research on nonverbal communication indicates that

Nonverbal Communication

Affiliations.

• 1 Department of Psychology, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA; email: [email protected].
• 2 Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Flint, Michigan 48502, USA; email: [email protected].
• 3 Department of Psychology, Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, California 90045, USA; email: [email protected].
• PMID: 30256720
• DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103145

The field of nonverbal communication (NVC) has a long history involving many cue modalities, including face, voice, body, touch, and interpersonal space; different levels of analysis, including normative, group, and individual differences; and many substantive themes that cross from psychology into other disciplines. In this review, we focus on NVC as it pertains to individuals and social interaction. We concentrate specifically on ( a) the meanings and correlates of cues that are enacted (sent) by encoders and ( b) the perception of nonverbal cues and the accuracy of such perception. Frameworks are presented for conceptualizing and understanding the process of sending and receiving nonverbal cues. Measurement issues are discussed, and theoretical issues and new developments are covered briefly. Although our review is primarily oriented within social and personality psychology, the interdisciplinary nature of NVC is evident in the growing body of research on NVC across many areas of scientific inquiry.

Keywords: decoding; encoding; interpersonal accuracy; nonverbal behavior; nonverbal communication.

Publication types

• Interpersonal Relations*
• Nonverbal Communication* / psychology
• Social Perception*

EDITORIAL article

Editorial: advances and obstacles in contemporary nonverbal communication research.

• 1 Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri-St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States
• 2 Department of Communication, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, United States
• 3 Department of Organizational Behavior, Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
• 4 Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

Editorial on the Research Topic Advances and Obstacles in Contemporary Nonverbal Communication Research

For centuries, speculation about the meaning and impact of nonverbal behavior has been common in literature, philosophy, and science (see Knapp, 2006 for a historical review). In the latter half of the nineteenth century, Darwin's 1872 The expression of the emotions in man and animals work was particularly instrumental in focusing attention on expressive behavior. Nevertheless, sustained and systematic empirical research on nonverbal communication was not widespread until the middle of the twentieth century. Examples of its diverse roots can be found in anthropology ( Birdwhistell, 1955 , 1970 ; Hall, 1959 , 1966 ), sociology ( Goffman, 1959 , 1963 ), and psychology ( Sommer, 1959 , 1962 ; Exline, 1963 ; Ekman, 1964 , 1965 ). Since that time, literally tens of thousands of articles and hundreds of scholarly books have expanded our knowledge of the nonverbal communication and prompted new and interesting questions about its scope and functions. This acceleration of publications, especially in recent years, provides an appropriate opportunity to examine the current landscape of nonverbal communication research and to provide an outlook into future areas and topics.

In laying the foundation for our “Advances and Obstacles” issue, it is worth noting some of the important topics addressed in current research. For example, we are learning more about the accuracy of pervasive automatic judgments of others' appearance and behavior ( Todorov, 2017 ; Murphy et al., 2019 ). But automatic judgments can also facilitate prejudice and discrimination, as studies of implicit bias show ( Richeson and Shelton, 2005 ). The long-held view that facial expressions necessarily reflect underlying emotions ( Ekman, 1982 ) is now being challenged. One alternative view proposes that facial behaviors are adaptive and adaptable tools for social influence, rather than universal uniform expressions of basic emotions ( Crivelli and Fridlund, 2018 ). The relative merits of these opposing views also have relevance for understanding nonverbal communication in a variety of settings, including the justice system (e.g., detecting deception), policy decisions, national security, and clinical settings ( Denault et al., 2020 ). Research on cultural differences in nonverbal communication provides insight into cultural dynamics and is relevant for reducing inter-group conflict and facilitating cooperation ( Matsumoto and Hwang, 2016 ). Exciting recent work in behavioral neuroscience examines the neural correlates of nonverbal communication (e.g., Jacob et al., 2014 , Lindenberg et al., 2012 ; Arioli and Canessa, 2019 ).

