Você está na página 1de 7

A LINGUAGEM DO CORPO COMUNICAO NO VERBAL

http://www.mh.etc.br/blog/relacoes-humanas/a-linguagem-do-corpo-comunicacao-nao-verbal Profa. Maria Luiza Marins Holtz Os cientistas no-verbalistas, so estudantes do comportamento humano, que se dedicam a estudar as atuaes no-verbais e os sinais dos seres humanos, atravs dos gestos. Charles Darwin publicou em 1872 um trabalho de enorme influncia, A expresso das emoes no homem e nos animais. Porm, somente em 1960, estes estudos foram valorizados e confirmados atravs de pesquisas, da sua grande influncia. A partir de 1970, com a publicao do livro de Julius Fast, sobre a linguagem do corpo, o pblico comeou a tomar conhecimento do assunto. Ainda hoje, a grande maioria das pessoas ignora a existncia da linguagem do corpo. Os resultados das pesquisas mostram que o impacto total de uma mensagem : 7% Verbal (apenas palavras escritas) 38% Vocal (incluindo tom de voz, inflexes e outros sons) 55% No-Verbal.(gestos e movimentos)

Numa conversa frente a frente, o impacto : 35% Verbal (palavras) 65% No-Verbal (gestos e movimentos)

A maioria dos pesquisadores concorda que: O canal verbal usado para transmitir informaes O canal no-verbal usado para negociar atitudes entre as pessoas e como substituto de mensagem verbal. Independente da cultura, palavras gestos e movimentos acontecem juntos.

O ser humano raramente est ciente de suas atitudes movimentos e gestos, os quais podem contar uma histria, enquanto sua voz est contando outra. ATENO:- Quando a linguagem do corpo no est de acordo com a linguagem verbal, temos a percepo da mentira. As mulheres so, geralmente, mais perceptivas que os homens. Elas tem habilidade inata para captar e decifrar sinais no-verbais, alm de possuirem olho acurado para perceber detalhes e sentir mentiras.

PROFESSOR ALBERT MEHRABIAN'S COMMUNICATIONS MODEL


Professor Albert Mehrabian has pioneered the understanding of communications since the 1960s. He received his PhD from Clark University and in l964 commenced an extended career of teaching and research at the University of California, Los Angeles. He currently devotes his time to research, writing, and consulting as Professor Emeritus of Psychology, UCLA. Mehrabian's work featured strongly (mid-late 1900s) in establishing early understanding of body language and non-verbal communications. Aside from his many and various other fascinating works, Mehrabian's research provided the basis for the widely quoted and often much over-simplified statistic for the effectiveness of spoken communications.

Here is a more precise (and necessarily detailed) representation of Mehrabian's findings than is typically cited or applied: 7% of message pertaining to feelings and attitudes is in the words that are spoken. 38% of message pertaining to feelings and attitudes is paralinguistic (the way that the words are said). 55% of message pertaining to feelings and attitudes is in facial expression. The following is a more common and over-simplified interpretation of Mehrabian's findings, which is quoted and applied by many people to cover all communications - often without reference to Mehrabian, although Mehrabian's work is the derivation. It is understandable that many people prefer short concise statements, however if you must use the simplified form of the Mehrabian formula you must explain the context of Mehrabian's findings. As a minimum you must state that the formula applies to communications of feelings and attitudes. Here's the overly-simplistic interpretation. Where you see or use it, qualify it, in proper context. 7% of meaning in the words that are spoken. 38% of meaning is paralinguistic (the way that the words are said). 55% of meaning is in facial expression. Other important contextual and qualifying details are: Mehrabian did not intend the statistic to be used or applied freely to all communications and meaning. Mehrabian provides this useful explanatory note (from his own website www.kaaj.com/psych, retrieved 29 May 2009):

"...Inconsistent communications - the relative importance of verbal and nonverbal messages: My findings on this topic have received considerable attention in the literature and in the popular media. 'Silent Messages' [Mehrabian's key book] contains a detailed discussion of my findings on inconsistent messages of feelings and attitudes (and the relative importance of words vs. nonverbal cues) on pages 75 to 80. Total Liking = 7% Verbal Liking + 38% Vocal Liking + 55% Facial Liking Please note that this and other equations regarding relative importance of verbal and nonverbal messages were derived from experiments dealing with communications of feelings and attitudes (i.e., like-dislike). Unless a communicator is talking about their feelings or attitudes, these equations are not applicable. Also see references 286 and 305 in Silent Messages - these are the original sources of my findings..." (Albert Mehrabian, source www.kaaj.com/psych, retrieved 29 May 2009) The 'Mehrabian formula' (7%/38%/55%) was established in situations where there was incongruence between words and expression. That is, where the words did not match the facial expression: specifically in Mehrabian's research people tended to believe the expression they saw, not the words spoken.

