The Use of Kinesics in Establishing and Determining

Louisiana State UniversityLSU Digital Commons

LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School

1973

The Use of Kinesics in Establishing andDetermining Meaning in Superior-SubordinateCommunications.Mary Bordelon BlalockLouisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses

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 inLSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected].

Recommended CitationBlalock, Mary Bordelon, "The Use 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

https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu?utm_source=digitalcommons.lsu.edu%2Fgradschool_disstheses%2F2517&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses?utm_source=digitalcommons.lsu.edu%2Fgradschool_disstheses%2F2517&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool?utm_source=digitalcommons.lsu.edu%2Fgradschool_disstheses%2F2517&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses?utm_source=digitalcommons.lsu.edu%2Fgradschool_disstheses%2F2517&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/2517?utm_source=digitalcommons.lsu.edu%2Fgradschool_disstheses%2F2517&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[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

© 1974

MARY BORDELON BLALOCK

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

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


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


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


IV. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Believability by


V. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Reputability by


VI. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Reliability by


VII. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Pleasantness by


VIII. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Informability by


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


XI. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Believability by


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


XIV. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Pleasantness by


XV. Analysis of Variance Table of Message Informability by


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Body Language by Voice for Message Favorability 49

2. Body Language by Voice for Message Truthfulness 5 2

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 5 9

6. Body Language by Voice for Message Reliability 6 2

7. Body Language by Voice for Message Pleasantness 6 5

8. Body Language by Voice for Message Informability 6 8

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 l a s t few y e a r s , a s c i e n t i f i c study of

k i n e s i c s (body language) has been pursued from many a n g l e s .

Doctors of Medicine have i n v e s t i g a t e d k i n e s i c s i n

r e l a t i o n t o phys io logy , such as F i n l e y ' s K i n e s i o l o g i c a l

Ana lys i s of Human Locomotion, and Jensen ' s Applied

Kines io logy: The S c i e n t i f i c Study of Human Performance.2

In these manuels of structural kinesiology, much attention

i s paid to applied anatomy,3 w i l l and unwilled movement,4

and motor s k i l l s 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 Sc ient i f i c Study of Human Performance (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc . , 1970).

^Phil l ip J . Rasch and Roger K. Burke, Kinesics and Applied Anatomy: The Science of Human Movement (third edit ion; 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 Pediatr ics ) , September 2, 1969.

2

P s y c h o l o g i s t s and p s y c h i a t r i s t s have s tud ied body

language for mental i l l n e s s c l u e s (as i n Berger ' s "Nonverbal

Communication i n Group Psychotherapy"); and as paralangu-

age , i . e . , a means of g i v i n g depth to verbal communication.

Some of t h e s e s t u d i e s dea l pr imari ly with emot ions , such as

"The Kines ic Level i n the I n v e s t i g a t i o n of the Emotions"8

whi l e o t h e r s concentrate on p a t h o l o g i c a l i l l n e s s e s . 9 Much

of t h e i r informat ion, whi le h e l p f u l , i s of l i m i t e d va lue t o

b u s i n e s s m e n . 1 0

°Gordon W. Allport and P. E. Vernon, Studies in Expressive Movement (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 Psychotherapy," 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 Persona l i t y 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 F ir s t Approximation," Studies of Linguist ics , 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 Universit ies Press, 1963), pp. 123-139; and Rudulf Arnheim, "The Gestalt Theory of Expression," Psychological Review, 56:156-171, 1949.

9 S , E, J e l l i f f e , "The Parkinsonian Body Posture: Some Considerat ions in Unconscious Host i l i ty ," Psychoanalysts Review, 27:467-479, 1940; and Authur Steindler, Kinesiology of the Human Body Under Normal and Pathological Conditions (Springfield, I l l i n o i s : C. C. Thomas, 1955).

1 0 P . 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, Kinesiology: 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 Portrayed 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 American 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 Setting", in Readings in Social Psychology (T. L. Newcombe and E. L.

4

A c t o r s " and speech-makers X b have pondered t h e b e s t

way t o use n o n - v e r b a l communication though much of t h e i r

work i n v o l v e s mimic s t e r e o t y p i n g .

Most of t h e s e s t u d i e s have been ex t r eme ly l i m i t e d i n

s cope , however, and of a lmos t no wor th t o a businessman

because of t h e sometimes ve ry t e c h n i c a l n a t u r e of t h e

t r e a t i s e . 1 7

Hart ley, e d s . ) , (New York: Ronald P ress , 1947); Thomas Alber t Sebeok, Approaches t o Semiotics (Alfred S. Hayes and Mary Catherine Bateson, e d s . ) , (The Hague: Mouton, 1964); and L. D. B a t t l e , "New Dimensions in Cul tura l Communications," Publ ica t ions of ttie_ Modern Language Associat i o n , 78(2):15-19, 1963.

15Ray L. Bi rdwhis te l l , Communication Without Words in L'Aventure Humaine, Encyclopedic des Sciences de 1'Homme (Kister S. A. P a r i s : De La Grange Ba te l i e r e 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 Cr i t che ly , Kinesics: Gestural and Mimic Language—An Aspect of Non-Verbal Communication i n Problems of Dynamic Neurology: An In t e r n a t i o n a l Volume (Lipman Halpern, e d . ) , (Jerusalem, I s r a e l : Hebrew Univers i ty , 1963), pp. 181-200.

16Ray L. Bi rdwhis te l l , Kinesics and Communication in Explorat i o n s in Communications (E. Carpenter and M. McLuhan, e d s . ) , (Boston: Beacon P res s , 1960), pp. 56-64; H. Campbell, e t . a l . Voice, Speech, and Gesture: Elocutionary Art (Edinburgh, England: John Grant, 1912); and Ray L. Bi rdwhis te l l , The Kinesic Level in the Inves t iga t ion of the *ft""tions in Expression of the Emotions in Man (P. H. Knapp, e d . ) , (New York: In t e rna t iona l Univers i t i e s Press , 1963), pp. 123-139.

1 7 E. I . Corbin, "Muscle Action as Nonverbal and Preverbal Communication," Psychoanalysts Quar ter ly , 31:351-353, 1962; S. G. Es t e s , "Judging Personal i ty from Expressive Behavior," Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 3:217-236, 1938; and Jud i th I . Laszio and P. J . Bainstow, "Journal of Motor Behavior, Accuracy of Movement, Per ipheral Feedback and Efference Copy," Journal Publishing A f f i l i a t e s , 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. Calero, "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," Personnel 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 t h e l a r g e s t amount of t h e i r t ime invo lved

i n communica t ion , 2 3 i t a p p e a r s k i n e s i c s canno t be d i s r e

g a r d e d .

I . STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND HYPOTHESES

Body language i s based upon t h e b e h a v i o r a l p a t t e r n s of

nonve rba l communicat ions . C l i n i c a l s t u d i e s have r e v e a l e d t h e

e x t e n t t o which body language can a c t u a l l y c o n t r a d i c t v e r b a l

communica t ions . 2 4

K i n e s i c s can i n c l u d e any n o n - r e f l e x i v e o r r e f l e x i v e

movement of a p a r t , o r a l l of t h e body, used by a pe r son t o

communicate an emot iona l message t o t h e o u t s i d e wor ld . To

u n d e r s t a n d unspoken body l anguage , one must t a k e i n t o con

s i d e r a t i o n emot iona l and env i ronmen ta l d i f f e r e n c e s . 2 5 The

a v e r a g e bus inessman, unschooled i n c u l t u r a l nuances of k i n -

e s c i s , o f t e n m i s i n t e r p r e t s o r m i s r e p r e s e n t s what he s e e s o r

communicates . T h e r e f o r e , he may n e g a t e a p o s i t i v e message

t o h i s s u b o r d i n a t e s by t h e use of n e g a t i v e body movements.

23Raymond V. Lesikar, Business Communication: Theory and Application (Homewood, I l l i no i s : 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. c i t . ; and David Efron and J . P. Foley, loc. c i t .

25Ray L. Birdwhistell, Kinesics and Context, loc. c i t . : 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;


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 l e v e l s . Or t h e s tudy might have been l i m i t e d i n

e x p e c t i n g t h o u g h t f u l and h o n e s t answers from h u r r i e d and

sometimes s u s p i c i o u s s u b j e c t s . Perhaps r e s t r i c t i n g t h e

s tudy f u r t h e r would have g iven more u n i f i e d answer s . S ince

t h e r e a r e no m a t e r i a l s a t hand w i t h which t h e hypo these s can

be t e s t e d , t hey must be l e f t fo r subsequen t i n v e s t i g a t o r s .

I I I . METHOD OF ANALYSIS

The m a j o r i t y of i n f o r m a t i o n p r e s e n t e d i n t h e s t udy

was o b t a i n e d through an exper iment u s i n g employees ( the

s e l e c t i o n of which w i l l be more f u l l y d e t a i l e d i n Chapter I I ) .

