The Use of Kinesics in Establishing and Determining Meaning in Superior-Subordinate Communications

Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons

LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School

1973 The seU 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: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses

Recommended Citation Blalock, Mary Bordelon, "The sU e of Kinesics in Establishing and Determining Meaning in Superior-Subordinate Communications." (1973). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 2517. https://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, 1942- THE 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, Ann Arbor, Michigan

MARY BORDELON BLALOCK

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 27

The "F Value" Column , 31

The "Probability of F" Column 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 69

CHAPTER IV. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 71

Summary 71

Conclusions 75 viii.

Recommendations for Further Study .78

BIBLIOGRAPHY 79

APPENDIX A. Text of Message Experiment 99

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 119 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

I. Statistical Breakdown of Employees by Demographics and

Personality 26

II. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Favorability by

Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type .... 33

III. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Truthfulness by

Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type .... 35

IV. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Believability by

Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type .... 36

V. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Reputability by

Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type .... 38

VI. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Reliability by

Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type .... 39

VII. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Pleasantness by

Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type .... 41

VIII. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Informability by

Demographics, Personality Factors and Message Type .... 42

IX. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Favorability by

Message Type, Demographics, and Personality Factors. ... 48

X. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Truthfulness by

Message Type, Demographics, and Personality Factors. ... 51

XI. 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, ... 58

XIII. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Reliability by

Message Type, Demographics, and Personality Factors. ... 61

XIV. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Pleasantness by

Message Type, Demographics, and Personality Factors. ... 64

XV. 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 per ception, 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 nega tive or positive body language is used; there is no differ ence 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 demo graphic characteristics or personality type except in very limited instances. Subsequent analysis indicated that different types of communication (oral, visual, or written) did not influ ence 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 the last few years, a scientific study of kinesics (body language) has been pursued from many angles.

Doctors of Medicine have investigated kinesics in relation to physiology, such as Finley's Kinesiological

Analysis of Human Locomotion, and Jensen's Applied

Kinesiology: The Scientific Study of Human Performance.2 In these manuels of structural kinesiology, much attention is paid to applied anatomy,3 will and unwilled movement,4 and motor skills in a medical context.5

xRay F. Finley, Kinesiological Analysis of Human Locomotion (Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon Press, 1961). 2Clayne R. Jensen, Applied Kinesiology: The Scientific Study of Human Performance (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1970).

^Phillip J. Rasch and Roger K. Burke, Kinesics and Applied Anatomy: The Science of Human Movement (third edition; Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1971).

4A. 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 in Human Communication in Clinical 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 Pediatrics), September 2, 1969. 2

Psychologists and psychiatrists have studied body language for mental illness clues (as in Berger's "Nonverbal

Communication in Group Psychotherapy"); and as paralanguage, i.e., a means of giving depth to verbal communication.

Some of these studies deal primarily with emotions, such as

"The Kinesic Level in the Investigation of the Emotions"8 while others concentrate on pathological illnesses.9 Much of their information, while helpful, is of limited value to businessmen.10

°Gordon W. Allport and P. E. Vernon, Studies in Expressive Move ment (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 in Group Psycho therapy," International Journal of Group Psychotherapists, 8:161-178, 1958.

7M. C. Bateson, "Kinesics and Paralanguage," Science, 139:200, 1963; D. A. Barbara, "The Value of Nonverbal Communication in Person ality 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 First Approximation," Studies of Linguistics, 13:1-12, 1958.

8Ray L. Birdwhistell, "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), pp. 123-139; and Rudulf Arnheim, "The Gestalt Theory of Expression," Psychological Review, 56:156-171, 1949.

9S, E, Jelliffe, "The Parkinsonian Body Posture: Some Considera tions in Unconscious Hostility," Psychoanalysts Review, 27:467-479, 1940; and Authur Steindler, Kinesiology of the Human Body Under Normal and Pathological Conditions (Springfield, Illinois: C. C. Thomas, 1955).

10P. L. Wachtel, "An Approach to the Study of Body Language in Psychotherapy," Psychotherapy, 4:3, 1967. 3

Physical therapists and physical educationalists have explored and choreographed body movement11 for health and/or aesthetic reasons12 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, Kinesio logy: The Anatomy of Motion (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, 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).

13Ray 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 Por trayed 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 Ameri can English," (Presented before Section H., A.A.A.S., Cleveland, 1963), pp. 27-28.

l4David Efron, Gesture and Environment (New York: Kings Crown Press, 1942); and J. P. Foley, "Gestural Behavior and Social Set ting", in Readings in Social Psychology (T. L. Newcombe and E. L. 4

Actors" and speech-makersXb have pondered the best way to use non-verbal communication though much of their work involves mimic stereotyping. Most of these studies have been extremely limited in scope, however, and of almost no worth to a businessman because of the sometimes very technical nature of the treatise.17

Hartley, eds.), (New York: Ronald Press, 1947); Thomas Albert Sebeok, Approaches to Semiotics (Alfred S. Hayes and Mary Catherine Bateson, eds.), (The Hague: Mouton, 1964); and L. D. Battle, "New Dimensions in Cultural Communications," Publications of ttie_ Modern Language Associa tion, 78(2):15-19, 1963.

15Ray L. Birdwhistell, Communication Without Words in L'Aventure Humaine, Encyclopedic des Sciences de 1'Homme (Kister S. A. Paris: De La Grange Bateliere S. A.), Volume 4, 1968; 0. P. Gately, "If You Don't Speak the Language, Play Charades," Harvest Years, 8:16-17, 1968; and Macdonald Critchely, Kinesics: Gestural and Mimic Language—An Aspect of Non-Verbal Communication in Problems of Dynamic Neurology: An In ternational Volume (Lipman Halpern, ed.), (Jerusalem, Israel: Hebrew University, 1963), pp. 181-200.

16Ray L. Birdwhistell, Kinesics and Communication in Explora tions in Communications (E. Carpenter and M. McLuhan, eds.), (Boston: Beacon Press, 1960), pp. 56-64; H. Campbell, et. al. Voice, Speech, and Gesture: Elocutionary Art (Edinburgh, England: John Grant, 1912); and Ray L. Birdwhistell, The Kinesic Level in the Investigation of the *ft""tions in Expression of the Emotions in Man (P. H. Knapp, ed.), (New York: International Universities Press, 1963), pp. 123-139.

17E. I. Corbin, "Muscle Action as Nonverbal and Preverbal Com munication," Psychoanalysts Quarterly, 31:351-353, 1962; S. G. Estes, "Judging Personality from Expressive Behavior," Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 3:217-236, 1938; and Judith I. Laszio and P. J. Bainstow, "Journal of Motor Behavior, Accuracy of Movement, Peripheral Feedback and Efference Copy," Journal Publishing Affiliates, 3(3):241- 252, 1970. 5

More recently, most magazines—both scholarly18 and

otherwise19—have some article suggesting how much we can

learn20 (or tell about ourselves21) through the use of kin

esics. 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.

18Ray L. Birdwhistell, "Background to Kinesics," ETC., Review General Semantics, 13:10-18, 1955; and , "Communication Without Words," loc. cit.

19Julius Fast, "Body Language," Newsweek, 75-87, 1970; and B. Ford, "Body Language: What It Reveals About You," Science Digest, 68:16- 21, August, 1970.

20Ray 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).

21Julius Fast, loc. cit.; Gerald I. Nierenberg and Henry H. Cal ero, "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," Per sonnel 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 the largest amount of their time involved in communication,23 it appears kinesics cannot be disre garded.

I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND HYPOTHESES

Body language is based upon the behavioral patterns of nonverbal communications. Clinical studies have revealed the extent to which body language can actually contradict verbal communications.24 Kinesics can include any non-reflexive or reflexive movement of a part, or all of the body, used by a person to communicate an emotional message to the outside world. To understand unspoken body language, one must take into con sideration emotional and environmental differences.25 The average businessman, unschooled in cultural nuances of kin- escis, often misinterprets or misrepresents what he sees or communicates. Therefore, he may negate a positive message to his subordinates by the use of negative body movements.

23Raymond V. Lesikar, Business Communication: Theory and Application (Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1968), pp. 3-4. 24Helen Flanders Dunbar, Emotions and Bodily Changes (fourth edition; New York: Columbia University Press, 1954); David Efron, loc. cit.; and David Efron and J. P. Foley, loc. cit. 25Ray L. Birdwhistell, Kinesics and Context, loc. cit.: 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 publica tions 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 them selves 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 per ception. Specifically, some questions under consideration were: 1. What, if any, are the benefits of management con- trating 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 communica tion—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 infor mation 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 incom pletely 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 levels. Or the study might have been limited in expecting thoughtful and honest answers from hurried and sometimes suspicious subjects. Perhaps restricting the study further would have given more unified answers. Since there are no materials at hand with which the hypotheses can be tested, they must be left for subsequent investigators.