In the present digital age, rapidly-evolving communication technologies might seem to displace the more mundane role of face-to-face nonverbal communication in everyday life. The continuing expansion of social media, artificial intelligence systems, virtual reality, and social robots, however, is not replacing, but rather extending nonverbal communication to new platforms (see also von der Pütten et al., 2010 ; Hasler and Friedman, 2012 ; Küster et al., 2015 ; Patterson, 2019 ; Blunden and Brodsky, 2021 ). As a result, this is a time of expanding research and theory into new domains. Nevertheless, the opportunities provided by the new technologies must be weighed against the ease of spreading misleading and deceptive images that affect our trust in their content (e.g., Tolosana et al., 2020 ).

Consequently, this is an appropriate time to (1) examine more fully the questions driving current research and theory, (2) weigh the obstacles to a broader understanding of nonverbal communication, and (3) consider the potential opportunities for advancing future research on nonverbal communication. The collection of articles here is testimony to the diversity of nonverbal communication research in addressing these goals.

Many of the 17 articles in this issue focus in some fashion on methodological advances and their potential limitations in new directions for research. Murphy and Hall review the thin-slice method with a particular focus on its reliability and validity in representing sustained behavioral sequences. The article proposes that deciding if and when to employ thin-slice measurement should focus on its broader representativeness for behavior, predictive validity for variables or constructs beyond the sampled behavior, and assessing how the length of the sampled thin-slices affects the accuracy of interpersonal judgments.

Three articles deal with new technologies that include machine learning and the application of algorithms to the scoring and evaluation of nonverbal stimuli. Albohn and Adams applied computer vision algorithms to the structure, color, and texture of faces to predict gender-stereotypic impressions. In addition, the computer impressions were similar to those made by human participants. The broader issue of the opportunities and limitations of machine learning were addressed in two other articles. Burgoon et al. used machine learning and automated analysis to examine the role of dominance-submission, composure-nervousness, and trust-mistrust in relational communication. They also discussed the potential benefits of the new techniques in simplifying the study of nonverbal communication. Renier et al. also recognize the utility of applying algorithms in machine learning techniques in analyzing nonverbal behavior. Nevertheless, they caution that automated nonverbal coding can be as biased as human coding and can be limited to the particular context for the behavior.

Several empirical articles focus on a variety of issues related to the encoding and decoding of expressive displays. Bente et al. developed a motion capture and character animation method eliminating cultural and gender appearance cues that can precipitate stereotypic biased judgments. In the absence of visual culture and gender cues, they found that female dyads were rated significantly higher on rapport and that this difference was greater in Arab dyads than in German dyads. Song et al. examined anger and sadness expressions in South Korean and American samples. They found that in both cultures, anger and sadness displays signaled both negative and positive underlying states. Fugate and Franco studied the correspondence between human facial expressions and analogous emoji faces. They found that the majority of emoji faces did not conform to human emotional expressions, even though the anatomical codes for the two types of faces were generally shared. Etcoff et al. investigated the effects of botulinum toxin treatments on the perceptions of pre- and post-treatment smiles. Pre-treatment smiles were rated as more felt, more spontaneous, and happier than post-treatment smiles. Although post-treatment patients were rated as looking younger, they were not judged as more attractive than pre-treatment patients. The effects of tears on visual attention to faces and on subsequent judgments of emotional intensity were the focus of an experimental study by Pico et al. An eye tracking method provided evidence for tears being a magnet for visual attention that, in turn, facilitated perceptions of greater emotional intensity. Ruben et al. addressed the issue of whether technology use enhanced or hindered nonverbal decoding skill. Overall screen time was unrelated to objective measures of decoding skill, but how participants used their screen time was related to decoding skill. Active users (e.g., posting content) performed worse on decoding skill measures, but passive users performed better.

Various issues dealing with authenticity/deception in expressive behavior are the focus of three other articles. Zloteanu and Krumhuber discuss different perspectives on facial displays in the context of increasing evidence contradicting the traditional view that reliable facial muscle movements signal distinct emotional experiences. They discuss spontaneous vs. posed expressions and advocate a functional approach to expressions as neurophysiological states and communicative signals. Vrij and Fisher's article addresses the common assumption that liars display more nervous behaviors than truth tellers. They provide evidence that liars do not show more nervous behaviors. Consequently, observers who focus on such nervous behaviors are likely to do poorly in detecting deception. On a similar theme, Denault discusses the negative consequences of depending on unreliable nonverbal cues for detecting deception. Specifically, in the justice system, judges, and juries are vulnerable to the common, but scientifically discredited, assumption of valid nonverbal indicators of deception. As a result, assessments of witness credibility can be distorted, with detrimental effects on trial outcomes.