The V i d e o - t a p e . With t h e c o o p e r a t i o n of Dr. T. Win

W e l f o r d , 2 6 a v i d e o - t a p e was produced t o p r o j e c t p o s i t i v e and

n e g a t i v e body mot ions a long w i t h p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e

v o c a l i z a t i o n . To p r o j e c t t h e s e d i f f e r e n t meanings (v ia body

l a n g u a g e ) , t h e o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n of g e s t i c u l a t i o n was

employed ; 2 7 i . e . , use of eye c o n t a c t , 2 8 head and hand

2 6Dr. Welford teaches k ines ics in Speech and Drama a t Southeas te rn Louisiana Univers i ty , Hammond, Louisiana.

2 7 Alber t Mehrabian, In t roduct ion: A Semantic Space for Nonverbal Behavior in Advances in Communication Research (C. David Morten-sen and Kenneth K. Sereno, e d s . ) , (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), pp. 277-287.

2 8R. W. Exline and L. C. Winters, Affective Relat ions and Mutual Glances i n Dyads in Affect , Cognition, and Personal i ty ( s . S. Tomkins and

11

mot ions , 2 9 p o s t u r e , 3 0 and prox imi ty 3 1 were var ied to change

k ines i c meanings. For purposes of d i f f e r e n t verbal messages,

r e p e t i t i o n , h e s i t a t i o n , and mispronounciat ion 3 2 were used.

Dr. Welford, who i s cu r r en t ly preparing a t e x t on the use of

kinesiology in speech, not only suggested the above as the

bes t va r i ab l e s to employ to p ro j ec t des i red meaning, but a l so

indulgent ly acted as the "employer" in the v ideo- 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 Interaction," 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, "Significance 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: Institute 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 Premier, 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 prox-

emics 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 University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

14

sample. (The minimum was set a t twenty-five par t ic ipants

per group for nine groups.) Also, no subject was allowed

to par t ic ipa te in more than one group so as to eliminate re in

forcement or bias for the second message by repeated expres

sions, e t c .

Dr. Joseph G. Dawson36 provided assistance in se lec t

ing the psychological t e s t used in the experiment—Cattell 's

Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (Appendix B). This

t e s t i s not designed to measure neurotic or psychotic condi

t ions , but attempts to assess the ent i re personali ty. As

described by Cat te l l and Eber: The 16 P.F. i s the psychologists' answer, in the

questionnaire realm, to the demand for a t e s t giving ful les t information in the shortest time about most personality t r a i t s . I t i s not merely concerned with some narrow concept of neuroticism or "adjustment," or spec ia l kind of ab i l i ty , but sets out to cover planfully and precisely a l l the main dimensions along which people can differ, according to basic factor analytic research.37

Cat te l ' s P.F. has been used in many cross-cul tural

surveys, and has been translated into French, I t a l i an , 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 Univers i ty , Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

37Raymond B. Cattel l and Herbert W. Eber, Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (Champaign, I l l i n o i s : Ins t i tu te 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, Construction 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

Group

Group

Group

Group

Group

Group

Group

Group

A -

B -

C -

D -

E -

F -

G -

H -

I -

Saw positive kinesics; heard

Saw negative kinesics; heard



Heard positive vocalization;

Heard negative vocalization;



positive vocalization

positive vocalization

negative vocalization

negative vocalization

saw nothing

saw nothing

nothing

nothing

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 Publishing 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 ^ to

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



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 pe r sona l i t y fac to r s from the 16 P .F . t e s t were

scored and i n t e r p r e t e d with the advise of Dr. Dawson and Dr.

Caesar B. Moody.42 Rather than undertake a complete person

a l i t y inventory (which was not the i n t e n t of t h i s d i s s e r t a

t ion) , a s impl i f ied eva lua t ion 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, s ta id , 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, s ta id , 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 c lose r to "10" checked for the following

v a r i a b l e s , the more ex t rover ted the pe r sona l i t y ;

A. Reserved, detached, c r i t i c a l , aloof

B. Less in te l l igent , concrete-thinking

C. Affected by feelings, emotionally less s table, easily upset

D. Humble, mild, accommodating, conforming

E. Sober, prudent, serious, taciturn

G. Shy, restrained, timid, threat-sensi t ive

1. Trusting, adaptable, free of jealousy, easy to get along with

J . Pract ical , careful, conventional, regulated by external r e a l i t i e s , proper

M. Conservative, respecting of established ideas, tolerant of t radi t ional d i f f icul t ies

P . Relaxed, tranquil , unfrustrated

After mathematically coding the columns, a mean score

was computed for each p a r t i c i p a n t . Based upon the score

they received, an employee was designated as fol lows:

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;


the probability is less than .05;


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 Variation

Degrees of Freedom F Value Probability of F

Sex

Marital Status

Ethnic Background

Age

Religion

Education

Personality

ERROR#

1

1

3

3

1

4

2

139

0.01

2,87

0.01

0.64

0.01

1.71

0.88

0.99

0.09

1.00

0.59

0.97

0.15

0.59

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 Variation

Degrees of Freedom F Value Probability of F

Sex

Marital Status

Ethnic Background

Age

Religion

Education

Personality

ERROR#

1

1

3

3

1

4

2

139

0.30

2.89

0.51

2.42

0.06

0.74

1.95

0.59

0.09

0.68

0.07

0.80

0.57

0.14

Source: Appendix B


36

TABLE IV

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE BELIEVABILITY BY DEMOGRAPHICS, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND MESSAGE TYPE

Source of Variation

Sex

Marital Status

Ethnic Background

Age

Religion

Education

Personality

ERROR#

Degrees of Freedom

1

1

3

3

1

4

2

139

F Value

1.22

3.34

0.23

2.05

0.11

0.38

4.42

Probability of F

Source: Appendix B


*Five percent level

0.27

0.07 *

0.87

0.11

0.74

0.82

0.01 *

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

0.14

0.54

0.68

0.09

0.61

0.68

0.06

Sex

Marital Status

Ethnic Background

Age

Religion

Education

Personality

ERROR#

1

1

3

3

1

4

2

139

2.14

0.57

0.51

2.24

0.75

0.58

2.79

Source: Appendix B


39

TABLE VI

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE RELIABILITY BY DEMOGRAPHICS, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND MESSAGE TYPE



0.06 0.81

2.14 0.14

0.26 0.85

1.03 0.38

0.01 0.96

0.20 0.93

1.84 0.16

Sex

Marital Status

Ethnic Background

Age

Religion

Education

Personality

ERROR#

1

1

3

3

1

4

2

139

Source: Appendix B


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

0.06 0.80

1.67 0.20

0.74 0.54

0.71 0.55

0.16 0.69

0.31 0.87

0.77 0.53

Sex

Marital Status

Ethnic Background

Age

Religion

Education

Personality

ERRORff

1

1

3

3

1

4

2

139

Source: Appendix B


42

TABLE VIII

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE OF MESSAGE INFORMABILITY BY DEMOGRAPHICS, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND MESSAGE TYPE



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


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:



used.

45


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

Source of Variation

Body Language Voice Body Language by Voice 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 Education by Voice

ERROR #

Degrees of Freedom

2 2 4 4 4 2 2 6 6 2 8 2 2 6 6 2 8

139

F Value

1.43 0.86 4.92 1.07 1.33 2.29 1.65 1.01 0.80 0.04 0.52 0.98 0.51 1.42 1.81 0.45 0.30

Probability of F

0.24 0.57 0.01 ** 0.37 0.26 0.10 0.19 0.42 0.58 0.96 0.84 0.62 0.61 0.21 0.10 0.64 0.97

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

H

H m

« o >

W

w to

W

S

3.5

3.O..

2.5.,

2.a.

1.5.

1.0-

.5.

No Vocalization

Positive Vocalization

Negative Vocalization

•4- 4- 4 -P o s i t i v e N e u t r a l N e g a t i v e

B O D Y L A N G U A G E

Source: Appendix B

Note: 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.

50

there are only 13 times in 10,000 that this combination can

be attributed to chance alone.

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

Source of Variation


Degrees of Freedom

2 2 4 4 4 2 2 6 6 2 8 2 2 6 6 2 8

F Value

0.02 2.60 5.83 0.28 1.49 0.24 1.75 0.20 1.17 0.05 0.53 0.81 0.59 1.48 2.62 0.33 0.58

Probability of F

0.98 0.08 0.01 ** 0.89 0.21 0.79 0.18 0.97 0.33 0.95 0.83 0.55 0.56 0.19 0.02 * 0.72 0.79

ERROR # 139

Source: Appendix B



** 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 * 2 . S D fa a 2.0

D « 1.5

w 1.0-o < w . 5 -en w

0 P o s i t i v e N e u t r a l Nega t ive


Source: Appendix B

Note: Means are adjusted for sex, marital status, ethnic background, age, religion, education, personality, personality by body Inaguage, 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.


No Vocalization


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

Source of Variation


ERROR #

Degree of Freedom

2 2 4 4 4 2 2 6 6 2 8 2 2 6 6 2 8

139

F Value

0,94 2,92 1.76 0.31 1.39 0.20 1.36 0.53 0.62 1.31 0.80 1.15 3.18 1.18 1.29 0.84 0.82

Probability of F

0.60 0.06 * 0.14 0.87 0.24 0.82 0.26 0.79 0.71 0.27 0.60 0.32 0.04 * 0.32 0.26 0.56 0.59

Source: Appendix B



55

FIGURE 3

AGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE TRUTHFULNESS

CO

w W Z

fa

EH

D

«

fa O

«fl 1 0

CO

H

3.5..