III. METHOD OF ANALYSIS

The majority of information presented in the study was obtained through an experiment using employees (the selection of which will be more fully detailed in Chapter II).

The Video-tape. With the cooperation of Dr. T. Win Welford,26 a video-tape was produced to project positive and negative body motions along with positive and negative vocalization. To project these different meanings (via body language), the operational definition of gesticulation was employed;27 i.e., use of eye contact,28 head and hand

26Dr. Welford teaches kinesics in Speech and Drama at South eastern Louisiana University, Hammond, Louisiana.

27Albert Mehrabian, Introduction: A Semantic Space for Non verbal Behavior in Advances in Communication Research (C. David Morten- sen and Kenneth K. Sereno, eds.), (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), pp. 277-287.

28R. W. Exline and L. C. Winters, Affective Relations and Mutual Glances in Dyads in Affect, Cognition, and Personality (s. S. Tomkins and 11 motions,29 posture,30 and proximity31 were varied to change kinesic meanings. For purposes of different verbal messages, repetition, hesitation, and mispronounciation32 were used. Dr. Welford, who is currently preparing a text on the use of kinesiology in speech, not only suggested the above as the best variables to employ to project desired meaning, but also indulgently acted as the "employer" in the video-tape.

C. E. Izard, eds.), (New York: Springer Press, 1965), p. 319; and A. Kendon and M. Cook, "The Consistency of Gaze Patterns in Social Inter action," British Journal of PsjrchologY., 60:481-494, 1969. 29 Albert Mehrabian, Silent Messages (Belmont, California: Wads- worth 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. 30Albert 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, "Signifi cance of Posture in Communications Systems," Psychiatry, 27(4):316-331, 1964; B. Christiansen, Thus Speaks the Body: Attempts Toward a Person- ology From the Point of View of Respiration and Postures (Oslo: Insti tute 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 Pre mier, 1959), pp. 146-164; and Mehrabian, Silent Messages, op. cit., pp. 76-86.

32G. 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 34 both pro vided 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 proxemics 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 pre sent to the employee groups to initiate the experiment.

The Questionnaire. Using the assistance of Dr. Kenneth L. Koonce35 the questionnaire design and sample were deter mined. 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 participat ing 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

35oepartment of Experimental Statistics, Louisiana State Univer sity, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 14 sample. (The minimum was set at twenty-five participants per group for nine groups.) Also, no subject was allowed to participate in more than one group so as to eliminate rein forcement or bias for the second message by repeated expres sions, etc. Dr. Joseph G. Dawson36 provided assistance in select ing the psychological test used in the experiment—Cattell's Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (Appendix B). This test is not designed to measure neurotic or psychotic condi tions, but attempts to assess the entire personality. As described by Cattell and Eber: The 16 P.F. is the psychologists' answer, in the questionnaire realm, to the demand for a test giving fullest information in the shortest time about most per sonality traits. It is not merely concerned with some narrow concept of neuroticism or "adjustment," or spe cial kind of ability, but sets out to cover planfully and precisely all the main dimensions along which people can differ, according to basic factor analytic research.37 Cattel's P.F. has been used in many cross-cultural surveys, and has been translated into French, Italian, Ger man, 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 Univer sity, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 37Raymond B. Cattell and Herbert W. Eber, Handbook for the Six teen Personality Factor Questionnaire (Champaign, Illinois: Institute 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 associa tion, 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. Represented were: 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.

38Raymond G. Smith, Development of a Semantic Differential for Use with Speech Related Concepts in Speech Monographs, 4_, (n.p.), 1959, p. 263.

39Manager, Choralkali Production, Engineering Maintenance, Con struction and Plant Technical Services; Dow Chemical Company, U.S.A., Plaquemine Division. 16

The eight companies represented encompassed the func tions 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 re quested 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-and- white 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 interpreta tions. Group I only read the message, and as such, served as a control group in case the message itself was biased.

The Experiment. Five minutes were allowed to elapse for any late-comers. 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 meaning ful ways to clarify communications between management and employees. The employees were informed that, although there was no real "personal" information requested, that all mate rial 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 parti cipants . 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 demo graphic information on page 2, and the personality evalua tion 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 half- inch 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 find ings 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 per sonality 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 mean ingful 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 fac tors, 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 back ground, 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 person ality 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 extro vert 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. This method was impractical for several reasons. 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. Therefore, an initial group of 292 employees was tested. 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 percep tion. After receiving Phase I from the computer and tabulat ing 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 Bap tists, and one Presbyterian did not classify them selves 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 indi viduals as protestants. 3. The original eight categories for ethnic background were collapsed to four categories: (a) Afro- American (which includes those persons who speci fied "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 Publish ing 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 cate gories of "some post-graduate work" and "post graduate 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 Marital Status Ethnic Background Female Male Single or Divorced Married or Widowed Afro-Am. N'n Europ. S'n Europ. Other

22 201 19 204 16 120 59 28

Age Religion Personality 18 to 25 26 to 30 31 to 35 36 or older Catholic Protestant Introvert Ambivert Extrovert

25 40 57 101 98 125 47 123 53

Education less than high school high school diploma some college college degree post-graduage work

9 73 77 40 24

Source: Appendices B and E 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 understand ing 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. Sex 1. Female 2. Male

B. Marital Status 1. Never Married or Divorced 2. Currently Married or Widowed

C. Ethnic Background 1. Afro-American 2. Northern European 28

3. Southern European 4. Other

D. 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

E. Religion 1. Catholic 2. Protestant

F. Education Completed 1. Less than high school 2. High school diploma 3. Some college 4. College degree 5. Post graduate work

The personality factors from the 16 P.F. test were scored and interpreted with the advise of Dr. Dawson and Dr. Caesar B. Moody.42 Rather than undertake a complete person ality inventory (which was not the intent of this disserta tion) , a simplified evaluation was made as described below:

4lHead, Psychology Department, Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond, Louisiana. 29

The closer to "1" checked for the following vari ables, 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, staid, 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

F. conscientious, persevering, staid, 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 4. The closer to "10" checked for the following variables, the more extroverted 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 1. Trusting, adaptable, free of jealousy, easy to get along with J. Practical, careful, conventional, regulated by external realities, proper M. Conservative, respecting of established ideas, tolerant of traditional difficulties P. Relaxed, tranquil, unfrustrated After mathematically coding the columns, a mean score was computed for each participant. Based upon the score they received, an employee was designated as follows: 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 indi viduals. 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 per ception 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 Degrees of Variation 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# 139

Source: 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 con sidered 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 per son'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 Degrees of Variation 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# 139

Source: 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 Degrees of Variation 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# 139

Source: 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 predis posed 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 per sonality 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 Degrees of

Variation Freedom F Value Probability of F Sex 1 2.14 0.14 Marital Status 1 0.57 0.54 Ethnic Background 3 0.51 0.68 Age 3 2.24 0.09 Religion 1 0.75 0.61 Education 4 0.58 0.68 Personality 2 2.79 0.06 ERROR# 139

Source: 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 Degrees of

Variation Freedom F Value Probability of F Sex 1 0.06 0.81 Marital Status 1 2.14 0.14 Ethnic Background 3 0.26 0.85 Age 3 1.03 0.38 Religion 1 0.01 0.96 Education 4 0.20 0.93 Personality 2 1.84 0.16 ERROR# 139

Source: Appendix B

#There is a total of 139 degrees of freedom

i 40

Perception of Message "Pleasantness". The message variable of "pleasantness" was unaffected by any of the fac tors 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 inde pendent 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 Degrees of Variation 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 139

Source: 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, ambi vert, 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 con stant 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 fac tors were compared with use of body language to discover any possible relationships as a main effect and for interaction. 5. Demographic characteristics and personality fac tors 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: "Source of Variation", "F Value", and "Probability of F". 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 demo graphics. 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 per ceived (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

Degrees of F Probability Source of Variation Freedom Value of F

Body Language 2 1.43 0.24 Voice 2 0.86 0.57 Body Language by Voice 4 4.92 0.01 ** Personality by Body Language 4 1.07 0.37 Personality by Voice 4 1.33 0.26 Sex by Body Language 2 2.29 0.10 Marital Status by Body Language 2 1.65 0.19 Ethnic Background by Body Language 6 1.01 0.42 Age by Body Language 6 0.80 0.58 Religion by Body Language 2 0.04 0.96 Education by Body Language 8 0.52 0.84 Sex by Voice 2 0.98 0.62 Marital Status by Voice 2 0.51 0.61 Ethnic Background by Voice 6 1.42 0.21 Age by Voice 6 1.81 0.10 Religion by Voice 2 0.45 0.64 Education by Voice 8 0.30 0.97

