaction. The research also found.001 significance which validated the third research question. The Pearson Correlation found that length and overall relationship satisfaction were positively correlated (.259). This information is beneficial to the field of communication studies because it provides evidence that a relationship should be allowed significant time to reach its full understanding of the other s nonverbal immediacy behaviors leading to ultimate satisfaction. Discussion The primary purpose of this investigation was to further develop research in the area of relationship satisfaction in relation to nonverbal behaviors. Results revealed a major gap in the focus of nonverbal behaviors in relationships and the duration of the relationship because of these liking behaviors. Most research, as stated before, focused on the correlations between positive nonverbal behaviors and increased liking, but did not focus on positive nonverbal

8 36 Nonverbal Behaviors in Relationships behaviors and the duration of the relationship and overall relationship satisfaction. According to Canary, Stafford, Hause and Wallace, Relationships have little chance of success unless partners like one another (Canary, Stafford, Hause and Wallace, 1993, pp. 6). This was the objective in the current study. Table 3 Correlations LENGTH LENGTH NEGNV Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed).432 NEGNV N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed).432 N Table 4 Correlations LENGTH FINALSAT LENGTH FINALSAT Pearson Correlation ** Sig. (2-tailed).001 N Pearson Correlation.259 ** 1 Sig. (2-tailed).001 N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Two of the hypotheses were validated and proved to be correct. The first hypothesis analyzed couples perceived use of nonverbal immediacy behaviors. It focused on whether or not a positive relationship exists between using nonverbal behaviors and the duration of the relationship. There was a positive correlation between positive nonverbal behaviors and duration and longevity in the relationship. It was a goal to validate a relationship between length and negative nonverbal immediacy behaviors and the duration of the relationship. The length of the relationship was observed in order to see if a phenomenon existed. There were not findings that were significant enough to validate that as the length of the relationship increases, the use of negative nonverbal behaviors decreases. The third hypothesis observed a possible relationship between the longevity of the relationship and overall satisfaction. It was resulted that the longer a

9 Jessica Spott, Colleen Pyle, & Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter 37 relationship exists, the more relationship satisfaction will be experienced. Therefore, the third hypothesis was validated. The implications of this study prove that the longer a couple is in a relationship, whether it be dating, committed or marital, the more satisfied they are in the relationship due to the fact that they use more positive nonverbal behaviors. These results are valuable because now it is known that there is a positive correlation between nonverbal immediacy factors and relationship satisfaction. In other words, the more one uses positive nonverbal immediacy factors, such as eye contact, smiling, and physical touch; the more relationship satisfaction they will experience. Past research has been done on nonverbal immediacy in marriage relationships and in professional relationships, but there has not been any research done on non-marital relationships. This research will provide a new depth and more evidence to the field of nonverbal communication. Through this study, we now know that nonverbal behaviors are important in non-marital relationships because the directly affect the overall satisfaction of the relationship. Because there was a positive correlation with the length in the relationship and the use of nonverbal immediacy behaviors and also between length in the relationship and the relationship satisfaction, one can conclude that the longer the relationship, the more prevalent the nonverbal immediacy behaviors are. Also inversely, the more nonverbal behaviors are used, the more relationship satisfaction is displayed. Limitations Although this study found that there was a significant correlation between the uses of positive nonverbal behaviors, length of relationship, and overall relationship satisfaction those surveyed were mostly undergraduate students whose relationships were less than a year. In future research it would behoove the researcher to survey those who are in relationships that are longer than a year in length. Also, the research didn t address the convergence of nonverbal behaviors between both individuals in the relationship. This would help define why the nonverbal behaviors increase with the longevity of the relationship. It would also help determine what nonverbal behaviors are most used to develop a relationship with the highest possible satisfaction. The current research showed there is a positive correlation between the use of positive nonverbal behaviors, the length of the relationship and the overall relationship satisfaction, but it does not take into account why this phenomenon occurs or what behaviors work to increase satisfaction. Future Research Questions regarding the participants living situations in regard to their significant other such as living together, not living together, and sleeping over regularly, were asked. Although these questions were not taken into account during this study it would be interesting to see how various living situation would affect nonverbal behaviors and relationship satisfaction. The researcher also disregarded question aimed at learning about long distance relationships and their affect on overall relationship satisfaction. Moreover, the researchers gathered data regarding physical touch and how that relates to overall relational satisfaction and longevity of the relationship. This information can be used in a future study. Weiner and Mehrabian observed a strong relationship between immediacy behaviors and liking (Hinkle, 1999). Therefore, it would be interesting for future research to look at specific nonverbal behaviors, such as gestures, physical touch, facial expressions, to determine which immediacy behaviors are most affective in achieving relationship satisfaction. Conclusion

10 38 Nonverbal Behaviors in Relationships The research found significant findings in two factors, longevity of the relationship and overall relationship satisfaction, which are positively correlated to the use of positive nonverbal behaviors. Previous research was conducted over the use of positive nonverbal behaviors and increased liking in relationships. Liking is considered to be a necessary component to relationship satisfaction (Hinkle, 1999, pp 82). The findings of this study are significant and pertinent to the field communication studies because it shows that an increased use in positive nonverbal behaviors will help increase relationship satisfaction.