3.0.-

2.5..

2.0..

1 .5 . -

1.0._

. 5 . -

No V o c a l i z a t i o n Pos i t i ve Vocal izat ion

Negative Vocal izat ion

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

A G E

35 up

Source: Appendix B

Note: 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, ago by voice, religion by voice, and education by voice.

I

56

FIGURE 4

VOICE BY MARITAL STATUS FOR MESSAGE BELIEVABILITY

En

n < > w H

i4

H

m

w V)

< CO

CO

fa S

3.5..

3.a.

2.S-

2.a.

l.S-

l.a.

.a.

No Vocalization



-4- -4-Never Married Currently Married or Divorced or Widowed

M A R I T A L S T A T U S

Source: Appendix B


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

Source of Variation

Body Language Voice Body Language by Voice 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 Education by Voice

ERROR #

Degrees of Freedom

2 2 4 4 4 2 2 6 6 2 8 2 2 6 6 2 8

139

F Value

0.11 2.79 2.88 '0.34 0.32 0.09 0.80 0.31 0.34 0.09 0.87 0.45 0.01 1.19 1.36 0.37 0.60

Probability of F

0.90 0.06 0.02 * 0.85 0.87 0.92 0.55 0.93 0.91 0.91 0.54 0.64 0.99 0.32 0.23 0.70 0.78

Source: Appendix B



59

FIGURE 5

BODY LANGUAGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE REPUTABILITY

En

m < EH

D

ft fa Pi

fa 0 < CO

CO

fa s

3 . 5

3 . 0

2 . 5

2 . 0 . _

1-5 . _

l - 0 . _

• 5 . _

* Positive Vocalization

No Vocalization


4 - 4- 4-Positive Neutral Negative


Source: Appendix B


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

Source of Variation


ERROR #

Degrees of Freedom

2 2 4 4 4 2 2 6 6 2 8 2 2 6 6 2 8

139

F Value

0.39 3.32 3.30 0.12 0.84 0.72 1.75 0.57 0.28 0.30 0.72 0.54 0.31 1.02 1.22 0.12 1.04

Probabili of F

0.68 0.04 * 0.01 * 0.97 0.51 0.51 0.18 0.76 0.94 0.74 0.68 0.59 0.74 0.41 0.30 0.89 0.41

Source: Appendix B



62

FIGURE 6

BODY LANGUAGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE RELIABILITY

E H

H

• J

H

n < H

fa «

fa o

CO

CO

fa s

3.5-.

3.0-

2.5..

2.O..

1.5.

1.0..

.5

Pos i t ive Vocalization

"^ No Vocalization


4 -Posit ive Neutral Negative


Source: Appendix B


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

Source of Variation


ERROR #

Degrees of Freedom

2 2 4 4 4 2 2 6 6 2 8 2 2 6 6 2 8

139

F Value

2,08 1.12 4.28 0.60 0.11 0.28 1.23 0.41 0.71 0.04 1.73 0.98 0.75 1.27 1.05 0.06 1.91

Probability of F

0.13 0.33 0.01 ** 0.66 0.97 0.76 0.30 0.87 0.64 0.97 0.10 0.62 0.52 0.27 0.40 0.94 0.06

Source: Appendix B


** There is a 99% confidence level that there was a causation variation associated with the variable.

I

65

FIGURE 7

BODY LANGUAGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE PLEASANTNESS

CO

to fa Z

EH

Z

< CO

< fa

cu

fa o < co

CO

fa S

3.5..

3 . a .

2 .5 , -

2.a .

1.5..

1.0-.

.5 . .

Positive Vocalization No Vocalization


4- 4-Positive Neutral Negative


Source: Appendix B


66

a message was perceived as concerns pleasantness. This

fact seemed to hold true in all cases, Ambiverts, introverts,

and extroverts were all equally likely to determine a message

was pleasant. Moreover, whether or not a message was thought

pleasant could not be attributed to a person's sex, age,

marital status, ethnic background, religion, or education.

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

Source of Variation


ERROR #

Degrees of Freedom

2 2 4 4 4 2 2 6 6 2 8 2 2 6 6 2 8

139

F Value

0.67 3.25 3.87 0.20 0.61 0.10 1.90 1.45 0.55 1.19 0.76 0.05 0.42 1.05 1.23 0.33 0.55

Probabilit; of F

0.52 0.04 * 0.01 ** 0.94 0.66 0.90 0.15 0.20 0.77 0.31 0.64 0.95 0.66 0.40 0.30 0.73 0.82

Source: Appendix B




68

FIGURE 8

BODY LANGUAGE BY VOICE FOR MESSAGE INFORMABILITY

EH

H

H

m < S « o fa z

H

CO

CO

fa

3.5..

3.0,.

2.5,.

2.O..

1.5..

1.0,.

• 5,_


No Vocalization


Positive Neutral Negative


Source: Appendix B


69

informed seemed independent of personality type. Addition

ally, the subject's age, education, ethnic background,

religion, and sex did not influence how he regarded a

message on reliability,

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:



used;


whether or not kinesics is congruent with

verbal message content;

72

3. The e f fec t of body language on message percep

t i on i s constant r ega rd less of pe r sona l i t y type

or demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

The method employed in developing t h i s study was to

use a v ideo- tape experiment to t e s t whether, and t o what

degree , d i f f e r e n t forms of messages would a f fec t an

employee's message percept ion . This experiment cons is ted

of f i r s t , adminis ter ing a demographic ques t ionna i re , person

a l i t y f ac to r t e s t , and experimental message t o a la rge number

of employees p a r t i t i o n e d i n t o nine random groups from e igh t

d i f f e r e n t companies, chosen with the cooperat ion of Dow

Chemical Company. The employee groups were divided as

fol lows:

Group A - Saw p o s i t i v e k i n e s i c s ; heard p o s i t i v e voca l i za t ion

Group B - Saw negat ive k ines i c s ; heard p o s i t i v e voca l i za t ion

Group C - Saw negative k i n e s i c s ; heard negat ive voca l i za t ion

Group D - Saw p o s i t i v e k ines i c s ; heard negative voca l iza t ion

Group E - Heard p o s i t i v e voca l i za t ion ; saw nothing

Group F - Heard negative voca l i za t ion ; saw nothing

Group G - Saw p o s i t i v e k ines i c s ; heard nothing

Group H - Saw negative k i n e s i c s ; heard nothing

Group I - Read the message (nei ther saw nor heard the message)

A n e u t r a l message content was used for every group

in order t o reduce b i a s as much as pos s ib l e .

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 Perspectives . 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: Elocutionary 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 Communications. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merill Company, 1971.

83

Ekman, Paul. Communication Through Nonverbal Behavior: h Source of Information About an Interpersonal Relationship 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 Everyday 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 Kinesiology: 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 Development. 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 Language . 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 Detection 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 Variations in Speaker's Nonfluency Upon Audience Ratings of Attitude Toward the Speech Topic and Speakers' Credibility 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 Monographs , 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 Perspectives . 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 Mechanical 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 Affiliation," 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 Disorders , 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 Psychotherapy ," International Journal of Group Psychotherapists, 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 Personality," 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," Psychological 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 Language," 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 Charades," Harvest Years, 8:16-17, 1968.

Geldard, F. A. "Some Neglected Possibilities of Communication: 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 Understanding 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 Personality," 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 Communications 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 Communicate 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 Annotation 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 Fitness 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 University, 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 Portrayed 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

Female

Male

OCCUPATION

Employee

Student

MARITAL STATUS

never married

currently married

divorced

widowed

ETHNIC BACKGROUND

Afro-American

Anglo-Saxon

French

_German

Italian

Oriental

Spanish

AGE

JUnder 18 years

18 years to 21 years

_22 years to 25 years



_36 years or older

RELIGION

Catholic

Jewish

Protestant

other (specify)

EDUCATION COMPLETED

less than high school

high school diploma

some college

college degree

some post-graduate

sst-graduate degree

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.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 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.

The message appeared to be favorable

It appears the message was truthful

>

•p .c tn

•H 03

0)

(0 U 0)

s +J

.c •H rH >

unfavorable

untruthful

I felt the message was believable unbelievable

The message seemed to be reputable disreputable

After experiencing 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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

s

1.34 1.36 1.43 1.25 1.39 1.35 1.53

n

170 175 197 148 183 173 222

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 S T I C A L A N A L Y S I S S Y S T E M

J« H S S G C

1 2

3

* 5 6

T a 9

! ><• l i 1 2

13 1 *

IS 1 6

17 1 8

14 2 3

2 1

2 2

23 2 *

as 2 6

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 C

31 3 2

3 3

3 4

35 3 6

it 3 8

3 9

4 *

41 4 2

4 3

4 4

4 5

4 b

4 7

4 3

4 9

5 r

5 1

1 2

3

4

5 6

7

a 9

1 2

13 14 1

15 1 6

1 7

1 8

19 2 0

21 2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 ?