ERROR # 139

Source: 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 « o > 2.a. Positive Vocalization

1.5. W

1.0- Negative Vocalization w to W .5. S •4- 4- 4- Positive Neutral Negative

BODY LANGUAGE

Source: Appendix B

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

Degrees of F Probability Source of Variation Freedom Value of F

Body Language 2 0.02 0.98 Voice 2 2.60 0.08 Body Language by Voice 4 5.83 0.01 ** Personality by Body Language 4 0.28 0.89 Personality by Voice 4 1.49 0.21 Sex by Body Language 2 0.24 0.79 Marital Status by Body Language 2 1.75 0.18 Ethnic Background by Body Language 6 0.20 0.97 Age by Body Language 6 1.17 0.33 Religion by Body Language 2 0.05 0.95 Education by Body Language 8 0.53 0.83 Sex by Voice 2 0.81 0.55 Marital Status by Voice 2 0.59 0.56 Ethnic Background by Voice 6 1.48 0.19 Age by Voice 6 2.62 0.02 * Religion by Voice 2 0.33 0.72 Education by Voice 8 0.58 0.79

ERROR # 139

Source: 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 Positive Vocalization * 2.S D fa No Vocalization a 2.0

D « 1.5

w 1.0- Negative Vocalization o < w .5- en w 0 Positive Neutral Negative

BODY LANGUAGE

Source: Appendix B

Note: Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age, religion, education, personality, personality by body Inaguage, per sonality 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 prob ability of F did not rise above .2 on most variables. Table X does indicate, though somewhat less emphat ically, 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 statis tically 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

Degree of F Probability Source of Variation Freedom Value of F

Body Language 2 0,94 0.60 Voice 2 2,92 0.06 * Body Language by Voice 4 1.76 0.14 Personality by Body Language 4 0.31 0.87 Personality by Voice 4 1.39 0.24 Sex by Body Language 2 0.20 0.82 Marital Status by Body Language 2 1.36 0.26 Ethnic Background by Body Language 6 0.53 0.79 Age by Body Language 6 0.62 0.71 Religion by Body Language 2 1.31 0.27 Education by Body Language 8 0.80 0.60 Sex by Voice 2 1.15 0.32 Marital Status by Voice 2 3.18 0.04 * Ethnic Background by Voice 6 1.18 0.32 Age by Voice 6 1.29 0.26 Religion by Voice 2 0.84 0.56 Education by Voice 8 0.82 0.59

ERROR # 139

Source: 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 3.0.- Z

2.5.. fa

EH 2.0.. No Vocalization D Positive Vocalization « 1.5.- Negative Vocalization

fa O 1.0._ «fl 10 CO .5.- H

rf: -h 18-25 26-30 31-35 35 up

AGE

Source: Appendix B

FIGURE 4

VOICE BY MARITAL STATUS FOR MESSAGE BELIEVABILITY

En 3.5.. No Vocalization

Positive Vocalization 3.a. n < > 2.S- w H Negative Vocalization i4 2.a. H

m l.S- w V) l.a. < CO CO .a. fa S -4- -4- Never Married Currently Married or Divorced or Widowed

MARITAL STATUS

Source: Appendix B

Note: Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age, religion, education, personality, personality by body language, per sonality 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 com pared 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 commu nication clues for complete message believability. Other demographic factors such as gender, religious beliefs, age, learning, lineage, and personality did not affect the per ception 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 signifi cant 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 nega tive 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

Degrees of F Probability Source of Variation Freedom Value of F

Body Language 2 0.11 0.90 Voice 2 2.79 0.06 Body Language by Voice 4 2.88 0.02 * Personality by Body Language 4 '0.34 0.85 Personality by Voice 4 0.32 0.87 Sex by Body Language 2 0.09 0.92 Marital status by Body Language 2 0.80 0.55 Ethnic Background by Body Language 6 0.31 0.93 Age by Body Language 6 0.34 0.91 Religion by Body Language 2 0.09 0.91 Education by Body Language 8 0.87 0.54 Sex by Voice 2 0.45 0.64 Marital Status by Voice 2 0.01 0.99 Ethnic Background by Voice 6 1.19 0.32 Age by Voice 6 1.36 0.23 Religion by Voice 2 0.37 0.70 Education by Voice 8 0.60 0.78

ERROR # 139

Source: 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

No Vocalization m < 2.5

EH D ft 2.0._ fa Pi 1-5. _ fa 0 Negative Vocalization < l-0._ CO

CO fa •5._ s

4- 4- 4- Positive Neutral Negative

BODY LANGUAGE

Source: Appendix B

Note: Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age, religion, education, personality, personality by body language, per sonality 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

Degrees of F Probabili Source of Variation Freedom Value of F

Body Language 2 0.39 0.68 Voice 2 3.32 0.04 * Body Language by Voice 4 3.30 0.01 * Personality by Body Language 4 0.12 0.97 Personality by Voice 4 0.84 0.51 Sex by Body Language 2 0.72 0.51 Marital Status by Body Language 2 1.75 0.18 Ethnic Background by Body Language 6 0.57 0.76 Age by Body Language 6 0.28 0.94 Religion by Body Language 2 0.30 0.74 Education by Body Language 8 0.72 0.68 Sex by Voice 2 0.54 0.59 Marital Status by Voice 2 0.31 0.74 Ethnic Background by Voice 6 1.02 0.41 Age by Voice 6 1.22 0.30 Religion by Voice 2 0.12 0.89 Education by Voice 8 1.04 0.41

ERROR # 139

Source: 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 3.0- H Positive Vocalization n < 2.5.. H "^ No Vocalization 2.O.. fa « 1.5. fa o 1.0.. Negative Vocalization

CO CO .5 fa s 4- Positive Neutral Negative

BODY LANGUAGE

Source: Appendix B

Note: Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age, religion, education, personality, personality by body language, per sonality 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 gesticu lation. 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

Degrees of F Probability Source of Variation Freedom Value of F

Body Language 2 2,08 0.13 Voice 2 1.12 0.33 Body Language by Voice 4 4.28 0.01 ** Personality by Body Language 4 0.60 0.66 Personality by Voice 4 0.11 0.97 Sex by Body Language 2 0.28 0.76 Marital Status by Body Language 2 1.23 0.30 Ethnic Background by Body Language 6 0.41 0.87 Age by Body Language 6 0.71 0.64 Religion by Body Language 2 0.04 0.97 Education by Body Language 8 1.73 0.10 Sex by Voice 2 0.98 0.62 Marital Status by Voice 2 0.75 0.52 Ethnic Background by Voice 6 1.27 0.27 Age by Voice 6 1.05 0.40 Religion by Voice 2 0.06 0.94 Education by Voice 8 1.91 0.06

ERROR # 139

Source: 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

FIGURE 7

BODY LANGUAGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE PLEASANTNESS

CO 3.5.. to fa Z 3.a.

EH Z < 2.5,- CO < fa 2.a. Positive Vocalization cu No Vocalization 1.5.. fa o < 1.0-. Negative Vocalization co

CO fa .5.. S 4- 4- Positive Neutral Negative

BODY LANGUAGE

Source: Appendix B

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 over come negative vocalization as far as whether or not inform ability is concerned, as is indicated by a negative inform ability 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

Degrees of F Probabilit; Source of Variation Freedom Value of F

Body Language 2 0.67 0.52 Voice 2 3.25 0.04 * Body Language by Voice 4 3.87 0.01 ** Personality by Body Language 4 0.20 0.94 Personality by Voice 4 0.61 0.66 Sex by Body Language 2 0.10 0.90 Marital Status by Body Language 2 1.90 0.15 Ethnic Background by Body Language 6 1.45 0.20 Age by Body Language 6 0.55 0.77 Religion by Body Language 2 1.19 0.31 Education by Body Language 8 0.76 0.64 Sex by Voice 2 0.05 0.95 Marital Status by Voice 2 0.42 0.66 Ethnic Background by Voice 6 1.05 0.40 Age by Voice 6 1.23 0.30 Religion by Voice 2 0.33 0.73 Education by Voice 8 0.55 0.82

ERROR # 139

Source: 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..

H 3.0,. Positive Vocalization H m 2.5,. < S No Vocalization « 2.O.. o fa z 1.5.. Negative Vocalization H 1.0,.