The last four articles provide a range of commentaries on approaches to future research. Matsumoto and Hwang advocated for a multimodal approach to research and theory. That is, increased attention to clusters of nonverbal behavior, rather than a single channel at a time, can facilitate our understanding of underlying mental states. Carrard addresses a similar theme of linking interactants' inner preferences and expectations to patterns of nonverbal behavior. That is, nonverbal communication should be viewed as an adaptive process driven by actors' inner characteristics. DeGroot et al. focus on the emerging and important research on the diverse effects of olfaction on a wide variety of interpersonal processes, including identity, emotion, and mate selection. The authors argue that pursuing effectively the wide range of important issues in olfaction requires an integration of the psychology and chemistry disciplines into a new field of “sociochemistry.” Finally, Kirkwood et al. extend the process of interpersonal synchrony from the nonverbal mimicry between partners to individuals' synchrony with wearable exoskeletons. Recent technological advances in wearable robots are designed to augment a user's strength and mobility. The authors discuss the utility of the Interpersonal Adaptation Theory in facilitating research maximizing human-exoskeleton synchrony.

In conclusion, we hope that this interesting set of articles provides an informative window into some of the diverse issues driving current research on nonverbal communication. The advances in research discussed in many of these articles are often responses to existing obstacles or discrepancies in research. Other articles are focused more on identifying the new obstacles yet to receive attention that, in turn, will stimulate new research. Thus, the present issue provides a vehicle for facilitating our understanding of nonverbal communication and appreciating where future research may be headed.

Author Contributions

All of the authors have contributed to this work and approved its publication.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the efforts of all of the contributors to this special issue and for the very helpful comments and insights of the manuscript reviewers.

Arioli, M., and Canessa, N. (2019). Neural processing of social interaction: coordinate-based meta-analytic evidence from human neuroimaging studies. Hum. Brain Mapp . 40, 5354–5369. doi: 10.1002/hbm.24627

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Birdwhistell, R. L. (1955). Background to kinesics. ETC Rev. General Semant. 13, 10–15.

Google Scholar

Birdwhistell, R. L. (1970). Kinesics and Context: Essays on Body Motion Communication . Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. doi: 10.9783/9780812201284

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Blunden, H., and Brodsky, A. (2021). Beyond the emoticon: are there unintentional cues of emotion in email? Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 47, 565–579. doi: 10.1177/0146167220936054

Crivelli, C., and Fridlund, A. J. (2018). Facial displays are tools for social influence. Trends iCognitive Sci. 22, 388–399. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2018.02.006

Darwin, C. (1872). The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals . London: Murray. doi: 10.1037/10001-000

Denault, V., Plusquellec, P., Jupe, L. M., St-Yves, M., Dunbar, N. E., Hartwig, M., et al. (2020). The analysis of nonverbal communication: the dangers of pseudoscience in security and justice contexts. Anuario de Psicol. Jurídica 30, 1–12. doi: 10.5093/apj2019a9

Ekman, P. (1964). Body positions, facial expression and verbal behavior during interviews. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 68, 295–301. doi: 10.1037/h0040225

Ekman, P. (1965). Differential communication of affect by head and body cues. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2, 726–735. doi: 10.1037/h0022736

Ekman, P. (1982). Emotion in the Human Face (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Exline, R. V. (1963). Explorations in the process of person perception: visual interaction in relation to competition, sex, and need for affiliation. J. Pers. 31, 1–20. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1963.tb01836.x

Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life . Garden City, NY: Anchor.

Goffman, E. (1963). Behavior in Public Places . New York, NY: Free Press.

Hall, E. T. (1959). The Silent Language . New York, NY: Doubleday.

Hall, E. T. (1966). The Hidden Dimension . New York, NY: Doubleday.