tips on explaining context and application of mehrabian's formula

Notwithstanding all this background and qualification, Mehrabian's model has become one of the most widely referenced statistics in communications. You will continue to see it referenced, and you will probably use it yourself, not always in its purest form, and not always with reference to its originator. The essence of the model - even when used in overly simplistic form - is powerful and generally helpful, and certainly better than placing undue reliance on words alone for conveying (receiving and sending) communications, especially those which carry potentially emotional implications. So, subject to suitable qualification and explanation, Mehrabian's findings and the theory resulting from them, are particularly useful in explaining the importance of understanding meaning in communications as distinct from words alone. Here are a couple of simple ways to begin to qualify the interpretation and application of the formula: You must first clarify that the Mehrabian formula often quoted out of context and too generally. For example, the spoken instruction, "Everyone evacuate the building because there is a fire," carries 100% of the meaning in the words: i.e., 1) there is a fire, and 2) get the hell out of here. The tone of voice and body language might additionally indicate how far ahead of you the person issuing the instruction is likely to be, but aside from that, you'd get the message fully through the words without having to be an expert in body language to unravel the meaning. Mehrabian's theory and its implications are also not especially applicable in strongly autocratic environments, such as the armed forces. If the Regimental Sergeant Major tells a soldier to jump, the soldier is best advised to consider how high, rather than whether the RSM is instead maybe inviting a debate about the merit of the instruction, or the feelings of the soldier in response to it. The value of Mehrabian's theory relates to communications where emotional content is significant, and the need to understand it properly is great. This is often applicable in management and business, where motivation and attitude have a crucial effect on outcomes.

using mehrabian's theory and statistics Understanding the difference between words and meaning is a vital capability for effective communications and relationships. For example, as John Ruskin so elegantly put it: "The essence of lying is in deception, not in words." (John Ruskin, 1819-1900, English art critic and social commentator) The Mehrabian model is particularly useful in illustrating the importance of factors other than words alone when trying to convey meaning (as the speaker) or interpret meaning (as the listener), but care needs to be taken in considering the context of the communication: Style, expression, tone, facial expression and body language in Mehrabian's experiments did indeed account for 93% of the meaning inferred by the people in the study, but this is not a general rule that you can transfer to any given communications situation. The understanding of how to convey (when speaking) and interpret (when listening) meaning will always be essential for effective communication, management and relationships. But using the Mehrabian percentages is not a reliable model to overlay onto all communications scenarios.

For example, Mehrabian's research involved spoken communications. Transferring the model indiscriminately to written or telephone communications is not reliable, except to say that without the opportunity for visual signs, there is likely to be even more potential for confused understanding and inferred meanings. A fairer way of transferring Mehrabian's findings to modern written (memo, email etc) and telephone communications is simply to say that greater care needs to be taken in the use of language and expression, because the visual channel does not exist. It is not correct to assume that by removing a particular channel, then so the effectiveness of the communication reduces in line with the classically represented Mehrabian percentages. It ain't that simple. It is fair to say that email and other written communications are limited to conveying words alone. The way that the words are said cannot be conveyed, and facial expression cannot be conveyed at all. Mehrabian provides us with a reference point as to why written communications, particularly quick, reduced emails and memos, so often result in confusion or cause offence, but his model should not be taken to mean that all written communications are inevitably weak or flawed. If this were the case there would be no need for written contracts, deeds, legal documents, public notices, and all other manner of written communications, which, given their purpose, when well-written convey 100% of the intended meaning perfectly adequately using written words alone. When we enter a public bar and the sign on the wall says 'NO SMOKING' we know full well what it means. We may not know how the bar owner feels about having to bar his customers from smoking, but in terms of the purpose of the communication, and the meaning necessary to be conveyed, the written word alone is fine for this situation, regardless of Mehrabian's model. A visitor to this page also made the fascinating observation that modern text-based communications allow inclusion of simple iconic facial expressions (smileys, and other emotional symbols), which further proves the significance of, and natural demand for, non-verbal signs within communications. The point also highlights the difficulty in attempting to apply the Mehrabian principle too generally, given that now electronic communications increasingly allow a mixture of communication methods - and many far more sophisticated than smileys - within a single message. (Thanks M Ellwood, Apr 2007) Telephone communication can convey words and the way that the words are said, but no facial expression. Mehrabian's model provides clues as to why telephone communications are less successful and reliable for sensitive or emotional issues, but the model cannot be extended to say, for instance, that without the visual channel the meaning can only be a maximum of 45% complete. Nor does Mehrabian's model say that telephone communications are no good for, say, phoning home to ask for the address of the local poodle parlour. For this type of communication, and for this intended exchange of information and meaning, the telephone is perfectly adequate, and actually a whole lot more cost-effective and efficient than driving all the way home just to ask the question and receive the answer face to face. The Mehrabian statistics certainly also suggest that typical video-conferencing communications are not so reliable as genuine face-to-face communications, because of the intermittent transfer of images, which is of course incapable of conveying accurate non-verbal signals, but again it is not sensible to transfer directly the percentage effectiveness shown and so often quoted from the model. Video conferencing offers a massive benefits for modern organisation development and cooperation. Be aware of its vulnerabilities, and use it wherever it's appropriate, because it's a great system. Mehrabian's model is a seminal piece of work, and it's amazingly helpful in explaining the importance of careful and appropriate communications. Like any model, care must be exercised when transferring it to different situations. Use the basic findings and principles as a guide and an example - don't transfer the percentages, or make direct assumptions about degrees of effectiveness, to each and every communication situation.