CO CO • 5,_ fa

Positive Neutral Negative

BODY LANGUAGE

Source: Appendix B

III. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Chapter III, dealing with how different types of communication affect message perception, decisively evi dences 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. Specifically: 1. 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 vocali zation can be somewhat overcome; 4. When using negative body language, message per ception 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 communica tion) 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 con stantly 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 superior- subordinate 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 effect of body language on message percep tion is constant regardless of personality type or demographic characteristics. The method employed in developing this study was to use a video-tape experiment to test whether, and to what degree, different forms of messages would affect an employee's message perception. This experiment consisted of first, administering a demographic questionnaire, person ality factor test, and experimental message to a large number of employees partitioned into nine random groups from eight different companies, chosen with the cooperation of Dow Chemical Company. The employee groups 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) A neutral message content was used for every group in order to reduce bias as much as possible. 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 verbaliza tion. 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 per ception is adversely affected, 4. Any body language (negative or positive) increases message acceptance. Messages are often interpreted unfavorably when only vocali zation 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. The type hypothesis used is called a null hypothesis. 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 vocal- zation are employed, message perception as con cerns reliability drops drastically. 6. Although other message perceptions may be dis torted by the use of body language, the percep tion 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 langu age 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 manage ment is taught to use favorable body language. 4. Finally, the same study done with similar indus trial institutions would be most helpful in establishing the validity of this study. BIBLIOGRAPHY 80

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. BOOKS

Adler, Sol, The Non-Verbal Child. Springfield, 111.: C. C. Thomas Pub., 196#. Allport, Gordon W. and B. E. Vernon. Studies in Expressive Movement. New York: Hafner, 1967. Aubert, Charles. The Art of Pantomine. New York: Benjamin Blom, Inc., 1970. Austin, Gilbert. Chironomia. Carbondale, 111.: Southern Illinois University Press, 1966. Baldwin, Gordon Cortis. Talking Drums to Written Words; How Early Man Learned to Communicate. New York: Norton & Co., Inc., 1970. Barclay, John. Muscular Motions of the Human Body. Edinburgh: W. Laing & A. Constable & Company, 1808. Barthes, Roland. Elements of Semiology. New York: Hill & Wang, Inc., (n.d.) 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'Aven- ture Humaine, Encyclopedic des Sciences de 1'Homme. Geneva! Kister S.A. Paris; De La Grange Batelidre S. A. Volume 4, 1968. . Introduction to Kinesics. Louisville: University of Louisville Press, 1952. . Kinesics and Communication in Explorations in Communications". E. Carpenter and M. McLuhan Eds.). Boston: Beacon Press, 1960. . Kinesics and Context. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1970. 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 Perspec tives . 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 Communica- tional 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. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1968. . An Introduction to Kinesiology. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall,"T9681 Broodbent, R. A History of Pantomine. New York: Benjamin Blom, Inc., 1964. Bruford, Rose. Teaching Mime. London: Methuen, 1964. Campbell, H., et al. Voice, Speech, and Gesture: Elocu tionary 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. New York: Macmillan, 1966.

i 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. London: E. Arnold & Company, 1939. 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. New York: Academic Press, Inc., 1969. Disher, Maurice Willson. Clowns and Pantomines. New York: Benjamin Blom, Inc., 1968. 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. New York; King's Crown PressT 1941. , 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 Communi cations. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merill Company, 1971. 83

Ekman, Paul. Communication Through Nonverbal Behavior: h Source of Information About an Interpersonal Relation ship 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: Wesleyan University Press, 1965. 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: M. Evans and Company and Pocket Books, 1970. Feldman, S. S. Mannerisms of Speech and Gestures in Every day 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. Kinesiology. St Louis: C. V. Mosby Company, 1950. Hackett, Herbert. Understanding and Being Understood. New York: Longmans, Green & Company, Inc., 1957. 84

Hall, Edward T. The Silent Language. New York: Fawcett Premier, 1959. 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. New York: Atheneum Publishers, 1964. Hutchison, John Alexander. Language and Faith: Studies in Sign, Symbol, and Meaning. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963. Jensen, Clayne R. and Gordon W. Schultz. Applied Kinesio logy: The Scientific Study of Human Performance. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1970. Jurgen, Ruesch. Nonverbal Communication: Notes on the Visual Perception of Human RelationsT Berkeley: University of California Press, 1956. 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: Prentice- Hall, 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. New York: Oxford University Press, 1966. Lawson, Joan. The Theory and Practice of Expression Gesture With a Description of its Historical Develop ment. 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 Lan guage . 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. Vigilance and Attention: A Signal Detec tion Approach. Baltimore: Penguin Books, Inc., 1970. Maurer, Edward Rose. Kinematics. Fifth edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons., Inc., 1925. McLuhan, Herbert M. The Medium is the Message. New York: Random House, 1967. 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. Chicago: Aldine- Atherton, 1972. . Silent Messages. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1971. 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. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1968. 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 Com- pany, 1950. Morris, Desmond. Intimate Behavior. New York: Random House, 1971. Naess, Arne. Elements of Applied Semantics. Totowa, New Jersey: Bedminster Press, 1956. Nierenberg, Gerald I. and Henry H. Calero. How to Read a Person Like a Book. New York: Pocket Books, 1973. Petersen, Hans. Banderkinematik. Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitatsbuchhandlung, 1918. Pickersgill, Mary Gertrude. Practical Miming. New York: Sir I. Pitman & Sons, Ltd., 1947. 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. New York: Humanities Press, Inc., 1972. 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. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., 1966. 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: Appleton- Century-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 Varia tions in Speaker's Nonfluency Upon Audience Ratings of Attitude Toward the Speech Topic and Speakers' Credi bility Tn Speech Monograph (n.p.), 1967. Shands, Harley C. Semiotic Approaches to Psychiatry. New York: Humanities Press, Inc., 1970. Smith, Raymond G. Development of a Semantic Differential for Use with Speech Related Concepts in Speech Mono graphs , 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. New York: Humanities Press, Inc., 1972. Thayer, Lee 0. Communication: General Semantics Per spectives . 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 Mechan ical 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. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1941. 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. (n.p.) Lee & Shepard, 1892.

B. 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 Affilia tion," 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 Dis orders , 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 Psycho therapy ," International Journal of Group Psycho therapists, 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 Person ality," 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," Psycho logical 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 Behav- lor," 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 Lan guage," 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, 61:45- 46+, 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 Char ades," Harvest Years, 8:16-17, 1968. Geldard, F. A. "Some Neglected Possibilities of Communica tion: 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. "Proxemics," Current Anthropology, 9:83-108, 1968. Harrison, Randall P. and Mark L. Knapp. "Toward an Under standing 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>4- 58, 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 Person ality," 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, Orienta- tion 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. "Intimate Behavior," McCalls, 99:75-77+, March, 1972. Needles, W. "Gesticulation and Speech," International Journal of Psycho-Analysts, 40:291-294, 1959. Nierenberg, Gerald I. and Henry H. Calero. "Watch Your Body Language," Sales Management, 40, 1971. "Non-Verbal Communication and the Teacher," School and Society, 98:363-364, 1970. Paget, R. A. S. "Gesture Language," Nature (London), 139: 198, 1937. "Parting Shots: What Our Politicians are Really Saying," Life, 69:82-84, September, 1970. Price, W. E. "Visual Communications Gap," Office, 69:100- 101, January, 1969. Ralston, R. M. "Quest for Silence," Vital Speeches, 32:726- 731, 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 Communica tions Systems," Psychiatry, 27(4)316-331, 1964. Shearer, Lloyd (Ed.), "Body Language," Parade Magazine, April 8, 1973. 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. "Language and Silence," Time, 89:112, April 28, 1967. 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 Communi cate 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 Annota tion 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 Fit ness 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 Univer sity, 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 Por trayed 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 re lating 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 hospital ization. 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 addi tional $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 dis tributed 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:

SEX AGE

Female JUnder 18 years

Male 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. Please mark every scale for every concept—NO NOT OMIT ANX. Never put more than one mark on a single scale. 123456789 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.

