How do you know if he loves you? Using body language to detect lying
How can reading body language and paralanguage alert you to whether or not he really loves you when he says he does? Remember that in nonverbal communication and deception detection, the timing is the “tell”. What does his body language look like just before he says, “I love you”? People feel and show what they are feeling before and as they are saying what they are feeling. The order of a honest person's message is feel, show, say. The primitive brain feels first without the words--just the pure emotion of love. Then the primitive brain, where emotions and body language are processed, shows with nonverbal cues that there is love present. Then the cognitive brain thinks of the words that say I love you. So just before he says I love you and/or as he says it, look for the cues. Is he making eye contact? Is his heart facing towards you? Does his face change with upward expressions before or as he says the words? Are his toes pointed towards your heart or towards the door? Listen to his voice. Does his tone and intonation reveal warmth and caring as he says the words. If all the nonverbal signs of love come before or during you are in luck. The man loves you. Or is the timing off? For example, he has a tight face with downward pulled muscles and clipped voice and he says "I love you," and then he smiles. If so, it is possible he might not be into you. Remember to look for the timing and duration of emotional gestures to be synchronous. If they are off the normal pace, delayed, stay longer than they would naturally, or stop suddenly, the man may be lying. OK guys, I know you may be reading this wondering, "Why did Patti make the guy the liar?" Simply because more women send me photos standing with their sweeties and ask me, “Is he in to me?” than men. A woman could give the same cues.
DISC Personality Style and Body Language
Getting What You Want from People.
How to Get Buy In, Follow Through and Enthusiastic Participation on Projects, Task and Goals.
By Patti Wood MA, CSP, Professional Speaker
Your boss walks into your cubical and says, “I need that project from you by 2:00,” turns around and walks out. How do you feel? Well if you’re a get it done kind of person, you might appreciate that he didn’t waste your time with niceties and was in and out. But if that is not your style you may get pretty mad. You’re really excited to tell your team you have a new project. It will require a lot of work and the deadline is almost impossible to meet without everyone putting in extra hours, but you're pumped. You go in smiling and read to rock. Speaking with an enthusiastic voice and lots of gestures and rah rah language you tell the team about the project. How do they respond? Well if they are fellow expressive types they might jump on the bandwagon with equal enthusiasm. However if they are get it right analyzers they are sitting there shaking their heads thinking of all the details that need to be taken care of, in other words all the mistakes that they will need to fix and how they will be spending every waking hour for the next three weeks. Different people need different delivery styles.
If you have an important idea to communicate to someone at work and you need other people's buy in, you have a task to assign to someone and you want to make sure they follow through, or you want to make sure you will get enthusiastic participation, what’s the best way to present your message? You need to consider the personality of the person you are going to talk to and form a message and delivery style that suits them. We often go in to persuade someone using the communication style that is comfortable for us. What we need to do is consider the personality type of the person we are speaking with! Below are the four basic personality types of the DISC personality inventory and their characteristics. Read what each one likes and prepare your message and delivery style to match your communication recipient's needs. Understand the underlying traits of the four main types, but know that most people are a combination.
The Amiable or Get Along. This type of person wants to be your friend. They respond to heavy use of the word "you" and the promise of an on-going relationship. They like warmhearted friendly conversations and a relaxed pace. Ask about their weekend and their kids before you ask for work from them. In fact, you should build relationship credits with them every week so when you really need them you have relationship credits to draw on. Also know a warm hello and a sincere thank you are as necessary as food and water to the Amiable. Amiable think carefully before taking any action and they don’t like change. You need to talk them through any new projects or changes in old routines to get them to buy in and follow through, otherwise they will keep doing it the old way or what they may consider the way that has “always worked before.” They need to feel a sense of security before moving forward. They best way to get work from an amiable is to become their friend. Make your body language warm, your voice soft and relaxed, and smile.
More on the other types this Sunday!
How to Get Buy In, Follow Through and Enthusiastic Participation on Projects, Task and Goals.