I am grateful for the guidance of B Taylor and C Edwards in progressively revising this guide to Mehrabian's communications theory. For more information about Dr Albert Mehrabian and his fascinating work see his website. Albert Mehrabian's key book is Silent Messages, which contains lots of information about non-verbal communications (body language). Mehrabian, A. (1981) Silent messages: Implicit communication of emotions and attitudes. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth (currently distributed by Albert Mehrabian, email: am@kaaj.com)

Mehrabian's communications model is frequently applied in an overly simplistic or indiscriminate manner. Please handle it with care and ensure it is used in proper context with suitable explanation.

93% DA COMUNICAO MESMO NO VERBAL?


Por Sergio Senna Pires em 5 dezembro 2011 | 10 comentrios Formato Documento Eletrnico (ABNT) PIRES, Sergio Fernandes Senna. 93% da comunicao mesmo no verbal?. Instituto Brasileiro de Linguagem Corporal. Disponvel em < http://linguagemcorporal.net.br/comunicacao-nao-verbal/93-comunicacao-nao-verbal/> . Acesso em 03 de maio de 2012. Formato Documento Eletrnico (APA) Pires, Sergio Fernandes Senna. (2012). 93% da comunicao mesmo no verbal?. Instituto Brasileiro de Linguagem Corporal. Recuperado em 03 de maio de 2012, de http://linguagemcorporal.net.br/comunicacao-nao-verbal/93comunicacao-nao-verbal/.

Voc j deve ter lido e ouvido que a comunicao no verbal responsvel por 93% do processo comunicativo. Quando comecei a me interessar pelo tema, essa foi uma das primeiras regras que aprendi. Li isso em muitos livros e ouvi de muitos especialistas. Essas pessoas afirmavam que estudos cientficos comprovavam essa porcentagem. No entanto, eu sempre fiquei incomodado com o dado por dois motivos: 1. Me parecia que se o significado das palavras representasse apenas 7% do que se desejava comunicar, era melhor nem utiliz-las. Para que empregar algo to ineficiente e desprezvel em relao ao todo? 2. Observei que a comunicao mudava muito de acordo com o contexto no qual ocorria (incluindo a comunicao no verbal). Em ambientes acolhedores, por exemplo, as palavras eram muito importantes e compreendidas com cuidado. Por outro lado, em ambientes hostis, as palavras eram escolhidas com cuidado e a quantidade de gestos que as pessoas faziam tambm diminuam se passavam atomar cuidado com o que diziam ou aumentavam se entravam em um modo persuasivo. Essa minha inquietao me levou origem da to falada regra 7-38-55, sobre a qual dedicarei esse artigo. Segundo essa regra, 7% da comunicao seria atribuda ao componente verbal (seu significado), 38% ao componente vocal (no caso especfico, o tom da voz) e 55% ao componente facial (expresso facial). Da que