0) •p +J .c (0 tn U .c 0) •H •H > 03 rH The message s > appeared to be favorable unfavorable

It appears the message was truthful untruthful

I felt the message was believable unbelievable

The message seemed to be reputable disreputable

After exper iencing 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 „ sx = Standard error of the mean n = (?_!_§) ^ Where: ' (= .103) E Z = 2.58 = 99£ confidence level E = .265 = 2.56 • s~ n = participants needed

Messages s n 1 1.34 170 2 1.36 175 3 1.43 197 4 1.25 148 5 1.39 183 6 1.35 173 7 1.53 222

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 inter pretation 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

42Ernust 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, extro vert 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 STICAL A N A L Y S IS SYSTEM

J« H S S G 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 3 1 1 3 3 3 4.75C0 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 4 5 2 1 4.50C0 1 2 2 3 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 3 " 2 2 I 5.1875 2 2 2 * 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 2 2 5.1875 2 2 2 5 5 9 2 2 2 5 3 3 6 T a 7 9 3 6 5 8 3 6 8 S 3 3 5 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 5.75C3 2 2 2 6 6 9 2 2 1 5 3 2 b a 9 2 8 1 9 5 6 7 9 10 a 2 9 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6.3125 3 2 2 T 7 4 2 2 1 4 J 2 3 6 4 1 5 9 1C a 7 5 4 6 a 7 4 5 1 2 4 3 4 2 1 5.7503 2 2 2 a a 9 2 2 6 2 1 3 5 7 9 5 4 3 3 6 3 3 a 8 5 2 2 3 1 1 1 5 2 1 1 4.7500 1 2 2 9 9 9 2 2 3 4 1 3 It 9 1C 4 4 2 9 •* 2 1 a 2 1 3 7 3 I 2 4 3 4 1 " 1 " 4.8125 1 2 2 ! ><• 12 9 2 2 3 6 1 2 5 9 a 9 7 a 3 4 9 10 4 3 7 2 7 a 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 6.4375 3 2 2 li 13 9 2 2 2 5 3 3 7 a 9 3 4 2 s o 3 3 9 4 6 3 3 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 S.12S0 2 2 2 12 14 1 9 1 2 3 2 1 3 a 7 4 4 9 3 9 4 3 4 a 7 5 9 5 3 1 1 3 3 2 1 2 5.75C0 2 2 2 13 15 4 2 2 2 6 3 S 4 a a 4 5 3 5 3 a 3 a 9 a 1 6 2 1 1 S 3 4 1 5 5.3125 2 2 2 1* 16 9 2 2 2 6 3 2 1 3 6 1J a a 2 9 2 2 9 6 5 3 9 2 1 1 5 1 5 1 1 5.3125 2 2 2 IS 17 9 2 2 6 4 3 2 3 5 5 5 5 6 5 3 10 3 6 6 3 5 6 a 1 5 5 3 3 1 1 5.5625 2 2, 2 16 18 9 2 2 2 5 3 2 3 3 3 7 5 3 8 9 7 1 6 6 7 3 6 i 3 5 4 4 4 4 4 4.8750 1 2 2 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 1 1 I 1 1 5.3125 2 2 2 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 3 2 1 1 2 4.6875 1 2 2 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 1 1 1 1 1 6.5625 3 2 2 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 2 3 3 2 3 5.4375 2 2 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 1 2 2 1 1 5.3125 2 2 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 1 1 1 1 1 5.4375 2 2 2 23 25 4 1 2 J b 1 4 5 4 B 8 6 2 7 4 4 6 6 6 6 5 4 4 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 5.6250 2 2 2 2* 26 a 2 2 3 2 1 5 s 7 a 3 5 3 3 7 7 5 7 8 5 5 6 7 4 4 4 3 3 S 3 5.6875 2 1 2 as 2? a 2 2 a 6 1 b 3 9 a 4 2 2 3 9 3 4 8 a 2 3 3 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.5625 1 1 2 26 28 1 8 2 1 2 S 3 3 li. !• a 9 7 3 3 5 2 7 6 9 13 5 6 1 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 6.6250 3 1 2 27 29 a 2 2 3 4 1 2 7 6 9 b 2 t 9 4 5 6 4 10 3 6 3 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5.3753 2 1 2 28 30 a 2 2 3 o 3 3 4 7 7 6 4 6 5 S 6 7 5 5 6 4 5 6 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 5.5000 2 1 2 29 31 a 2 2 2 1 3 s 6 a 5 6 6 2 5 7 6 5 9 4 6 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 S 1 5.3750 2 1 2 3C 32 8 2 2 3 6 1 3 3 6 5 o 7 3 3 3 a 6 5 6 2 5 5 2 5 S 5 5 5 1 5 5.1875 2 1 2 31 33 8 2 2 2 5 3 7 a 11 5 5 4 6 9 6 2 8 10 3 4 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 b 5.7503 2 1 2 32 34 a 2 2 2 6 1 3 3 D 6 6 3 2 4 6 5 5 9 6 8 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 4 4 4» 4.812S 1 1 2 33 35 a 2 2 2 3 2 4 6 9 2 7 1 1 1 3 5 3 5 4 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 3.4375 1 1 2 34 36 a 2 2 2 3$ 3 2 4 5 7 6 b 6 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5 6 6 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 5.5625 2 1 2 35 37 a 2 2 2 5 3 4 1 5 4 b 5 b 5 4 1U 3 6 7 1 1 6 5 4 b 5 b b b 4.8125 1 1 2 36 38 i a 2 2 2 6 3 3 5 5 9 3 4 7 4 6 3 4 6 4 4 1 6 3 5 I5 5 5 5 5 5_^ 4.9375 1 2 — it 39 a ~2 —"5~~2 ~ ~6 3 5 4 4 b 5 5 b 6 5 7 7~ 4 "4~ 4 " 3 3 2~ ~5~ " 2~ 2~ 5. 1875 2~ 1 2 38 4 L a 2 2 2 5 3 7 4 2 3 ? 6 3 5 6 9 4 3 3 2 4 3 4 4 4 2 2 4.3750 1 1 2 39 41 8 2 5 o 4 2 1 5 4 7 1. 1 1' 7 1. 6 5 9 3 2 1 5 5 4 4 5 3 4 6.1875 3 1 2 4* 4£ L a 2 1 3 6 3 2 b 6 a 6 9 3 7 3 7 8 4 3 7 4 3 3 3 2 1 1 2 2 2 5.6875 2 1 2 41 »3 o 2 2 J b I ? a 1 • 5 7 7 3 3 3 3 i: 6 7 6 o a 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 6.4375 3 1 2 42 44 1 d 1 1 2 6 3 3 i 5 1 5 1. 3 1 a 1 1 i If 1C 1 3 l 5 5 4 3 5 5 1 6.12SC 3 1 2 43 45 8 1 1 3 b 1 2 I 5 1 6 li 1 ° b 5 5 i 1? 1 4 4 l 1 1 1 I 1 I S.9375 2 1 2 44 4b 1 -1 1 2 p 1 2 7 c a 4 6 3 7 a 7 4 8 a 5 6 4 7 4 5 5 4 5 4 5 6.:ccc 3 1 2 45 47 i a "2 2 n ~ 4~ o ~ a o 5 5 4 o 5 5 6 6 5 5 6 ~5" ~"2 1~ 4 5 ~5~ 3 5.6875 2 1 2 4b 48 l a 2 2 3 2 1 2 a •'. 3 3 5 2 5 a 5 4 7 2 4 7 2 6 4 1 1 3 1 4 5 .4.6875 1 1 2 47 49 a 2 2 3 a 1 2 a 5 7 7 7 o 6 o 4 5 4 5 4 b 7 J b b i i J b 3 5.5625 2 1 2 43 5J 2 2 3 5 3 D 7 6 4 4 3 7 3 3 a 7 4 7 6 5 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 5.3125 2 1 2 » 2 3 e 49 51 7 2 3 4 1 7 5~~ 9 9 4 6 6 ~3 9 7 " a " 6 '~ 7~~ 7 5 2 2 1 1 2 1 6.-"125 3 3 2 H 5r 52 1 7 2 2 6 6 1 2 1 a b = 1 7 4 a 5 5 b 6 S 6 6 S 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 5.4375 2 3 2 it* 51 il I 7 ? 2 1 5 1 1 1 •• ^ f 5 1 b b a 1 ) ~ 5~ b 6 5 o 6 5 3 1 3" 5 3 1 3 6.3125 3 3 2 STATI STICAL A N A L Y S IS S Y S T E «