2 8

2 9

3 0

31 3 2

33 3 4

3 5

3 6

37 3 8

3 9

4

4 1

4 £

»3 4 4

4 5

4 b 4 7 4 8

4 9

5 J

5 1

5 2

i l

9

9

9

9

9 9

4 9

9

9

9 9

4 9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

4 a a

1 8

a a a 8

8

a a a a

i a

a L a

8 L a

o

1 d 8

1 -1 i a l a

a

» 7

1 7 I 7

2 ?

2

1

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 1

2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1 2

2

2

2

2

2 2

2 2

2

2

2 2

~2 2 2 2

2 1

1

1 "2

2

2

2 2 2

?

1 1

i l

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

2

2

2

?

1

2

2

2

2 2

2

1

2

2

2 2

2 2

2

2

2 2

—"5~ 2 5

1

2 1

1

2 2 2

2

2

2

2

3 2

3

2

2 1

1 6

3 3

2 3

2

2

6

2

2

2

3

2

2

J 3

a

2

3

3

2

3

2 2

2

2

2 2

~ 2 ~ 2 o

3

J 2

3

p

3

3

3 3 6

1

5

6

5

2

5 5

4

2

4

6

5 2

6

6

4

5

6

6

4

4

5

6

b

2

6

S

4

o

6

5

6

$ 3

5 6

~ 6 5 4 6

b

6

b

n 2

a

5 4 6

5

1

3

3

3

3 3

J

1

1

1

3 1

3 3

3

3

3

3

3 1

3

1

1 1

1 3

1

3

1 1

3

1

3

3

3 3 3 3

3

I 3

1

1

1

1

3 1 1

1

2

2

1

2

3 2

2

3

3 2

3 3

S 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

4

5

b

3

2

3

3 3

3

2

2

4

3 5

2

2

? 3

2 2

~ 4~

2

2

2

1

2

3

5

7

6

b

3

5

I t

5

7 a 4

1

3

3

7

3

5

a 4

7

5 s 3

l i .

7

4

s 3

7 3

4

4

1 5 4

1

b

a i

I 7 o ~

a a

D 7

1

1 ••

e 3

5

5

T a 6

7

9

9

a 7

a 3

5

3

a 6

9

5

6

6

4 7

9

!• 6

7

6

6

a D

6

5

5 5

5

6

1 • 5

5

c

a

•'. 5

5~~ a

^

a 6

5

4

a 9

4

9

1 C

a 9

4

a 6

5

3

9

7

4

a 7

5

B

a a a 9

7

a 5

11

6

9

7

4

9 4 7 4 a

1

1

a o

3

7

7 9 b

f

4

6

4

4

7

2

1

5

4

9

3 4

4

1 J

5

7

7

7

8

7

a 7

8

3

4

9

b

6

5 o

5

6

2

6

b

3

4 7 6

5 5

6

4 5 3

7

6 9

= 5

2

4

6

5

9

8

5

4

4

7

4

9

5

a 5

5

5

2

9

9

4

7

6

5

2

7

2

4

6

7

5

3

7

b

5

4 b 2

1 . 9

7 1 .

l i

6 5 5

7

4 4

1

1

5

3

4

b

3

1

9

3

2

a 2 3

3 a 6

3

2

4

2

2

6

2

2

3

2

3

t

6

6

3

4

2

1

6

b

7 5 3 1 3

7

3

1

3

4 2

o

4 6 7

b

2

3

5

6

6

9

1C

3

9

3

s 9

5

2

5

8

7

5

7

6

3

8

7 3

3

3

9

5

2 3

6

4

1

5

5 4

5 ?

1 ' 7

3

1

° 7

5

6

3 6 4

b

S

4

6

6

5

5

a 6

•* 4

o

4

3

9

3

9

4

3

a 7

4

5

4

7

9

5

4

S

5

3

9

6

1

5

4

6 b 6

3

3 a b

a o a

o

7 ~ 3

a a

4

6

5

5

8

6

7

3 2 9

3 3

a 2

1 0

7

1 0

2

5

4

4

a 4

7

3

2

5

6

7 a 6 5

3

5

1 U

3 6 3 7 7

3

1

5

7 5 5

4

3 9 5

1 )

2

4

6

3

3

7

5

3 1

1 0

3

4

3

2

3

1

2

2

7

2

4

2

6

5

4

7

6

7

6

6

2

5

5

5

3 4 5 5

1 . 8

3 1

5

4 5 4

5

3 7 5

~ 5 ~

9

7

7

5

6

9 4 a a 4

9

a a 9

6

6

9

7

8

a 7

9

6

7

8

6

4

5

5

5

8

9

3

6

6

6 7 6

6

4

i : i

i

8 6 7

4

a " a "

b b

S

6

5

4

8

10 6 8 2 3

4 7 9 6

6

6

4

9

6

8

7

4

6

8

a 9

1 0

5

9

6

10 6

5

6

7 4 7 ~ 9

5

3

6 I f 1?

a 6

2

5

7 6 ' 6 6

6

4

5

6

S

a a 5 1 7

6

5 a 5

3

7

2

4

a 5

7

4

6

5

2

1 3

3

6

4

2

3

8

4

5

1 4

4

9

7

7

1C 1 5

5

4

4

4 ~ 7~~

S 5

3

4

6

7

3

2 7 2 3 2

3

9 1 3

5

3

2

3

1 0

1

3

3

5

5

3

5

6

4

6

5

4

3

2

5

1

1 4 3

3

4

6

1 4 6

5

7

b

7 2

6 o

5

4

4

S

3

9 4 2 7 7

3

5 6 9

6

6

1

6

3

3

6

3

4

6

3

6

3

5

3 5

4

3

1

6

6

6 " 4 ~

3

2

3

o

3 4 4

6

2

7

6 7 6 6

6

5

5

6

5

2 5 3 3 a 2

3 2 2

a i

6

5

7

6

5

7

4

7

2

1

5

6

3

2

2

2

1

6

5

3 4

2

1

3

a l l 7

~ 5 " 6

J

5 5 S 5

1

1

1

2

1

1 1 1 I 1

1

1 1 1

1

3

1

2

2 -

3

1

1

1

4

4

4

4

4

4

5

4

3

3

2

4 5

4 5 3

3 5 1 4

4

b

4 3

4 3

3

1

2

2

1

1 2 1 2 2

2

1 1 1

5

5

1

1

1

2

2

1

2

4

4

4

4

3

3

S

3

3

1 2

I 5 " 3

3 5 2

4

5

5 ~"2

1

b

4 2 3 1

1

5

2

2

1

1 4 1 4 2

2

3 S 5

5

4

1

3

1

2

1

1

1

4

4

4

4

3

3

5

4

2

1

3

b

5 3 4 4 1

4

4

1 5 1 ~ 1

i

4 2 3

3 "

1

4 3 " 2

1

1 3 5 3 2

2

3 3 1

3

4

1

2

1

3

2

1

1

3

4

4

4

3

3

5

4

3

1

3

5

5 2 ~ 4 4 1

3 3 1 4 4 3

i

3

1 4

5

3

5 2 2

1

1 4 2 4 2

2

2

4

5

3

4

I

1

1

3

2

1

2

3

4

4

4

4

4

5

4

4

1

3

b

5 ~ 5 ~

4 5 2

3 5 I 5 5 1

J

4 1 4 3

3

2 2 2

2

1 2 1 1 " 1

1

1

1

1

1

4

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

S

4

3

4

4

S

1

b

4

1

3

b

5 " 2 ~

2 3 2

3 5 1 4

~ 5 ~ 4

b

4 2 4

1

3

1 I 2

1

1 1 1 1 " 2

1

2

5

1

1

4

1

2

1

3

1

1

1

3

4

3

5

3

1

5

» 4

1

3

b

5_̂ 2~ 2 4 2

4

1 I 5 3 5

3

3 1 4 3

4 . 7 5 C 0 4 . 5 0 C 0 5 . 1 8 7 5 5 . 1 8 7 5 5 . 7 5 C 3 6 . 3 1 2 5 5 . 7 5 0 3 4 . 7 5 0 0 4 . 8 1 2 5 6 . 4 3 7 5 S . 1 2 S 0 5 . 7 5 C 0 5 . 3 1 2 5 5 . 3 1 2 5 5 . 5 6 2 5 4 . 8 7 5 0 5 . 3 1 2 5 4 . 6 8 7 5 6 . 5 6 2 5 5 . 4 3 7 5 5 . 3 1 2 5 5 . 4 3 7 5 5 . 6 2 5 0 5 . 6 8 7 5 4 . 5 6 2 5 6 . 6 2 5 0 5 . 3 7 5 3 5 . 5 0 0 0 5 . 3 7 5 0 5 . 1 8 7 5 5 . 7 5 0 3 4 . 8 1 2 S 3 . 4 3 7 5 5 . 5 6 2 5 4 . 8 1 2 5 4 . 9 3 7 5 5 . 1 8 7 5 4 . 3 7 5 0 6 . 1 8 7 5 5 . 6 8 7 5 6 . 4 3 7 5 6 . 1 2 S C S . 9 3 7 5 6 . : c c c 5 . 6 8 7 5