somando 38+55 resulta a linguagem corporal mgica proposta de alguns que a comunicao no verbal responsvel por 93% de toda a comunicao. Nesse artigo, mostraremos a origem desse mito e faremos uma reflexo sobre a fragilidade dessa concluso. Como a regra 7-38-55 sobre comunicao no verbal foi elaborada? A regra 7-38-55 est baseada em dois estudos realizados por Albert Mehrabian (foto ao lado) em 1967: - Decoding of Inconsistent Communications (Decodificando Comunicaes Inconsistentes) e - Inference of Attitudes from Nonverbal Communication in Two Channels (Inferncia de Atitudes a partir da comunicao no verbal em dois canais) Vejamos o segundo estudo (mais robusto), que teve o objetivo de comparar a importncia relativa do significado da palavra, do tom de voz e da expresso facial, cujos resultados contm a concluso de Mehrabian sobre a prevalncia da expresso facial para a interpretao da mensagem. A metodologia desse estudo sobre comunicao no verbal A seguir apresento um resumo da metodologia de como se chegou concluso de que o significado das palavras importa em apenas 7% da comunicao: As vozes de trs mulheres foram gravadas dizendo a palavra talvez (maybe) com entonao que procurasse significar: 1. Que a pessoa talvez goste; 2. Que a pessoa no demonstra apreo ou averso (neutralidade); 3. Que a pessoa talvez no goste. As palavras foram gravadas duas vezes, pelas trs mulheres, perfazendo um total de 18 enunciaes da palavra talvez, com as entonaes acima descritas. Essas gravaes foram apresentadas a 17 ouvintes (todas tambm mulheres) que deveriam julgar, ao escutar cada palavra, se a comunicao era positiva, neutra ou negativa, dentro de uma escala apresentada no estudo. Fotografias de trs modelos foram tambm tiradas com expresses faciais que pudessem significar: 1. Que gostou de algo; 2. Que est neutra em relao a algo; 3. Que no gostou de algo. As vozes e fotografias foram emparelhadas de determinada forma (que no nos interessa no momento) descrita no estudo original, de maneira que as avaliadoras podiam ver uma foto com expresso facial positiva e escutar um talvez negativo, ou neutro etc. Feita a matemtica do resultado se chegou regra 7-38-55 para os componentes verbal, vocal e facial, respectivamente (concluso expressamente escrita pgina 252 do Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1967, vol. 31, N 3). Algumas limitaes e possibilidades desse estudo sobre comunicao no verbal

Quando esse estudo foi publicado sem que suas grandes limitaes fossem explicitadas, abriu-se caminho para um dos mitos mais conhecidos sobre a comunicao no verbal. Mito esse, estabelecido sem qualquer explicao plausvel sobre sua origem e repetido para milhares de pessoas que no tm, e possivelmente nunca tero, acesso aos estudos originais para verificarem a veracidade ou o exagero dessas afirmaes. Faa um teste! Se voc quiser saber se algum mesmo um especialista em comunicao no verbal pergunte como surgiu a regra 7-38-55 e quem foi o responsvel por ela! necessrio apenas um pouco de bom senso para ver que, no mnimo, essa regra muito exagerada. Alm disso, existem diversas limitaes para a aplicabilidade desses estudos na vida real. Limitaes essas que so largamente ignoradas, principalmente se a regra for aplicada a um contexto diverso daquele em que foi construda. Vejamos alguns outros motivos para colocarmos em questo esse tipo de linguagem corporal mgica na comunicao no verbal: - O estudo utilizou gravaes de voz feminina a partir de uma nica oportunidade. Seria esse um contexto natural? - Os estudos se referem percepo positiva versus negativa da mensagem. E as outras possibilidades? E os outros graus de atitude? E a dvida (que no neutralidade), por exemplo? - As vozes foram apenas femininas. Ser que o mesmo ocorrer se as vozes forem masculinas? E se os avaliadores fossem masculinos? Seria o resultado diferente? O estudo no aborda isso! - Os outros tipos de comunicao no verbal, por exemplo, postura corporal, posio relativa a outros objetos como mesas, obstculos etc como influenciariam a comunicao? Isso no foi tratado no estudo! Existem outros aspectos que podem ser levantados, mas os que indico acima so mais do que suficientes para colocar em questo a toda poderosa regra 7-38-55. Em outro artigo, trarei informaes de outros estudos a partir dos quais poderemos chegar a concluses diferentes. Por esse motivo, devemos avaliar as limitaes e possibilidades de qualquer estudo cientfico, pois somente seguro utilizar o conhecimento dentro desses limites. Devemos ser cautelosos com a generalizao apressada (ou mal intencionada). Se para voc, um estudo realizado da forma descrita, no qual 20 pessoas avaliaram mensagens produzidas por outras 6 suficiente para generalizar uma regra para qualquer tipo de comunicao, eu no vou critic-lo. Afinal, todos temos o direito de acreditar em algo, mesmo sem a mnima razo concreta para isso. No entanto, em minha opinio essa quantidade de sujeitos no suficiente para tal generalizao. Isso no suficiente! Alis, um absurdo! Que a comunicao no verbal importante, disso no h dvidas! No entanto, no seja enganado pelo canto da sereia.. A prxima vez que te contarem essa, pergunte se a pessoa sabe de onde surgiu isso. Caso ela no saiba, tome cuidado com o tipo de conhecimento que ela est te ensinando! No colabore para espalhar o mito de que 93% da comunicao no verbal e que isso tem suporte cientfico. Dedico esse artigo ao nosso amigo e colaborador Edinaldo Oliveira que sempre nos motiva pela sua curiosidade e pela sede em conhecer.

Você também pode gostar