2 ,3

52 54 1 7 2 2 6 6 3 3 9 2 e 8 9 9 5 8 6 7 3 2 8 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5.6250 2 3 2 53 55 1 7 2 2 3 5 ! 2 a a 9 IC a 3 9 a 7 8 2 9 8 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 5 1 6.4375 3 3 2 54 56 7 2 2 6 6 3 1 5 7 6 6 4 5 b 5 6 5 8 4 6 3 6 7 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 S.S625 2 3 2 55 57 7 2 2 2 6 3 3 4 7 6 4 4 5 4 4 7 7 6 6 5 7 6 S 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 S.4375 2 3 2 56 58 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 5.0625 2 3 2 57 59 7 2 2 6 6 1 5 4 7 7 fc 4 6 4 7 a S 7 6 5 4 4 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5.4375 2 3 2 58 60 7 2 2 6 6 1 3 7 6 5 6 4 3 5 8 9 4 5 6 7 6 7 5 4 3 4 3 4 2 4 5.8125 2 3 2 59 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 4.9375 1 3 2 63 62 1 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 5.1250 2 3 2 t 61 63 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 7.2500 3 3 2 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 5. SI 25 2 3 2 ' 63 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 5.5625 2 3 2 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 S.12S0 2 3 2 65 67 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 4.9375 1 3 2 66 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 4.7500 1 3 2 67 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 5.3125 2 3 2 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 5.6875 2 3 2 69 71 7 2 2 6 6 I 3 6 7 a 6 7 4 3 6 6 5 4 6 6 5 5 6 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 5.9375 2 3 2 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 5.9375 2 3 2 71 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 5.7500 Z 3 2 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 5.S62S 2 3 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 5.6875 2 2 1 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 5.5000 2 2 1 75 78 6 1 2 2 5 3 3 u 5 1" 5 10 2 5 IC 1 1 13 IC 5 10 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 3 4 6.0000 3 2 1 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 6.0625 3 2 1 77 80 6 2 2 1 4 3 3 If 7 c 9 11 5 9 2 5 9 8 3 9 3 2 3 4 4 5 4 5 4 5 6.4375 3 2 1 78 31 6 2 " 2 6 6~ 3 2 9 a 8 a 9 3 7 5 9 4 5 9 6 5 S 2 1 3 S 4 4 5 5 6.3125 3 2 1 79 B2 6 2 2 2 6 1 1 S 7 1 a 1 3 8 ir 5 5 6 13 5 2 3 6 1 I 4 I 1 1 1 5.3125 2 2 1 80 S3 6 2 2 3 6 1 3 4 4 8 3 9 6 5 a 4 5 S 2 2 2 3 7 2 1 1 3 2 3 4 5.1250 2 2 1 81 34 6 2 2 6 6 1 4 4 7 4 6 5 4 a 6 6 S 7 a 4 2 3 3 b 4 5 4 S 4 5 5.4375 2 2 1 82 85 b 2 2 2 S 3 4 ll 3 5 3 a 2 9 7 2 2 If 9 8 4 3 1 2 1 1 2 4 3 5 5.6875 2 2 1 d3 96 6 2 2 2 4 3 2 5 7 a 5 a *» 5 8 5 3 4 9 7 2 3 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 5.2500 2 2 1 84 87 6 ? 2 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 4.375C 1 2 1 85 88 6 2 2 2 b I 4 6 7 7 7 4 4 5 6 4 6 7 6 7 4 3 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5.5000 2 2 1 86 89 6 2 2 2 5 1 4 3 7 a lu 5 lr 7 3 2 1 3 9 b 3 3 2 3 3 2 4 4 3 5 5.1250 2 2 1 87 9C 6 2 2 1 4 1 4 5 a 3 2 2 6 7 3 5 5 6 9 8 4 a 5 2 •> 1 3 2 2 2 5.3750 2 2 1 — ~4~ a 7 4 " 4 6 4 4 4~ 4 7 2" 4 5.5C0C 83 °1 I 6~ 2 1 6" b~ 1 9 3 7 2 8 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 " 1 89 92 6 2 2 3 3 1 2 a 6 11 b 1 • 3 6 8 9 2 b It a 1 5 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6.7500 3 2 1 93 93 1 6 1 ? 1 4 1 3 l a a 3 1>< 1 B~ "5 5 3 7 ~Tc~" 3 3 ~~2 1 1 4 5 3 2" 3 6.0030 3 " 2 1 91 94 b 2 2 1 2 3 2 5 a a 9 5 2 S 6 3 a 3 3 9 5 6 4 5 5 5 4 4 2 5 5.8750 2 2 1 42 9S 6 2 ? 2 6 3 4 4 a l 5 1 i b 6 1 1 If 6 1 6 6 5 3 1 1 1 1 J b 4.7500 1 2 1 93 = 6 6 ? 2 6 3 2 b 4 3 b 2 3 7 a 3 8 a 4 5 5 4 I 3 4 3 4 4 5 5. 3125 2 2 - 94 97 6 1 5 I 3 ~5~ iT 5 6~ b 6 4 a 9 5 ~S 3 8 5 1 5 5 4 5 4 5 6.3125 3 2 1 - 95 93 b 7 ? 2 6 3 ^ e <= 6 b 4 7 £ 8 b 7 4 7 7 3 5 5 2 3 2 2 4 3 4 6.2530 3 2 1 96 99 c 2 9 •* o 3 4 a a 1 l 7 . 5 9 a 5 4 4 a 2 3 5 6 4 2 4 4 3 4 4 6.3750 3 2 1 97 I' 1 b 2 2 6 3 ? 7 7 o c 7 b 7 6 4 6 4 7 6 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 5 5.687S 2 2 1 ^ A 9a 1 1 5 2 2 3 J S b o 4 J 2 7 5 6 4 5 5 4 4 4 6 2 3 2 2 J 2 2 4.9375 1 2 3 3 9° 1 2 1 5 ? ? 6* 5 3 9 a C a a 3 9 5 a Q 4 4 9 2 2 b 1 3 5 5 2 3 o.437S 3 2 3 ^ £ •a 1." 1 3 I 5 9 o 3 b 1 1 4 a 7 c 5 5 6 8 3 4 7 a 5 5 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 5.3125 2 2 3 Ul ICI 1 4 I b 2 2 •* o 1 2 7 • « 3 7 6 3 7 3 3 4 e 6 4 7 4 2 1 I 3 1 2 1 5.312S 2 2 3 ~ 1 = 2 1 5 b 2 o ? 6 1 2 4 5 4 4 3 f- 5 3 b 4 8 5 6 7 6 6 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 5. 12SI 2 2 3 STATI STICAL ANALYSIS SYSTEM