. 4 . 6 8 7 5 5 . 5 6 2 5 5 . 3 1 2 5 6 . - " 1 2 5 5 . 4 3 7 5 6 . 3 1 2 5

1

1 2 2 2

3 2 1 1 3

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

1

3

2

2

2

2

2

1

3

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

2

1

— 2 ~ 1 3 2

3 3 2 3 2 1

2

2 3 2 3

2

2 2 2

2

2 2 2 2 2

2

2

2

2

2 ,

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1

1

1 3 3 3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 ' 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2 e 2 H 2 i t * 2

S T A T I S T I C A L A N A L Y S I S S Y S T E «

2 ,3

t '

-

~

5 2

5 3

5 4

5 5

5 6

5 7

5 8

5 9

6 3

6 1

42 6 3

6 4

6 5

6 6

6 7

6 8

6 9

7 "

7 1

7 2

7 3

7 4

7 5

7 6

7 7

7 8

7 9

8 0

8 1

8 2

d 3

8 4

8 5

8 6

8 7

8 3

8 9 9 3 9 1

4 2 9 3 9 4

9 5

9 6

9 7

9a 9 °

1 . "

I C I

1 = 2

5 4 1 5 5 1 5 6

5 7

5 8

5 9

6 0

6 1

6 2 1 6 3

6 4

6 5

6 b

6 7

6 8

6 9

7 0

7 1

7 2

7 3

7 4

7 6

77 7 8

7 9

8 0

3 1

B 2

S 3

3 4

8 5

9 6

8 7

8 8

8 9

9 C

° 1 9 2 9 3 9 4

9 S

= 6 9 7 9 3

9 9

I '

1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

6

b

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

b

6

6

6

6

6 I 6~

6 1 6

b

6

6 6 b

c

1 b 5

1 5 I 5 I b

b

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

?

2

2

2 2 2 1 2

2 ? 1 7

2

2

2

? 9

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

" 2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 2 1 2 ? 2

?

2

? 9

2

2

?

o

2 o

6

3

6

2

2

6

6

2

2

6

2

3

2

3

2

6

3

6

3

1

2

2

3

2

2

1 6 2

3

6

2

2

2

2

2

1 6" 3 1 1

2

2

•* ^ * 6

3 • *

?

6

5

6

6

5

6

6

4

5

4

5

4

4

5

6

6

6

6

5

2

2

6

5

5

4

4 6 ~ 6

6

6

S

4

6

b

5

4 — b ~

3

4

2

6

6 5 6

o

6

3

5

b

o

6

3

! 3

3

1

1

1

3

3

1

3

1

3

1

3

1

3

I

1

1

3

3

1

3

3

3 3 1

1

1

3

3

3

I

1

1 1 1

1

3

3

3 I 3

3

3

J

3

1

1

1

3

2

1

3

2

5

3

4

5

3

5

4

4

2

2

4

3

3

2

2

3

3

3

3

4

3 2 1

3

4

4

2

5

4

4

4 ~ 4 ~

2

3

2

4

2 3

^ 4

?

S

^ 1

2

2

9

a 5

4

8

4

7

4

4

6

7

7

4

7

8

4

8

6

i n 4

5

a 8

u 8

I f 9 S

4

4

l l

5

3

6

3

5 a

a l

5

4

b ~ 5 ~

e a 7

b

9

4

7

4

2

a 7

7

6

7

6

5

a 3

7

7

7

a 5

S

7

7

3

a 6

a 5

5

8

7 a 7

4

7

3

7

7

7

7 a 7

6

a a

a 4 iT

<= a 7

o

a a

• 5

e 9

6

6

9

7

5

9

S

9

5

b

7

1

8

5

8

a l . "

2

6

7

8

1 "