By Patti Wood MA, CSP, Professional Speaker
Your boss walks into your cubical and says, “I need that project from you by 2:00,” turns around and walks out. How do you feel? Well if you’re a get it done kind of person, you might appreciate that he didn’t waste your time with niceties and was in and out. But if that is not your style you may get pretty mad. You’re really excited to tell your team you have a new project. It will require a lot of work and the deadline is almost impossible to meet without everyone putting in extra hours, but you're pumped. You go in smiling and read to rock. Speaking with an enthusiastic voice and lots of gestures and rah rah language you tell the team about the project. How do they respond? Well if they are fellow expressive types they might jump on the bandwagon with equal enthusiasm. However if they are get it right analyzers they are sitting there shaking their heads thinking of all the details that need to be taken care of, in other words all the mistakes that they will need to fix and how they will be spending every waking hour for the next three weeks. Different people need different delivery styles.
If you have an important idea to communicate to someone at work and you need other people's buy in, you have a task to assign to someone and you want to make sure they follow through, or you want to make sure you will get enthusiastic participation, what’s the best way to present your message? You need to consider the personality of the person you are going to talk to and form a message and delivery style that suits them. We often go in to persuade someone using the communication style that is comfortable for us. What we need to do is consider the personality type of the person we are speaking with! Below are the four basic personality types of the DISC personality inventory and their characteristics. Read what each one likes and prepare your message and delivery style to match your communication recipient's needs. Understand the underlying traits of the four main types, but know that most people are a combination.
The Amiable or Get Along. This type of person wants to be your friend. They respond to heavy use of the word "you" and the promise of an on-going relationship. They like warmhearted friendly conversations and a relaxed pace. Ask about their weekend and their kids before you ask for work from them. In fact, you should build relationship credits with them every week so when you really need them you have relationship credits to draw on. Also know a warm hello and a sincere thank you are as necessary as food and water to the Amiable. Amiable think carefully before taking any action and they don’t like change. You need to talk them through any new projects or changes in old routines to get them to buy in and follow through, otherwise they will keep doing it the old way or what they may consider the way that has “always worked before.” They need to feel a sense of security before moving forward. They best way to get work from an amiable is to become their friend. Make your body language warm, your voice soft and relaxed, and smile.
More on the other types this Sunday!
What Can Your Voice Reveal About Your Personality?
What if you could go in for your first appointment with a doctor and know whether or not he or she had been sued for malpractice merely by listening to the tone of his or her voice? Would that seem magical? Well you can. Recent research that removed the meaning of the words from real surgeons' messages and played merely the tone of their voices to subjects found that the subjects where able to distinguish the doctors who had actually been sued for malpractice from the ones who had not. OK, the ones that had been sued may have sounded a bit like the grouch TV doctor House who seems to hate his patients, but the real discovery is that the difference in someone's tone of voice reveals so much about them. I was working with a client this week who was upset with a coworker for, "..making him wrong". I asked him to use my conflict management tool, the ERASER method (check out the full How To article on my website www.PattiWood.net under articles), to write a script to the coworker about his behavior. It turns out that the coworker said nothing in the word message about my client being wrong. My client felt he was being made wrong by the tone of voice his coworker was using. Here is a link to the research study on the doctors tone of voice revealing a history of malpractice. While you're there check out the site. It is one of my personal favorites. http://www.medscape.com/medline/abstract/12110787
The Effect of Attractiveness on Job Success
I have been reading a ton of research on how nonverbal communication effects or is effected by technologically based interactions. This is for a client that will video tape my presentation this afternoon. I have a link to a great study. http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/167/the_effects_of_physical_attractiveness_on_jobrelated_outcomes/index.html
The effects of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes is particularly interesting. I talk about the effect of attractiveness quite a bit. This article has a great review of the literature. I am interested in the research showing that, "What is beautiful is good."
"Substantial empirical evidence and three meta-analyses have firmly established the existence and validity of a "what-is- beautiful-is-good stereotype" (e.g., Dion, Berscheid, & Walster, 1972; Eagly et al, 1991; Feingold, 1992; Jackson et al., 1995). For example, meta-analyses by Eagly et al. (1991) and Feingold (1992) showed that attractiveness has (a) a strong effect on perceptions of social competence, social skills, and sexual warmth, (b) a moderate effect on perceptions of intellectual competence, potency, adjustment, dominance, and general mental health, and (c) a weak effect on perceptions of integrity and concern for others. In addition, sex-of-target differences were observed for the perceptions of sexual warmth and intellectual competence. More specifically, the effects of attractiveness on perceptions of sexual warmth were stronger for women than for men (Feingold, 1992). However, the effects of attractiveness on perceptions of intellectual competence were stronger for men than for women (Jackson et al., 1995).