133 106 5 1 2 6 4 1 2 a 2 2 3 9 4 4 3 4 1 8 2 s 1 6 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4.1250 1 2 3 1C4 107 5 2 2 3 6 1 3 a 5 6 6 6 6 4 5 7 6 5 6 6 S 6 4 1 3 2 4 3 1 2 5.6875 2 2 3 105 108 5 2 2 2 5 1 3 7 3 9 6 3 2 9 6 3 5 b 7 6 4 4 4 2 1 1 ~1 2~ 1 5.5625 2 "2 3 106 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 5.4375 2 2 3 187 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 4.062S 1 2 3 ica 111 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 a 9 3 9 9 1 5 4 2 6 6 6 7 2 5 5 1 4 5 4 4 1 2 5.4375 2 2 3 104 112 5 2 2 2 6 1 3 a 4 8 8 8 3 a 5 a 6 6 7 9 3 4 5 4 4 4 2 5 3 5 6.1250 3 2 3 113 113 1 S 2 1 2 6 3 4 3 a S 5 5 4 3 7 7 6 6 3 5 3 6 8 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 S.25C0 2 2 3 111 114 5 2 2 2 5 3 5 7 7 5 6 5 3 6 4 4 5 7 6 5 4 4 4 1 1 2 3 2 2 1 5.I2SC 2 2 3 112 US 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 5.9375 2 2 3 113 116 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 S.7500 2 2 3 114 117 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 4.4375 1 2 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 6.4375 3 2 3 116 119 5 2 2 2 4 1 4 l a 7 S 3 6 4 5 7 4 5 7 6 2 5 5 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 4.8750 1 2 3 117 120 5 2 2 2 5 1 3 3 a 8 9 3 3 3 7 2 2 7 9 3 3 3 3 1 1 I 4 1 1 1 4.7500 1 2 3 113 121 5 2 2 £ 6 3 5 a 5 9 13 4 9 9 6 7 6 4 4 5 2 a 8 1 4 4 4 4 1 4 6.500C 3 2 3 119 122 5 2 2 2 a 3 4 s S 9 6 2 5 5 5 5 2 8 8 3 4 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4.8750 1 2 3 120 123 5 2 2 3 6 1 3 9 a 9 3 5 4 a a 5 5 8 9 9 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5.9375 2 2 3 121 124 5 2 2 6 6 1 3 7 8 If 8 a 4 9 6 9 8 8 9 2 5 5 3 1 1 I I 1 1 1 6.8125 3 2 3 - 122 125 5 2 2 6 6 3 3 7 a 1 3 3 3 5 4 5 2 b 7 6 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4.8750 1 2 3 123 126 4 2 2 2 6 1 4 9 a 9 a a 7 9 9 a 3 9 9 6 2 5 2 5 4 5 4 5 2 S 6.6875 3 3 1 124 127 4 1 1 2 2 3 3 A 6 5 6 6 7 4 6 6 6 6 7 5 5 7 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5.6250 2 3 1 125 128 4 1 1 2 6 3 3 6 6 7 5 a 3 4 6 4 S 7 7 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S.375C 2 3 1 126 129 4 2 2 2 5 3 3 a 6 5 a a S 8 4 3 4 7 7 10 7 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 6.0000 3 3 1 r 12V 13 . 4 2 2 3 6 1 I l 1' n e 3 3 2 6 b 6 6 6 6 6 5 S 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 5.5625 2 3 1 128 131 4 2 2 3 5 1 3 5 3 4 a 5 4 3 4 a 8 5 7 3 5 3 6 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 4.8125 1 3 1 129 132 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 5.2SC0 2 3 1 133 133 4 2 2 2 2 1 4 a a li- 7 b 1 9 6 3 5 5 10 S 2 2 2 2 1 1 3 2 3 2 5.5625 2 3 1 131 134 4 2 2 2 6 3 3 l l 2 2 4 6 1 9 S 7 3 3 3 1 a 3 1 5 5 b 5 b b 3.6875 1 3 1 132 135 4 2 2 2 5 3 3 3 5 9 4 5 4 4 8 8 S 6 4 4 4 5 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5.1250 2 3 1 133 136 4 2 2 6 4 1 4 4 7 t 4 4 5 4 S 5 3 a 7 5 S 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 3 4 5.0625 2 3 1 134 137 L 4 2 2 2 2 3 2 5 5 9 6 5 3 4 6 5 4 6 6 5 6 6 6 4 2 3 S 4 4 S 5.5000 2 3 1 135 138 4 2 2 2 2 1 4 o 1"- 7 7 7 2 a a 3 7 a 8 7 1 3 T 1 3 4 4 4 3 5 6.3750 3 3 1 136 139 4 2 2 6 4 1 5 6 a 5 4 4 6 3 a 3 5 3 6 a 3 4 7 1 3 4 4 2 5 5 5.1875 2 3 1 137 14i' 4 t 2 6 6 3 1 3 2 2 1 4 IC i 1 I li. IC i a ir> 4 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 4.8750 1 3 1 133 141 4 2 2 2 a I 2 5 5 5 9 5 3 !-5• e 5 5 6 8 l 4 6 5 2 1 3 1 3 1 4 5.3125 2 3 1 139 142 L ~4 " 2 " 2 2 6 ~3~ b 2~ 3~ 3 3 6 3 3 7 3 6 8 3 7 3 1 1 1 1 1 4.4375" I " 3 1 14: 143 4 2 6 ? 3 6 7 5 7 7 2 a Q e 2 6 6 S 3 3 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S.SO'-O 2 3 1 141 144 I 4 ~?~ a~ « 4 j o 8 7 1' 7 3 4 4 7 7 7 6 4 6 2 3 IC 2 5 3 4 4 5 b S.937S 2 3 1 142 145 4 2 2 2 6 3 5 3 7 5 a 2 3 6 b a 4 a a 3 3 3 5 1 1 3 3 3 4 4 5.0300 2 3 1 143 14b 4 f 2 b J 4 a 6 a b 3 7 4 5 b b 7 6 3 5 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S.625r 2 3 1 144 147 4 1 2 a 3 •5 4 Q 1 7 3 a 4 1 1' 2 8 9 3 a a 1 3 1 3 3 3 3 2 5.3125 2 3 1 — 145 f43 4~ 2 " ? ~3~ 4 " 1 ~2 9 T 4 "5 7 7 3 5 6 7 " 5~ ~i" " 7 5 2" 2" "2 3 2 4 4 sisoco 2 3 1 146 149 2 2 b 3 ? 4 7 3 3 s b 5 5 5 6 9 1 l 6 4 I 2 4 4 4 3 3 4.6375 1 3 1 _ "147 15 4 2 a r a 7 3 5 4 3 "6 a 5 3 5 2 3 V ~3~ ~2~ " 3 3 3 5.5875 2 3 1 143 151 3 2 •> 2 4 9 3 u b 0 7 4 S 4 4 5 4 7 s 3 3 4 6 1 4 5 4 3 4 5 4.75C0 1 1 1 149 112 -a a Z 1 -i 3 4 9 7 7 a 4 7 4 3 9 6 3 B 4 3 a 4 5 5 4 5 4 4 6.3125 3 1 1 •a 3 ti 153 15> 3 2 1 U 1 7 a 7 ^ 9 fc 6 2 3 2 a 1' 8 9 2 2 4 2 7 3 3 3 2 5.6251. 2 1 1 H 151 154 1 3 •3 2 P 5 - ? 7 n 1 6 3 3 5 3 2 2 5 9 8 3 3 3 2 1 1 4 S 4 5 5.T"0C 2 1 1 CTi 152 IbS 3 ? 2 2 6 1 3 1 E 1 1 7 7 4 1 1 3 1 1 1 1' b 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4.3125 1 1 1 153 ISt t 3 2 2 1 4 1 5 c 1' 1 b 3 9 H 7 3 7 a 9 5~ "a" 4 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 7.2C"- 3 1 1 STATI STICAL ANALYSIS SYSTEM