Hasler, B. S., and Friedman, D. A. (2012). Sociocultural conventions in avatar-mediated nonverbal communication: a cross-cultural analysis of virtual proxemics. J. Intercultural Commun. Res. 41, 238–259. doi: 10.1080/17475759.2012.728764

Jacob, H., Brück, C., Domin, M., Lotze, M., and Wildgruber, D. (2014). I can't keep your face and voice out of my head: neural correlates of an attentional bias toward nonverbal emotional cues. Cerebral Cortex 24, 1460–1473. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhs417

Knapp, M. L. (2006). An historical overview of nonverbal research, in The Sage Handbook of Nonverbal Communication , eds Manusov, V., and Patterson, M. L., (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications), 3–19.

Küster, D., Krumhuber, E., and Kappas, A. (2015). Nonverbal behavior online: a focus on interactions with and via artificial agents and avatars, in The Social Psychology of Nonverbal Communication , eds Kostíc, A., and Chadee, D., (London: Palgrave Macmillan), 272–302. doi: 10.1057/9781137345868_13

Lindenberg, R., Uhlig, M., Scherfeld, D., Schlaug, G., and Seitz, R. J. (2012). Communication with emblematic gestures: shared and distinct neural correlates of expression and reception. Human Brain Mapp. 33, 812–823. doi: 10.1002/hbm.21258

Matsumoto, D., and Hwang, H. C. (2016). The cultural bases of nonverbal communication, in APA Handbook of Nonverbal Communication , eds Matsumoto, D., Hwang, H. C., and Frank, M. G., (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association), 77–101. doi: 10.1037/14669-004

Murphy, N. A., Hall, J. A., Ruben, M. A., Frauendorfer, D., Schmid Mast, M., Johnson, K. E., et al. (2019). Predictive validity of thin-slice behavior nonverbal behavior from social interactions. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 45, 983–993. doi: 10.1177/0146167218802834

Patterson, M. L. (2019). A systems model of dyadic nonverbal communication. J. Nonverbal Behav. 43, 111–132. doi: 10.1007/s10919-018-00292-w

Richeson, J. A., and Shelton, J. N. (2005). Brief report: thin slices of racial bias. J. Nonverbal Behav. 29, 75–86. doi: 10.1007/s10919-004-0890-2

Sommer, R. (1959). Studies in personal space. Sociometry 22, 247–260. doi: 10.2307/2785668

Sommer, R. (1962). The distance for comfortable conversation: a further study. Sociometry 25, 111–116. doi: 10.2307/2786041

Todorov, A. (2017). Face Value: The Irresistible Influence of First Impressions . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. doi: 10.1515/9781400885725

Tolosana, R., Vera-Rodriguez, R., Fierrez, J., Morales, A., and Ortega-Garcia, J. (2020). Deepfakes and beyond: a survey of face manipulation and fake detection. Informat. Fusion 64, 131–148. doi: 10.1016/j.inffus.2020.06.014

von der Pütten, A. M., Krämer, N. C., Gratch, J., and Kang, S.-H. (2010). It doesn't matter what you are!” Explaining social effects of agents and avatars. Comput. Human Behav. 26, 1641–1650. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.012

Keywords: nonverbal communication, facial expression, culture, technology, deception

Citation: Patterson ML, Dunbar NE, Mast MS and Fernandez-Dols JM (2021) Editorial: Advances and Obstacles in Contemporary Nonverbal Communication Research. Front. Psychol. 12:731334. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.731334

Received: 26 June 2021; Accepted: 13 July 2021; Published: 12 August 2021.

Edited and reviewed by: M. Teresa Anguera , University of Barcelona, Spain

Copyright © 2021 Patterson, Dunbar, Mast and Fernandez-Dols. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Miles L. Patterson, miles_patterson@umsl.edu

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

Types of Nonverbal Communication

Often you don't need words at all

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

 Tim Robberts / Getty Images

Why Nonverbal Communication Is Important

• How to Improve

Nonverbal communication means conveying information without using words. This might involve using certain facial expressions or hand gestures to make a specific point, or it could involve the use (or non-use) of eye contact, physical proximity, and other nonverbal cues to get a message across.

A substantial portion of our communication is nonverbal. In fact, some researchers suggest that the percentage of nonverbal communication is four times that of verbal communication, with 80% of what we communicate involving our actions and gestures versus only 20% being conveyed with the use of words.