11 Jessica Spott, Colleen Pyle, & Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter 39 References Burgoon, J.K., & Le Poire, B.A. (1999). Nonverbal cues and interpersonal judgments: Participant and observer perceptions intimacy, dominance, composure, and formality. Communication Monographs, 66, Canary, D. J.,& Dainton, M. (2003). Framing the maintenance of relationships through communication: An epilogue. In, Maintaining relationships through communication: Relational, contextual, and cultural variations (p ).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Canary, D., Stafford, L., Hause, K., & Wallace, L. (1993). An inductive analysis of relational maintenance strategies: Comparisons among lovers, relatives, friends, and others. Communication Research Reports, 10(1), Dainton, M. (2009). Maintenance behaviors, expectations for maintenance, and satisfaction: Linking comparison levels to relational maintenance strategies. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17(6), Dainton, M. (2008). The use of relationship maintenance behaviors as a mechanism to explain the decline in marital satisfaction among parents. Journal of Communication Reports, 21(1), Dainton, M. (2007). Attachment and marital maintenance. Communication Quarterly, 55(3), Gottman, J.M., & Porterfield, A.L. (1981). Communicative competence in the nonverbal behavior of married couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43(4), Guerrero, L.K., & Jones, S.M., & Burgoon, J.K. (2000). Responses to nonverbal intimacy change in romantic dyads: Effects of behavioral valance and degree of behavioral change on nonverbal and verbal reactions. Communication Monographs, 67(4), Hinkle, L.L. (1998). Nonverbal immediacy communication behaviors and liking in marital relationships. Communication research reports, 16(1), Jang, S. A., & Yoo, J. H. (2007). Topic avoidance in close relationships: Appling the theory of planned behavior. Human Communication. 12 (2), Johnson, D.I. (2004). Relationship maintenance behaviors. Communication Quarterly, 52(3), Koerner, A.F., & Fitzpatrick, M.A. (2002). Nonverbal communication and marital adjustment and satisfaction: The role of decoding relationship relevant and relationship irrelevant affect. Communication Monographs. 69(1), Leathers, D.G., & Emigh, T.H. (1980). Decoding facial expressions: A new test of decoding norms. The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 66, Leathers, D.G., & Eaves, M.H. (2008). Successful nonverbal communication: Principles and applications. (4ed), p.11. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. Manusov, V. (1991). Perceiving nonverbal messages: Effects of immediacy and encoded intent on receiver judgments. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 55, Noller, P., & Feeney, J.A. (1994). Relationship satisfaction, attachment, and nonverbal accuracy in early marriage. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 18(3), Rossip, J.P, & Hall, J.A. (2004). Knowledge of nonverbal cues, gender, and nonverbal decoding accuracy. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28(4), Schachner, D.A, & Shaver, P.R., & Mikulincer, M. (2005). Patterns of nonverbal behavior and sensitivity in the context of attachment relationships. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 29(3),

12 40 Nonverbal Behaviors in Relationships Stafford, L., & Canary, D.J. (2006). Equity and interdependence as predictors of relational maintenance strategies. The Journal of Family Communication, 6(4), Stafford, L., & Dainton, M. (2000, September). Measuring Routine and Strategic Relational Maintenance: Scale Revision, Sex versus Gender Roles, and the Prediction of Relational Characteristics. Communication Monographs, 67(3), 306. Waldron, V.R., & Hunt, M.D. (1992). Hierarchical level, length, and quality of supervisory relationship as predictors of subordinates use of maintenance tactics. Journal of Communication Reports, 5(2), Weigle, D.J., & Ballard-Reisch, D.S. (2008). Relational maintenance, satisfaction, and commitment in marriages: An actor-partner analysis. Journal of Family Communication. 8, Weigle, D.J., &Ballard-Reisch, D.S. (1999). The influence of marital duration on the use of relationship maintenance behaviors. Journal of Communication Reports, 12(2),

13 Jessica Spott, Colleen Pyle, & Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter 41 Appendix A Positive Nonverbal Questions 8. I use nonverbal communication frequently to express myself. 9. I can effectively understand my partner s nonverbal cues. 10. I express certain nonverbal cues when a relationship is ending. 11. I can tell when my partner is happy with me, because of his/her nonverbals. 12. I use nonverbal efficiently when mediating a disagreement. 15. I am satisfied with the current amount of shared nonverbal rituals. 16. Nonverbal cues are important to relational maintenance. 19. My nonverbal cues make me transparent, whatever the feeling. 24. I disclose what I need or want with my nonverbal cues. Negative Nonverbal Questions 17. I try to avoid certain nonverbal cues when I am in disagreement. 18. My nonverbal cues and my words conflict when I m upset. 23. My nonverbal cues change depending on who we are. Relationship Satisfaction Questions 6. I express feelings of satisfaction in my relationship. 7. I express feelings of dissatisfaction in my relationship. 13. I expect my partner to show affection to me when in public. 14. I expect my partner to show affection to me when we are alone.