S »- E M

154 157 1 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 7 5 5 6 1 6 4 7 a 4 2 8 5 2 8 5 5 5 4 4 S 5 4.8750 1 1 1 155 158 I 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 2 4.6250 1 1 1 156 159 3 2 1 3 6 1 3 IC 10 10 8 9 1 a 4 9 1 10 ir a 2 2 2 3 1 5 1 3 S 1 6.5000 3 1 1 157 160 1 3 2 2 3 4 3 3 a 8 1 1 10 3 s 8 1 1 IC 6 a 6 13 3 5 4 4 3 5 5 5 5.5625 2 1 1 lis 161 1 3 2 2 1 4 3 3 IC IC 5 9 8 1 a 2 2 2 9 9 9 3 3 1 4 4 4 4 4 2 S 5.6875 2 1 1 159 162 3 2 2 3 6 1 1 s 6 5 6 5 7 5 7 5 4 s 6 7 6 6 4 2 2 3 4 4 4 4 5.5625 2 1 1 163 163 3 2 2 1 2 3 3 7 10 3 7 8 2 2 3 7 a I 2 7 9 B 7 3 1 I 5 3 2 4 6.0000 3 1 1 161 164 3 2 2 2 6 3 4 3 6 4 6 4 5 4 7 7 5 7 4 3 3 3 5 1 1 2 1 2 2 4.7500 1 162 16S 3 2 2 2 4 3 5 a IC a q 6 6 7 7 a 5 3 7 4 6 5 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 2 6.3750 3 ~- 1 163 166 3 1 2 6 2 1 3 a 6 3 IC 11- 3 9 S 3 6 6 4 7 5 4 5 1 3 4 4 4 3 4 5.8750 2 1 t 164 167 3 1 1 6 5 1 3 7 a IC 6 6 3 a 5 6 2 9 7 7 4 4 7 3 1 2 3 3 4 1 6.1875 3 1 1 165 168 3 1 2 2 a 1 3 7 7 7 9 7 2 9 8 5 6 5 5 6 5 5 7 2 3 2 3 3 4 4 6.2500 3 1 1 166 170 3 2 2 2 b 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 4.3125 1 1 1 167 171 3 2 2 3 b 1 2 6 S a a s 5 0 6 7 6 5 6 4 6 6 5 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 6.1875 3 1 1 158 172 3 2 2 2 6 3 4 5 7 a 7 3 3 7 5 5 6 6 4 a 3 3 4 4 1 1 1 1 4 4 5.2503 2 1 1 169 173 3 2 2 2 6 3 S 4 6 7 a 4 2 6 5 4 2 8 5 5 4 4 S 2 2 2 2 2 1 4 4.9375 1 1 1 170 174 3 2 2 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 5.3125 2 1 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 6.2500 3 1 1 172 176 2 1 2 2 4 1 3 7 7 IC 6 4 2 9 7 3 3 8 a 9 9 a 2 1 1 4 2 2 1 1 6.6875 3 1 3 173 177 2 2 2 3 6 1 2 e a 9 6 a 6 a 4 9 6 3 s 9 4 5 6 3 5 4 3 3 3 3 6.3750 3 1 3 174 178 2 2 2 3 5 3 1 10 7 9 2 7 3 3 1 9 2 1 IC 4 1 2 7 2 1 3 2 I 4 1 4.8750 1 1 3 175 179 2 2 2 3 4 1 2 e a a 10 6 4 6 s 9 6 3 5 6 7 7 3 3 1 1 3 3 2 2 6.3125 3 1 3 17a 18C 2 2 2 2 5 3 4 6 7 4 4 3 4 5 s 6 4 S 5 5 3 3 8 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 5.0000 2 1 3 177 iai 2 2 2 2 4 3 2 1"< 7 IC 5 ir 2 13 5 1 3 6 1: 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5.5625 2 1 3 178 182 t 2 2 2 2 6 3 2 3 5 8 9 7 2 9 a 3 2 8 7 8 3 8 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5.7S00 2 1 3 179 183 2 2 2 2 b 3 3 6 7 6 5 7 If 3 6 3 3 8 7 5 6 5 7 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 5.8750 2 1 3 189 184 2 2 " 2 2 6 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 5.S0C0 2 1 3 181 185 1 2 2 2 2 5 3 3 e 7 9 5 5 4 a 7 8 6 3 2 a 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5.4375 2 1 3 182 186 2 ? 2 ? 2 1 2 4 9 5 6 10 5 s 6 13 10 6 5 10 6 a 5 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 6.S7SC 3 1 3 183 137 2 2 2 2 5 3 2 1 1 4 4 4 7 4 1 4 4 7 1 4 7 2 4 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 3.6875 1 1 3 184 taa 2 2 "2 3 6 1 2 a 7 K 3 5 3 a 5 4 2 6 9 5 4 2 1 1 3 3 3 2 1 1 5. 1250 2 1 3 1S5 1B9 1 2 2 2 6 3 2 8 8 a 6 a 1 7 3 6 3 8 a 5 5 6 6 5 5 4 4 5 4 4 6.C"00 3 1 3 186 I9C 2 2 2 2 4 3 4 4 8 a 6 5 2 a 7 7 3 6 7 7 2 4 6 2 3 1 2 1 3 1 s.sooo 2 1 3 187 191 2 2 2 2 6 3 2 5 5 a 5 4 2 5 7 6 4 6 9 4 4 5 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 5.1250 2 1 3 lsa 192 2 2 2 2 6 3 2 b 5 3 3 5 3 s 6 1 a 9 IC 6 6 3 2 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 5.3750 2 1 3 199 1°3 2 2 2 2 4 1 4 4 5 Q 5 5 2 a 6 4 3 3 9 7 8 2 5 1 1 3 2 1 1 5.1875 2 1 3 - * 193 194 o 2 2 2 4 1 5 a a a 9 Q 4 5 5 "s 6 6 4 4 7 5 6 2 1 2 3 2 1 3 6.1875 3 1 3 191 195 2 ? 2 ? •> 3 4 6 7 9 7 6 5 7 a 7 5 5 7 6 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 6.000C 3 1 3 192 196 2 2 2 2 6 3 3 5 a a 3 5 3 4 5 4 3 6 7 6 5 b 4 1 1 2 3 1 2 1 5.3125 2 1 3 193 197 1 2 2 2 1 2 J 3 a 6 1* 1 1 1 a 1 3 4 9 IC 1 9 H 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 I 5.0625 2 1 3 144 198 2 2 2 2 a" 1 2 8 5 5 S a 6 -1 S 6 3 7 3 b 5 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 5.6250 2 1 3 195 199 2 9 p 2 a 1 •a a 3 a 3 3 3 5 3 4 4 7 7 1 7 3 4 4 1 1 S 2 4 2 4.87SC 1 1 3 19b " 2"> 2 2 2 2 b 3 2 a 7 a 9 5 3 4 4 3 2 5 5 5 4 6 5 1 1 2 2 1 2 3 5.125? 2 1 3 197 2C1 2 1 1 3 3 3 I- 1 1 1 3 2 1 IC 1 2 9 9 1' 1 1 - 1 2 1 I 4 2 I 2 S.625C 2 3 3 19a 2 '2 ? 2 3 2 3 3 7 a f 3 7 5 9 3 4 a 6 2 3 9 7 7 4 1 4 3 4 2 4 6.6875 3 3 3 199 y 3 2 2 2 b 3 •» B e 1 3 3 1 5 3 S 1 9 7 1 5 I 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 3 4.3125 1 3 3 264 2' 4 1 2 5 1 2 5 3 3 6 5 3 7 2 5 a a 3 3 3 3 7 4 4 4 3 b 3 2 4.625v 1 3 3 " 4 231 2-5 ? b 2 1 4 6 7 8 7 a b 7 7 6 4 7 3 5 3 a 1 3 ? 2 P 1 ? 6.CCC3 3 3 2" 2 ~2i a 2 2 2 b 3 a 3~ •5 7 3" a 3 2 a 7 7 8 9 3 2 a 5 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 5.187S 2 3 1 c 3 2C3 2 7 o 2 2 5 3 3 S 4 a 3 2 3 4 5 4 4 7 6 4 a 4 6 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 4.5<"C ) 1 3 3 VI 254" 2 3 2 2 2 6 3 2 6 6 9 7 a 6 7 5 1 it 3 7 9 2 3 7 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 6.5625 3 3 3 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS SYSTEM

6 R T W E N H M m M m M M P TJ Y O S E A L SSSSSSS ER » IPUEWTG1E G G G G G G G A S B V 1 5 I f> X S M £ G D A B C 6 E F G H i J K L 5 N 5 P 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 N N L C

MS 209 1 1 2 2 3 4 3 3 6 8 10 7 3 2 10 9 2 2 9 9 S 6 5 2 1 4 3 3 3 1 1 5.9375 2 3 3 2*6 210 1 1 2 2 2 6 3 4 6 7 10 7 3 4 8 8 3 3 7 8 9 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 5.6075 2 3 3 2#7 ill 1 1 2 2 2 6 3 2 6 5 7 S 7 5 6 7 7 4 7 6 4 4 6 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5.6075 2 3 3 MO 212 1 1 1 2 3 6 1 2 4 6 a 3 8 2 3 4 9 * 5 6 3 6 3 3 2 3 2 1 2 3 2 4.0125 1 3 3 III 213 1 1 2 2 2 5 3 3 6 5 5 5 7 4 6 5 5 4 7 6 4 S 6 4 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 5*2500 2 3 3 ait 214 1 1 1 1 3 5 1 3 7 7 9 a 9 1 9 5 3 3 7 5 9 7 3 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6.1875 3 3 3 211 21S 1 1 2 2 6 6 1 3 S 6 4 6 S 8 7 6 S 3 7 6 4 5 6 6 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 5*5625 2 3 3 212 216 1 1 2 2 1 4 3 3 a 9 8 6 7 2 a 3 3 2 8 9 7 5 4 3 2 1 3 3 2 2 1 5*7500 2 3 3 *13 217 1 1 2 2 2 6 3 2 7 7 3 7 7 6 5 S 5 7 4 4 7 3 6 5 3 1 1 3 2 3 1 5.5000 2 3 3 214 210 1 1 2 2 2 6 3 4 3 7 6 7 3 4 4 6 3 2 8 4 6 3 3 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4.7500 1 3 3 2IS 219 1 1 2 2 3 2 1 2 9 7 S a a 4 9 6 4 8 4 10 1 1 id 2 1 2 s 2 4 3 3 6*6250 3 3 3 216 220 1 1 2 2 2 5 1 2 3 5 5 5 4 6 4 • 5 4 7 4 4 7 5 7 1 2 1 2 3 3 4 5*0625 2 3 3 217 221 1 1 2 2 2 6 3 3 8 9 3 7 6 8 . 4 4 4 6 3 3 8 3 9 8 1 1 1 3 3 4 4 5*8125 2 3 3 21S 222 1 1 2 2 2 6 3 5 3 7 8 5 3 3 4 4 a. 3 7 4 4 4 3 5 1 2 3 2 2 1 3 4*6875 1 3 3 219 223 1 1 2 2 5 3 3 6 7 a 6 5 3 8 7 8 4 S 8 3 3 S 4 1 2 3 2 3 2 2 5*6250 2 3 3 220 224 1 1 2 2 2 6 3 4 7 8 9 6 7 2 a 6 4 a 7 4 6 7 6 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 6.1875 3 3 3 221 225 1 1 2 2 3 5 1 3 6 6 6 8 4 5 6 4 4 s 5 6 5 4 5 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 5*0625 2 3 3 222 226 1 1 2 2 2 5 3 4 9 9 10 10 10 7 9 7 9 3 9 8 9 3 8 3 1 I 4 2 2 1 2 7.6075 3 3 3 223 227 1 1 2 2 2 S 3 5 7 7 7 16 4 8 8 0 8 7 4 8 2 3 3 5 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 6.1075 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 Univer sity 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 Philos ophy degree in Management at Louisiana State University. Currently, she is an Assistant Professor of Business Adminis tration 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 Bordelon Blalock

Major Field: Management

Title of Thesis: The Use of Kinesics in Establishing and Determining Meaning in Superior-Subordinate Communications Approvejj

EXAMINING COMMITTEE:

£^*^ &/yi"£

M-4_^[ ^<^Wyv^^6uy>

Date of Examination:

October 25, 1973