Every day, we respond to thousands of nonverbal cues and behaviors, including postures, facial expressions, eye gaze, gestures, and tone of voice. From our handshakes to our hairstyles, our nonverbal communication reveals who we are and impacts how we relate to other people.

9 Types of Nonverbal Communication

Scientific research on nonverbal communication and behavior began with the 1872 publication of Charles Darwin's The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals . Since that time, a wealth of research has been devoted to the types, effects, and expressions of unspoken communication and behavior .

Nonverbal Communication Types

While these signals can be so subtle that we are not consciously aware of them, research has identified nine types of nonverbal communication. These nonverbal communication types are:

• Facial expressions
• Paralinguistics (such as loudness or tone of voice)
• Body language
• Proxemics or personal space
• Eye gaze, haptics (touch)
• Artifacts (objects and images)

Facial Expressions

Facial expressions are responsible for a huge proportion of nonverbal communication. Consider how much information can be conveyed with a smile or a frown. The look on a person's face is often the first thing we see, even before we hear what they have to say.

While nonverbal communication and behavior can vary dramatically between cultures, the facial expressions for happiness, sadness, anger, and fear are similar throughout the world.

Deliberate movements and signals are an important way to communicate meaning without words. Common gestures include waving, pointing, and giving a "thumbs up" sign. Other gestures are arbitrary and related to culture.

For example, in the U.S., putting the index and middle finger in the shape of a "V" with your palm facing out is often considered to be a sign of peace or victory. Yet, in Britain, Australia, and other parts of the world, this gesture can be considered an insult.

Nonverbal communication via gestures is so powerful and influential that some judges place limits on which ones are allowed in the courtroom, where they can sway juror opinions. An attorney might glance at their watch to suggest that the opposing lawyer's argument is tedious, for instance. Or they may roll their eyes during a witness's testimony in an attempt to undermine that person's credibility.

Paralinguistics

Paralinguistics refers to vocal communication that is separate from actual language. This form of nonverbal communication includes factors such as tone of voice, loudness, inflection, and pitch.

For example, consider the powerful effect that tone of voice can have on the meaning of a sentence. When said in a strong tone of voice, listeners might interpret a statement as approval and enthusiasm. The same words said in a hesitant tone can convey disapproval and a lack of interest.

Body Language and Posture

Posture and movement can also provide a great deal of information. Research on body language has grown significantly since the 1970s, with popular media focusing on the over-interpretation of defensive postures such as arm-crossing and leg-crossing, especially after the publication of Julius Fast's book Body Language .

While these nonverbal communications can indicate feelings and attitudes , body language is often subtle and less definitive than previously believed.

People often refer to their need for "personal space." This is known as proxemics and is another important type of nonverbal communication.

The amount of distance we need and the amount of space we perceive as belonging to us are influenced by several factors. Among them are social norms , cultural expectations, situational factors, personality characteristics, and level of familiarity.

The amount of personal space needed when having a casual conversation with another person can vary between 18 inches and four feet. The personal distance needed when speaking to a crowd of people is usually around 10 to 12 feet.

The eyes play a role in nonverbal communication, with such things as looking, staring, and blinking being important cues. For example, when you encounter people or things that you like, your rate of blinking increases and your pupils dilate.

People's eyes can indicate a range of emotions , including hostility, interest, and attraction. People also often utilize eye gaze cues to gauge a person's honesty. Normal, steady eye contact is often taken as a sign that a person is telling the truth and is trustworthy. Shifty eyes and an inability to maintain eye contact, on the other hand, is frequently seen as an indicator that someone is lying or being deceptive.

However, some research suggests that eye gaze does not accurately predict lying behavior.

Communicating through touch is another important nonverbal communication behavior. Touch can be used to communicate affection, familiarity, sympathy, and other emotions .

In her book Interpersonal Communication: Everyday Encounters , author Julia Wood writes that touch is also often used to communicate both status and power. High-status individuals tend to invade other people's personal space with greater frequency and intensity than lower-status individuals.

Sex differences also play a role in how people utilize touch to communicate meaning. Women tend to use touch to convey care, concern, and nurturance. Men, on the other hand, are more likely to use touch to assert power or control over others.