9

c

8 1

8

4

5

a c

7

a 3 9

1 1

a a

l

3

6

1

o

4

C

7

« 4

8

I C

6

4

3

fc 6

4

4

1 0

5

6

S

3

5

b

7

6

5

6

S

3

a 5

8

9 a a 3

6

3

5

5

7

l u

2 4 " b

3

9

5

b

b

l

c A

a £

3

4

9

a 4

4

5

4

4

2

4

7

7

4

4

5

2

4

7

7

1 }

4

4

4

6

1 0

8

11 9 1

9

5

a a 2

4

5

2 4

1 • 1><

5

1

2 5 4

7

7

J

a c

7

3

9

3

5

5

2

6

3

2

5

I C

6

3

6

2

2

S

2

4

3

5

5

9

2

2

4

5 3

3

6

4

2

*» 3

4

l r

6 3 3

1

2

i

6 ~

7

. 5 b

2

3

5

6

f-

5

9

b

4

5

4

5

7

4

2

7

7

4

5

4

5

6

3

9

2

7

5

6

5

3

9 7 8

5

a 9

5

4

5

7 7 7 6

S

b

3 b

£

9

7

7

9 •a

3

5

8

a 5

4

5

7

8

8

7

2

6

6

a 3

6

5

4

6

4

7

7

4

6

I C

4

2

5

i r a 6

7

8

4

6

3

3

6

8

B~

6

6

7

6

8

a 6

5

5

5

7

3

6

7

6

7

6

a 9

3

4

9

5

4

7

5

5

6

5

6

9

6

5

4

6

1

6

5

9

5

4

6 2

5

3

4

2

5

2

9

" 5

3

1

a 4 b

5

4

6

a 6

3

b

7

8

5

7

3

S

4

5

4

1 3

4

4

5

3

3

6

5

5

3

4

6

4

3

1

5

9 4 5

5

S

2

3

3

6

1

5 4 2 5 a 1 3 a 7

4

6

4

Q

8

3

4

3

2

8

6

a 7

5

4

6

9

7 7

4

9

a 8

9

4

8

9

5

6

5

1 3

3

8 5 6

S

7

I f

4

a 7

3

6 8 b 3 3

I f 8 9 4

4

4

5

4

3

4

8

2

9

4

6

a 6

6

9

7

3

7

6

5

7

7

7

9

6

a 8

6

5

8

I C

7

3 9

1 3

2

a 9

9

8

6

9

9 4

I t 7 3

6

a 5 7

a 7

5

4

4

e 5

8

8

6

5

5

5

7

5

4

1 3

4

5

4

8

2

S

3

6

3

a 5

7

2

5

7

9 6 5

2

4

8

7

3

7

b

8 7 a

~Tc~" 9

1 4

~ S 7

2

6

4

9

7

6

6

2

2

3

7

4

4

6

7

6

a 6

6

3

5

6

3

3

5

2

5

5

6

6

1 0

4

3 5 2

2

2

4

2

3

4

3

4 4~ 1 3 5

6

5 3 3

3

3

4

2

a 4

7

2

2

6

6

2

4

7

3

5

9

6

6

4

S

2

6

3

5

1

7

7

5

7

1

5

2 S 3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

a 4 5 3 6

6

5 8 5

5

4

4

2

5

7

6

2

2

7

S

2

5

5

2

5

9

4

5

5

3

3

5

5

6

2

7

5

6

2

1

3

3 2 6

7

3

1

2

2

5

2

5 7 7

~ ~ 2 4

5

4 5 5

6

4

6

b

5

4

6

3

4

3

4

5

2

4

3

3

4

5

3

2

2

3

3

3

3

1

1

1

S

4

3

1

4 1 1

2

b

2

2

1

1

3

2 2 1 1 5

3

I 1 2

4

3

2

1

1

2

2

3

4

3

3

4

2

3

2

4

4

5

4

3

2

1

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

3

3

1

4 3 I

1

4

1

1

1

1

3

•> 2 1 1 5

1

3 5 3

2

4

3

3

1

1

1

3

4

3

4

4

2

4

3

4

4

5

4

3

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

2

3

3

1

5

5 S 4

1

5

1

1

2

1

2

1 2 1 4 5

1

4 5 2

4

4

2

5

1

I

2

3

4

3

3

4

2

3

2

3

4

2

4

2

4

2

2

1

1

1

1

2

3

2

1

4

4 4 I

3

4

2

2

2

1

4

3 2 " 1 5 4

1

3 4

2

4

4

2 3

2

3

2

3

4

3

4

4

2

4

2

4

4

5

4

3

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

5

4

1

4

5 4 1

2

S

4

2

3

1

4

2 2 1 3 4

1

4 5 4

3

4

J

5

2

1

2

3

5

3

3

4

2

2

2

3

3

5

4

2

3

4

3

1

1

1

1

1

5

4

3

1

4 5 1

3

4

3

2

2

1

3

2 2 1 2 " 2

J

4 4 3

4

3

2

2

1

2

1

3

1

3

3

4

2 4 5

4

3

5

3

2

I

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

5

4

4

4

5 5 1

4

5

5

2

2

1

5

2 4 1 3 5

b

5 5 4

4

5

2

3

1

1

1

5 . 6 2 5 0 6 . 4 3 7 5 S . S 6 2 5 S . 4 3 7 5 5 . 0 6 2 5 5 . 4 3 7 5 5 . 8 1 2 5 4 . 9 3 7 5 5 . 1 2 5 0 7 . 2 5 0 0 5 . S I 2 5 5 . 5 6 2 5 S . 1 2 S 0 4 . 9 3 7 5 4 . 7 5 0 0 5 . 3 1 2 5 5 . 6 8 7 5 5 . 9 3 7 5 5 . 9 3 7 5 5 . 7 5 0 0 5 . S 6 2 S 5 . 6 8 7 5 5 . 5 0 0 0 6 . 0 0 0 0 6 . 0 6 2 5 6 . 4 3 7 5 6 . 3 1 2 5 5 . 3 1 2 5 5 . 1 2 5 0 5 . 4 3 7 5 5 . 6 8 7 5 5 . 2 5 0 0 4 . 3 7 5 C 5 . 5 0 0 0 5 . 1 2 5 0 5 . 3 7 5 0 5 . 5 C 0 C 6 . 7 5 0 0 6 . 0 0 3 0 5 . 8 7 5 0 4 . 7 5 0 0 5 . 3 1 2 5 6 . 3 1 2 5 6 . 2 5 3 0 6 . 3 7 5 0 5 . 6 8 7 S 4 . 9 3 7 5 o . 4 3 7 S 5 . 3 1 2 5 5 . 3 1 2 S 5 . 1 2 S I

2

3 2 2

2

2 2 1

2

3

2

2

2

1

1

2

2

2

2

Z

2

2

2

3

3

3 3 2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2 2 3 3 2

1

2 3 3

3

2

1

3

2

2

2

3

3 3 3

3

3 3 3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

2

2

2

2

2 2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 2 " 2

" 2 2

2

2 2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 2 2

2

2 2 2 2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1 1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1 1 1 1

1

1

1

1

1

3

3

3

3

3

-

Ul


1 3 3

1 C 4

1 0 5

1 0 6

187 i c a 104 1 1 3

1 1 1

1 1 2

1 1 3

1 1 4

115 1 1 6

1 1 7

1 1 3

1 1 9

1 2 0

1 2 1

1 2 2

1 2 3

1 2 4

1 2 5

1 2 6

12V 1 2 8

1 2 9

1 3 3

1 3 1

1 3 2

1 3 3

1 3 4

1 3 5

1 3 6

137 1 3 3

1 3 9

1 4 :

1 4 1

1 4 2

1 4 3

1 4 4

1 4 5

1 4 6 "147

1 4 3

1 4 9

1 5 3

1 5 1

1 5 2

1 5 3

1 0 6

1 0 7

1 0 8

1 C 9

l i e 1 1 1

1 1 2

1 1 3 1 1 1 4

U S

1 1 6

1 1 7

l i s 1 1 9

1 2 0

1 2 1

1 2 2

1 2 3

1 2 4

1 2 5

1 2 6

1 2 7

1 2 8

1 2 9

13 r . 1 3 1

1 3 2

1 3 3

1 3 4

1 3 5

1 3 6

1 3 7

1 3 8

1 3 9

1 4 i ' 141 1 4 2 1 4 3

1 4 4

1 4 5

14b 1 4 7 f 4 3 —

1 4 9 1 5 1 5 1

1 1 2

1 5 >

1 5 4

I b S

I S t

5

5

5

S

5 5

5

S

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5 5

5

5

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

L 4 4

4

4

4 L ~4

4 I 4

4

4

4 4~

4

3 -a

3

1 3 3

t 3

1

2

2

2

2 2

2

2

2

2

2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

t 2

" 2

~ ? ~

2

f 1 2

2 a

2 •3

?

2

2

2

2

2

2 2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 2

2

2

2

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 2

" 2 2 a~ 2

2 " ?

2

•> Z

1

2

2 2

6

3

2

2

6

2

2

2

2

2

3

1

2

2

£

2

3

6

6

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

2

2

2

6

2

2

6

6

2 2

« 2

2

~ 3 ~

2 2 2

1 •a

P

2

1

4

6

5

6

5 4

6

6

5

4

4

5

2

4

5

6

a 6

6

6

6

2

6

5

6

5

5

2

6

5

4

2

2

4

6

a 6 6 4 6

b

a 4 b a 4 -i

U

5

6

4

1

1

1

1

1 3

1

3

3

3

1

1

1

1

1

3

3

1

1

3

1 3

3

3

1

1

1

1

3

3

1 3

1

1

3

I ~3~

?

j

3

J

3 " 1

3

r 9

3

1

-1

1

2

3

3

3

4

2

3

4

5

3

2 3

3

4

3

5

4

3

3

3

4

3

3

3

I

3

5

4

3

3

4

2

4

5

1

2

3

o

5

4

•5

~ 2 ?

3

4

3

?

3

5

a a 7

7

1

a a 3

7

a 6

6

a l

3

a s 9

7

7

9

A

6

a l

5

5

a l

3

4

5 o

6

3

5 b 6

8

3

4

4

u

ti 7

7

1

c

2

5

3

S

6

9

4

a 7

6

7

7

6

a a 5

S

a 8

a a 6

6

6

1 '

3

5

a l

5

7

5

1 " -

a 2

5

7

7

7

a Q

7

b

9

a n E

1 '

2

6

9

6

2

3

8

S

5

9

7 1<"

9

7

8

9

9

9

I f

1 -

9

5

7

5

n 4

5

l i -

2

9

t 9

7

5

2

5 2 ~ 5

1 '

5

6

1 9 3

0

7

7

1

1 1

3

6

6

5

S

9

8

5

6

5

7 1

7

S

9

1 3

6 3

8 3

a 6

5

a e a 5

7

2

4

4

6

7

4

1

9 3 ~ 7

7

a a 7

T 3 a 7

7

^ 6

1

9

6

3

6

3

9

8

5

5

9

4

3

6

3

3

4

2

5

a 3

a 6

a a 3

5

5

b

4

5

4

5

7

4

4

5

7

3

2

b

3 4

s 7 4

a 9

3

7 b

4

6

2

5

3

1

3

4

3

4

5

1

b

6

3

9

5

4

4

3

7

7

3

S

3

4

6

1

6

4

5

3

2

6

I C

3 3 2

4

3

3 a

" 5

3

S

4

fc 3

7

3

4

4

9

5

1

5

a 3

6

7

4

3

d

4

3

9

5

a 9

5

9

4

4

8

2

3

5

9

1

4

4

4

a 3

!-• 5 3 a 4

6

7

4 7 b 5 4

7

6

5

4

9

3

5

6

6

6

4

5

7

4

3

7

5

B

5

7

6

5

a 6

4

9

6

6

4

6

4

6

6

9

8

S

6

a a i

e 6 Q

7

b

4

1

7

5

4

4

2

3

1 H

4

7

3

7

5

2

a 7

4

7

7 1

5

7

2

7

5

5

9

5

a 6

4

3

b

a 5

3

S

8

5

5

3

3

1

5 3 e 7

a 5

1 '

3

5 4 5

3

3

2

1 7

1

6

5

5

4

6

6

6 5 2

4

3

3

4

2

6

2

5

8

2

3

6

S

4

6

8

5

5

7

S

3

4

7

5

I

5 3 2

7

4

b

2

5

5 3 4

9

2

2

3 3

8

5

b

7

6

6

6

6 7 9

7

6

7

5

7

4

8

8

8

b

9

6

7

7

6

5

6

5

3

6

a 6

a 3

l i .

6 7 6

6

a b

8

6

6 " 6

7

6

a 5

1 7

2

6

7

5

1

6

7

3 6

1 0

4

6

8

7

9

4

8

9

9

7

9

7

7

7

6

7

6

1 0

3

4

7

6

8

6

I C

8 3

6

4

a 7

9 7 9 a s 3

1 '

9

1

a

s 6

6

4

4

7

9

5 5 4

5

3

5

6

3

5

3

9

2

6

6

5

5

1 0

6

3

5

S

3

4

5

5

7

a i

l 6 S

6

3

6

3

" 5 ~ 1 5 3

B

8

8

1 9

1

S

4

6

4

2

3

3 4 4

4

3

9

2

3

2

4

4

5

3

2

5

5

7

6

5

4

2

1

4

S

6

1

3

a 4 8 3 2 3

3

a ~ i " l 3 3

4

9

3

1 ' 5 ~

6

6

4

4

4

5

4

6 4 3

7

7

3

5

3

a 4

2

5

3

5

7

5

3

5

3

6

2

a 5

4

6

3

4

ir> 6 3 3 3 3

5

a " 7

6 5 4

3

2

3

b " a "