There has been a substantial amount of research on the importance of touch in infancy and early childhood. Harry Harlow's classic monkey study , for example, demonstrated how being deprived of touch impedes development. In the experiments, baby monkeys raised by wire mothers experienced permanent deficits in behavior and social interaction.

Our choice of clothing, hairstyle, and other appearance factors are also considered a means of nonverbal communication. Research on color psychology has demonstrated that different colors can evoke different moods. Appearance can also alter physiological reactions, judgments, and interpretations.

Just think of all the subtle judgments you quickly make about someone based on their appearance. These first impressions are important, which is why experts suggest that job seekers dress appropriately for interviews with potential employers.

Researchers have found that appearance can even play a role in how much people earn. Attractive people tend to earn more and receive other fringe benefits, including higher-quality jobs.

Culture is an important influence on how appearances are judged. While thinness tends to be valued in Western cultures, some African cultures relate full-figured bodies to better health, wealth, and social status.

Objects and images are also tools that can be used to communicate nonverbally. On an online forum, for example, you might select an avatar to represent your identity and to communicate information about who you are and the things you like.

People often spend a great deal of time developing a particular image and surrounding themselves with objects designed to convey information about the things that are important to them. Uniforms, for example, can be used to transmit a tremendous amount of information about a person.

A soldier will don fatigues, a police officer will wear a specific uniform, and a doctor will wear a white lab coat. At a mere glance, these outfits tell others what that person does for a living. That makes them a powerful form of nonverbal communication.

Nonverbal Communication Examples

Think of all the ways you communicate nonverbally in your own life. You can find examples of nonverbal communication at home, at work, and in other situations.

Nonverbal Communication at Home

Consider all the ways that tone of voice might change the meaning of a sentence when talking with a family member. One example is when you ask your partner how they are doing and they respond with, "I'm fine." How they say these words reveals a tremendous amount about how they are truly feeling.

A bright, happy tone of voice would suggest that they are doing quite well. A cold tone of voice might suggest that they are not fine but don't wish to discuss it. A somber, downcast tone might indicate that they are the opposite of fine but may want to talk about why.

Other examples of nonverbal communication at home include:

• Going to your partner swiftly when they call for you (as opposed to taking your time or not responding at all)
• Greeting your child with a smile when they walk into the room to show that you're happy to see them
• Leaning in when your loved one speaks to show that you are listening and that you are interested in what they're saying
• Shoving your fist into the air when you're upset that something isn't working

Nonverbal Communication in the Workplace

You can also find nonverbal communication in the workplace. Examples of this include:

• Looking co-workers in the eye when speaking with them to be fully engaged in the interaction
• Throwing your hands in the air when you are frustrated with a project
• Using excitement in your voice when leading work meetings to project your passion for a specific topic
• Walking down the hall with your head held high to convey confidence in your abilities

Nonverbal Communication in Other Situations

Here are a few additional examples of nonverbal communication that say a lot without you having to say anything at all:

• Greeting an old friend at a restaurant with a hug, handshake, or fist bump
• Placing your hand on someone's arm when they are talking to you at a party to convey friendliness or concern
• Rolling your eyes at someone who is chatting excessively with a store clerk as a line begins to form
• Scowling at someone who has cut you off in traffic, or "flipping them the bird"

Nonverbal communication serves an important role in conveying meaning. Some benefits it provides include:

• Strengthening relationships : Nonverbal communication fosters closeness and intimacy in interpersonal relationships.
• Substituting for spoken words : Signaling information that a person might not be able to say aloud. This can be helpful in situations where a person might not be heard (such as a noisy workplace) or in therapy situations where a mental health professional can look at nonverbal behaviors to learn more about how a client might be feeling.
• Reinforcing meaning : Matching nonverbal communication to spoken words can help add clarity and reinforce important points.
• Regulating conversation : Nonverbal signals can also help regulate the flow of conversation and indicate both the start and end of a message or topic.

Nonverbal communication is important because it can provide valuable information, reinforce the meaning of spoken words, help convey trust, and add clarity to your message.

How to Improve Your Nonverbal Communication Skills

If you want to develop more confident body language or improve your ability to read other people's nonverbal communication behaviors, these tips can help:

• Pay attention to your own behaviors : Notice the gestures you use when you're happy versus when you're upset. Think about how you change the tone of your voice depending on the emotions you are feeling. Being aware of your own nonverbal communication tendencies is the first step to changing the ones you want to change. It can also give you insight into how you're feeling if you're having trouble putting it into words.
• Become a student of others : It can also be helpful to consider how others around you communicate nonverbally. What do their facial expressions say? What type of gestures do they use? Becoming familiar with their nonverbal communication patterns helps you recognize when they might be feeling a certain way quicker because you're actively watching for these cues. It can also help you recognize nonverbal behaviors you may want to adopt yourself (such as standing tall when talking to others to display self-confidence ).
• Look for incongruent nonverbal cues : Do you say that you're fine, then slam cupboard doors to show that you're upset? This can give those around you mixed messages. Or maybe when someone is speaking with you, they are saying yes while shaking their head no. This is another example of incongruent behavior. Both can be signs of feeling a certain way but not yet being ready to admit or discuss it.
• Think before you act : If your middle finger seems to automatically fly up when a car cuts you off—even if your young child is in the back seat, causing you to regret it as soon as it happens—you can work to stop this reaction. Train yourself to stop and think before you act. This can help you eliminate or replace nonverbal behaviors that you've been wanting to change.
• Ask before you assume : Certain types of nonverbal communication can mean different things in different cultures. They can also vary based on someone's personality . Before assuming that a person's body language or tone means something definitively, ask. "I notice that you won't look me in the eye when we speak. Are you upset with me?" Give them the opportunity to explain how they are feeling so you know for sure.

A Word From Verywell

Nonverbal communication plays an important role in how we convey meaning and information to others, as well as how we interpret the actions of those around us.

The important thing to remember when looking at nonverbal behaviors is to consider the actions in groups. Consider what a person says verbally, combined with their expressions, appearance, and tone of voice and it can tell you a great deal about what that person is really trying to say.

American Psychological Association. Nonverbal communication (NVC) .

Hull R. The art of nonverbal communication in practice . Hear J . 2016;69(5);22-24. doi:10.1097/01.HJ.0000483270.59643.cc

Frith C. Role of facial expressions in social interactions . Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci . 2009;364(1535):3453-8. doi:10.1098/rstb.2009.0142

Goldin-Meadow S. How gesture works to change our minds . Trends Neurosci Educ . 2014;3(1):4-6. doi:10.1016/j.tine.2014.01.002

Guyer JJ, Briñol P, Vaughan-Johnston TI, Fabrigar LR, Moreno L, Petty RE. Paralinguistic features communicated through voice can affect appraisals of confidence and evaluative judgments .  J Nonverbal Behav . 2021;45(4):479-504. doi:10.1007/s10919-021-00374-2

Abdulghafor R, Turaev S, Ali MAH. Body language analysis in healthcare: An overview .  Healthcare (Basel) . 2022;10(7):1251. doi:10.3390/healthcare10071251

Mccall C, Singer T. Facing off with unfair others: introducing proxemic imaging as an implicit measure of approach and avoidance during social interaction . PLoS One . 2015;10(2):e0117532. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0117532

Wiseman R, Watt C, ten Brinke L, Porter S, Couper SL, Rankin C. The eyes don't have it: lie detection and Neuro-Linguistic Programming .  PLoS One . 2012;7(7):e40259. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040259

Sekerdej M, Simão C, Waldzus S, Brito R. Keeping in touch with context: Non-verbal behavior as a manifestation of communality and dominance . J Nonverbal Behav . 2018;42(3):311-326. doi:10.1007/s10919-018-0279-2

Bambaeeroo F, Shokrpour N. The impact of the teachers' non-verbal communication on success in teaching .  J Adv Med Educ Prof . 2017;5(2):51-59.

Dilmaghani M. Beauty perks: Physical appearance, earnings, and fringe benefits . Economics & Human Biology . 2020;38:100889. doi:10.1016/j.ehb.2020.100889

Darwin C. The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals .

Wood J.  Interpersonal Communication: Everyday Encounters .

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."