4

4 4 4

1 0

5

5

8 4 5

7

6

5

5

3

8

2

1

3

3

2

5

5

3

S

6

5

2

3

4

4

6

T

7

4

5 7 6

IC 5

6

1 5 4

_ 2 6

a 2

3

1 4

1

1 2 1

3

1

4

1 1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

5

3

1

3

1

3

4

2

1

3

3

4

1

1

1

2 3 1 2 1

1

3 2" I 3 1

4

4

2

5 5

1

3 1 2

1

4

4

1 1 1

4

3

3

1

1

4

1

1

1

1

4

3

1

4

1

4

2

1

5 3

2

2

3

3

1

1 1 1 5 1

1

1 2 " 2 V 4

5

2

1

5 5

1

2 1 2

1

5

4

2 2 1

5

3

4

1

I

4

1

1

I

1

5

3

1

4

1

4

2

1

5

3

2 3

4

4

1

3 1 1 3 3

1

3 "2 4

~ 3 ~ 5

5

7

1

5 4

1

4

4

3

4

2

2 3 3

5

3

4

1

4

4

1

1

I

1

4

3

1

4

5

4

2

3

b

3

2

S

4

4

1

1 1 1 4 3

1

3 3 4

~ 2 ~ 4

4

3

4

5 5

1

3 ~ 1

2

3

4

5

1 2 1

S

2

1

2

1

4

1

1

1

1

5

3

1

4

1

3

2

2

5

3

2

4

4

2

3

3 1 1 4 3

1

3 2 4

" 3 3

5

3

S

5 5

1

1 2~ 2

3

1

3

1 2 1

1

t 2

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

3

1

4

1

3

4

3

b

3 3 4

3

5

1

1 1 1 5 4

1

3 4 3 3 4

4

3

4

5 5

1

2 1 1

5

2

5

1 1 1

5

3

3

4

1

4

1

1

1

1

S

3

1

5

1

4

5

2

b

3 4 S

5

5

2

4

1

b

4

1

2 4

3 3 5

4

2

5

5 5

4 . 1 2 5 0 5 . 6 8 7 5 5 . 5 6 2 5 5 . 4 3 7 5 4 . 0 6 2 S 5 . 4 3 7 5 6 . 1 2 5 0 S . 2 5 C 0 5 . I 2 S C 5 . 9 3 7 5 S . 7 5 0 0 4 . 4 3 7 5 6 . 4 3 7 5 4 . 8 7 5 0 4 . 7 5 0 0 6 . 5 0 0 C 4 . 8 7 5 0 5 . 9 3 7 5 6 . 8 1 2 5 4 . 8 7 5 0 6 . 6 8 7 5 5 . 6 2 5 0 S . 3 7 5 C 6 . 0 0 0 0 5 . 5 6 2 5 4 . 8 1 2 5 5 . 2 S C 0 5 . 5 6 2 5 3 . 6 8 7 5 5 . 1 2 5 0 5 . 0 6 2 5 5 . 5 0 0 0 6 . 3 7 5 0 5 . 1 8 7 5 4 . 8 7 5 0 5 . 3 1 2 5 4 . 4 3 7 5 " S .SO' -O S . 9 3 7 S 5 . 0 3 0 0

S . 6 2 5 r 5 . 3 1 2 5 s i s o c o 4 . 6 3 7 5 5 . 5 8 7 5 4 . 7 5 C 0 6 . 3 1 2 5 5 . 6 2 5 1 . 5 . T " 0 C

4 . 3 1 2 5 7 . 2 C " -

1

2 2 2

1

2 3 2 2 2

2

1

3

1

1

3

1

2

3

1

3

2

2

3

2

1

2

2

1

2 2 2

3

2

1

2 I " 2

2

2

2

2 2 1 2 1

3

2

2

1 3

2

2 " 2

2

2

2 2 2 2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3 3 3

3

3

3

3 3 3

3

3

3

3 3 3 3 1

1

1

1

1 1

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1 1

1

1

1

1

1

H CTi


S »-E M

1 5 4

1 5 5

1 5 6

1 5 7

l i s 1 5 9

1 6 3

1 6 1

1 6 2

1 6 3

1 6 4

1 6 5

1 6 6

1 6 7

1 5 8

1 6 9

1 7 0

1 7 1

1 7 2

1 7 3

1 7 4

1 7 5

1 7 a

1 7 7

1 7 8

1 7 9

1 8 9

1 8 1

1 8 2

1 8 3

1 8 4

1 S 5

1 8 6

1 8 7

lsa 1 9 9

1 9 3

1 9 1

1 9 2

1 9 3

144 1 9 5

1 9 b

1 9 7

1 9 a

1 9 9

264 2 3 1

2" 2 2 C 3

2 5 4 "

1 5 7 1 1 5 8 I 1 5 9

1 6 0 1 1 6 1 1 1 6 2

1 6 3

1 6 4

1 6 S

1 6 6

1 6 7

1 6 8

1 7 0

1 7 1

1 7 2

1 7 3

1 7 4

1 7 5

1 7 6

1 7 7

1 7 8

1 7 9

1 8 C

i a i 1 8 2

1 8 3

1 8 4

1 8 5

1 8 6

1 3 7

taa 1 B 9

I 9 C

1 9 1

1 9 2

1 ° 3

1 9 4

1 9 5

1 9 6

1 9 7

1 9 8

1 9 9

" 2 " > 2 C 1

2 '2 y 3 2' 4 2 - 5

~ 2 i a 2 7 2 3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

t 2 2

2

1 2 2

2 2

1 2 2 2

2 2 o

2

2

1 2

2 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 2 " 2

?

2 2

2

2

2

2

2

?

2

2

2 9

2

2

?

2

1

?

2 o

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 2 2

2

2 " 2

2

2

2

2 2

2

2

2

2

2 p

2

1

2 2

2 3

2

2

2

3

2

3

3

1

3

1

2

2

6

6

2

2

3

2

2

2

3

2

3

3

3

2

2

2

2 2 2

?

2 3

2

2

2

2

2

2

?

2

1

2

2

2

1

3

2

" b

2

2

2

2

6

6

4

4

6

2

6

4

2

5

a b

b

6

6

a 5

4

6

5

4

5

4

6

b 6 5

2

5 6 6

4

6

6

4

4

•>

6

2

a" a b 3

2

b

5

2

b

5

6

3

3

1

3

3

1

3

3

3

1

1

1

3

1

3

3

3

1

1

1

3

1

3

3

3

3

3

3

1

3

1 3

3

3

3

1

1

3

3

J

1

1

3

3

3

3

1

1

3

3

3

2

2

3

3

3

1

3

4

5

3

3

3

4

2

4

S

3

4

3

2

1

2

4

2

2

3

5

3

2

2

2

2

4

2

2

4

5

4

3

3

2 •a

2

3

3 • »

2

4

a 3

2

2

3

I C

a I C

s 7

3

a a 7

7

2

6

5

4

S

I C

7

e 1 0

e 6

1"< 3

6

6

e 4

1

a 8

4

5

b

4

a 6

5

a 8

a a

I -

7

B

5 6

3 ~

S

6

7

7

1 0

8

I C

6

1 0

6

I C

6

a 7

7

S

7

6

6

5

7

a 7

a 7

7

5

7

7

7

9

1

7

8

8

5

5

5

a 7

a 6

3

7

1

a e 3

7

•5

4

6

5

S

1 0

1

5

5

3

4

a 3

I C

7

7

a a 7

9

1

I C

9

9

a 4

I C

8

6

9

9

5

4

K

a a a 3 Q

a 9

a 1 *

5 a a

1

f

1

3

8

7 a 9

5

4

8

1

9

6

7

6

q

I C

6

9

9

a 7

a 5

l ^

6

6

2

1 0

4

5

9

5

e 5

6

4

3

6

6

5

3

5

9

7

3

1

5

3

9

1

3

3

6

7

3 "

3

7

6

2

9

1 0

8

5

8

4

6

1 1 -

6

7

2

s 3

4

6

1 0

4

a 7

6

3

i r 7

7

3

5

1 0

4

5

a 5

4

5

5

Q

6

5

1

S

3

5

3

7

3

5

a a 2

a

1

3

1

3

1

7

2

5

6

3

3

2

2

5

3

2

2

1

2

6

3

4

4

2

2

I f

3

4

5

7

3

1

2

2

3

2

4

5

3

1

3

3

2

5

1

3

b 3

3

6

6

3

a s a 5

2

4

7

9

a 9

1

0

7

6

6

7

9

a 3

6

5

1 3

9

3

3

a s 4

a 7

a 5

s a 5

7

4

a a 5

4

1

9

5

7

7

2

4

7

4

6

4

8

2

7

3

7

7

S

5

8

a 6

5

5

7

a 7

4

1

s s 5

a 6

5

7

6

1

5

3

7

7

6

6

5

a 5

1

6

3

4

I C

3

3

2

7

a 5

5

7

7

9

1

2

5

7

7 a 3

6

5

7

7

5

4

7

1 0

3

9

9

9

6

1

3

3

4

8

1 3

4

4

6

7

6

1

4

" s -

7

4

3

- 1

4

3

1

4

S

5

6

7

4

1

a 3

1

1

2

4

a 5 5 6

2

6

I

6

6

2

4

4

3

6

2

6

4

3

2

3

4

6

1 0

4

2

3

3

4

a 3

6

5

3

4

S

4

2

2

a 1

a 4

7

4

i t

4

9

1 0

I C

9

s I

7 3 6

9

5

8

5

6

8

9

1 0

8

3

1

3

S

6

8

8

7

3

6

7

6

8

6

6

9

3

6

5

6

9

6

7

5

9

6

9

a 7

8

7

3

2

5

i r 6

9

6

2

4 7 4

7

5

1 3

6

4

5

6

1

a s

I C

5

5

1 :

7

7

4

2

5

1

9

a 7

9

I C

9

4

7

7

I C

3

7

5

9

2

7

3

3

9

6

7

8

5

a a 9

7

7

3 4 7

7

6

1

4

a 5

4

4

9

9

4

6

5

7

8

5

6

a 1 0

4

5

5

7

4

6

7

4

6

6

1

7

1

5

1 '

3

1

3

5

3

4

9

5

2

2

6

3

6

9

3 6 5

4

5

1

6

3

4

3

3

9

4

1

7

3

1

3

6

5

2

6

7

4

5

2

4

6

8

7

4

5

9

3

7

4

1

9

5

3

3

2

a 2

2

4

2

1 3

3

6

B

3 5 4

4

5

2

6

3

4

4

9

a 5

2

7

3

1

8

5

4

3

a 2

2

6

4

5

3

2

5

4

b

H

b

3

6

1 -7

I

3

a a 4

3

8

5

2

3

1

4 7 5 3 5

7

7

I

5

4

S

2

7

2

6

7

3

8

1

2

7

7

2

5

4

1

6

6

3

2

5

6

3

4

1

5

4

5

1

7

1

7

4

5

6

7

5

3

3

5

4

2 3 1 1 1

3

2

1

1

4

2

2

2

1

3

2

3

1

1

1

3

2

1

3

1

1

5

2

2

1

1

2

3

1

1

1

4

1

2

4

1

4

1

1

1

1

5

3

1

4

4

2 1 1 3 3

1

3

5

3

1

2

1

1

1

5

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

3

5 3 2

1 1

1

3

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

4

3

1

1

1

5

2

5

4

4

3 I 2 3 4

2

2

S

3

1

2

I

1

4

4

3

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

I

3

4 1 2

1

3

2

3

2

2

1

1

2

I

4

3

4

? 2

2

2

4

1

1

3

4

4 5 1 3 4

3

3

5

1

1

2

1

3

2

3

2

3

1

1 1 1

1

1

2

1

3

4 2 2

1

* 3

3

3

3

2

S

2

4

3

1

3

2

1

2

3

4

2

3

5

4

4 3

3

4

3

3

S

1

1

2

1

1

2

3

I

3

1

1 1 1

1

1

3

I

2

5 1 2

I

2

2

3

1

1

1

2

1

2

4

2

b

P

1

1

1

S

2

S

5

2

4 2 2 3 3

4

4

1

1

4

1

2

1

1

3

4

2

3

1 1 1

2

1

2

1

1

4 3 3

1

1

1

3

2

1

1

4

2

I

2

1

3

1

1

1

1

5

2 1 5

S

4 4 2 2 4

1

4

5

2

4

4

1

5

1

3

1

2

1

1 1 1

1

1

2

1

1

4 1 2

1

1

3

3

1

I

1

2

3

2

4

3

2

?

1

1

1

4 . 8 7 5 0 4 . 6 2 5 0 6 . 5 0 0 0 5 . 5 6 2 5 5 . 6 8 7 5 5 . 5 6 2 5 6 . 0 0 0 0 4 . 7 5 0 0 6 . 3 7 5 0 5 . 8 7 5 0 6 . 1 8 7 5 6 . 2 5 0 0 4 . 3 1 2 5 6 . 1 8 7 5 5 . 2 5 0 3 4 . 9 3 7 5 5 . 3 1 2 5 6 . 2 5 0 0 6 . 6 8 7 5

6 . 3 7 5 0 4 . 8 7 5 0 6 . 3 1 2 5 5 . 0 0 0 0 5 . 5 6 2 5 5 . 7 S 0 0 5 . 8 7 5 0 5 . S 0 C 0 5 . 4 3 7 5 6 . S 7 S C 3 . 6 8 7 5 5 . 1 2 5 0 6 . C " 0 0 s.sooo 5 . 1 2 5 0 5 . 3 7 5 0 5 . 1 8 7 5 6 . 1 8 7 5 6 . 0 0 0 C 5 . 3 1 2 5 5 . 0 6 2 5 5 . 6 2 5 0 4 . 8 7 S C 5 . 1 2 5 ? S . 6 2 5 C 6 . 6 8 7 5 4 . 3 1 2 5 4 . 6 2 5 v 6 . C C C 3 5 . 1 8 7 S 4.5<"C ) 6 . 5 6 2 5

1

1 3 2

2

2 3

3

2

3

3

1

3

2

1

2

3

3

3

1

3

2

2 2 2

2

2

3

1

2

3 2 2

2

2

3

3

2

2

2

1

2

2

3

1

1

3

2

1

3

1

1 1 1

1

1 1

~-1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

t 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

1 c 3 V I 3

3


6 R T W E N H M m M m M M P

TJ Y O S E A L S S S S S S S E R » I P U E W T G 1 E 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

M S 2 * 6 2 # 7 M O

I I I a i t 211 2 1 2 * 1 3 2 1 4

2IS 2 1 6

217 2 1 S 2 1 9 2 2 0

221 2 2 2

223

2 0 9 2 1 0

i l l 2 1 2

213 2 1 4

21S 2 1 6 2 1 7 2 1 0

219 2 2 0

221 2 2 2

223 2 2 4

225 2 2 6

227

1 1 1 1

1 1

1 1 1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1

1 1 1 1

1 1

1 1 1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1 1 1

1

2 2 2 1

2 1

2 2 2 2

2 2 2 2

2 2 2 2

2

2 2 2 2

2 1

2 2 2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2 2 2

3 2 2 3

2 3 6 1 2 2

3 2

2 2 2 2 3 2

2

4 6 6 6

5 5

6 4 6 6

2 5 6 6 5 6 5 5 S

3 3 3 1

3 1 1 3 3 3

1 1 3 3

3 3 1 3

3

3 4 2 2

3 3

3 3 2 4

2 2

3 5 3 4

3 4 5

6 6 6 4 6 7 S

a 7 3

9 3 8 3 6 7 6 9 7

8 7 5 6 5 7 6 9 7 7

7 5 9 7

7 8 6 9

7

1 0 1 0

7

a 5 9 4 8 3 6

S 5 3 8

a 9 6

1 0 7

7 7 S 3 5 a 6 6 7 7

a 5 7 5 6 6 8

1 0 1 6

3 3 7 8

7 9 S 7 7 3

a 4 6 3 5 7 4

1 0 4

2 4 5 2 4 1 8 2 6 4 4 6 8 3 3 2 5 7 8

1 0 8 6 3 6 9 7 a 5 4

9 4

. 4 4 8 a 6 9 8

9 8 7 4 5 5 6 3 S 6 6

• 4 4 7 6 4 7

0

2 3 7 9 5 3 S 3 5 3

4 5 4 a. 8 4 4 9 8

2 3 4

* 4 3 3 2 7 2 8 4 6 3 4 a s 3

7

9 7 7 5

7 7 7 8 4 8

4 7 3 7 S 7 5 9 4

9 8 6 6 6 5 6 9 4 4

10 4 3 4 8 4 6 8 8

S 9 4 3 4 9 4 7 7 6

1 4 8 4 3 6 5 9 2

6 2 4 6 S 7 5 5 3 3

1 7 3 4 3 7 4 3 3

5 3 6 3 6 3 6 4 6 3

id 5 9 3 S 6 5 8 3

2 3 5 3 4 7 6 3 5 7

2 7 8 5 4 4 2 3 5

1 3 1 2 2 1 3 2 3 1

1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1

4 2 1 3 2 1 2 1 1 1

2 2 1 2 2 3 1 I 2

3 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 1

s 1 1 3 3 4 2 4 2

3 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 3 1

2 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 2

3 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1

4 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 2

1 3 1 3 2 1 1 2 3 1

3 3 4 1 2 4 1 1 1

1 3 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

3 4 4 3 2 3 1 2 1

5 . 9 3 7 5 5 . 6 0 7 5 5 . 6 0 7 5 4 . 0 1 2 5 5 *2500 6 . 1 8 7 5 5 * 5 6 2 5 5*7500 5 . 5 0 0 0 4 . 7 5 0 0 6 * 6 2 5 0 5 * 0 6 2 5 5 * 8 1 2 5 4 * 6 8 7 5 5 *6250 6 . 1 8 7 5 5 *0625 7 . 6 0 7 5 6 . 1 0 7 5

2 2 2 1 2 3 2 2 2 1 3 2 2 1 2 3 2 3 3

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

T 3

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 Borde lon B l a l o c k

Major Field: Management

Title of Thesis: The Use o f K i n e s i c s i n E s t a b l i s h i n g and D e t e r m i n i n g Meaning i n S u p e r i o r - S u b o r d i n a t e Communications

Approvejj

Date of Examination:

October 2 5 , 1973

EXAMINING COMMITTEE:

£^*^ &/yi"£

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

Documents

The Use of Kinesics in Establishing and Determining