Furthermore, more recent meta-analyses (Langlois et al., 2000) have shown that (a) following actual interaction with others, perceivers judge attractive individuals more positively (e.g., in terms of interpersonal competence, occupational competence, social appeal, adjustment) and treat them more favorably (e.g., visual/ social attention, positive interaction, reward, help/cooperation, acceptance) than less attractive individuals, and (b) attractive individuals experience more positive outcomes in life (e.g., occupational success, popularity, dating experience, sexual experience, physical health) than less attractive individuals."
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/16753/the_effects_of_physical_attractiveness_on_jobrelated_outcomes/index.html
The effects of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes
Posted on: Friday, 11 July 2003, 06:00 CDT
Discussion
Attractiveness can have a nontrivial, positive impact on individuals' job-related outcomes, even when job- relevant information about them is available to decision makers.
In spite of this study's failure to find a moderating effect of individuating information on the relationship between attractiveness and various job-related outcomes, we believe that this type of information can reduce the degree of reliance that decision makers place on attractiveness. Moreover, we suspect that our failure to find a moderating effect may have been attributable to two factors. First, our study may not have had enough statistical power to detect the effect. Second, the rather crude way in which the individuating information variable was operationalized in our study may have led to the failure to find such an effect.
Between- Versus Within-Subjects Designs
Our meta-analysis showed that the effect of attractiveness may be especially pronounced in research calling for evaluators to sequentially observe and evaluate several individuals who differ in terms of attractiveness (e.g., as is true of research using within- subjects designs). Under such conditions, differences in attractiveness among targets are likely to be more salient than when only one target is observed and evaluated (e.g., as is true of research using between-subjects designs). The same results are consistent with those of studies by Eagly et al. (1991) and Olian et al. (1988). However, similar to a note of caution advanced by Olian et al. (1988), we recognize that this study's findings may not generalize to actual employment situations. The reason for this is that the studies considered by our meta-analysis involved research in which participants made judgments about hypothetical, as opposed to actual, job applicants or incumbents. Nevertheless, it deserves noting that the strategy followed in research using within-subjects designs more closely reflects what occurs in "real world" selection contexts than that followed in research using between-subjects designs (e.g., Olian et al., 1988). That is, organizational decision makers typically evaluate two or more job applicants or job incumbents within a relatively short time interval. Thus, we believe that the closer in time two or more applicants or incumbents are evaluated by raters (e.g., personnel interviewers), the greater will be the bias in ratings attributable to differences in attractiveness among them.
Time Period of Attractiveness Research
As noted above, our meta-analysis showed differences in the magnitude of the attractiveness effect as a function of period during which studies were published: The strength of the same bias during the 1995-1999 period was smaller than the strength of the bias for the 1975-1979 and 1980-1984 periods (p < .01). These results suggest that the strength of attractiveness bias has decreased in recent years. However, at this point in time, the reasons for this decrease are not known.
The effects of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes is particularly interesting. I talk about the effect of attractiveness quite a bit. This article has a great review of the literature. I am interested in the research showing that, "What is beautiful is good."
"Substantial empirical evidence and three meta-analyses have firmly established the existence and validity of a "what-is- beautiful-is-good stereotype" (e.g., Dion, Berscheid, & Walster, 1972; Eagly et al, 1991; Feingold, 1992; Jackson et al., 1995). For example, meta-analyses by Eagly et al. (1991) and Feingold (1992) showed that attractiveness has (a) a strong effect on perceptions of social competence, social skills, and sexual warmth, (b) a moderate effect on perceptions of intellectual competence, potency, adjustment, dominance, and general mental health, and (c) a weak effect on perceptions of integrity and concern for others. In addition, sex-of-target differences were observed for the perceptions of sexual warmth and intellectual competence. More specifically, the effects of attractiveness on perceptions of sexual warmth were stronger for women than for men (Feingold, 1992). However, the effects of attractiveness on perceptions of intellectual competence were stronger for men than for women (Jackson et al., 1995).
Furthermore, more recent meta-analyses (Langlois et al., 2000) have shown that (a) following actual interaction with others, perceivers judge attractive individuals more positively (e.g., in terms of interpersonal competence, occupational competence, social appeal, adjustment) and treat them more favorably (e.g., visual/ social attention, positive interaction, reward, help/cooperation, acceptance) than less attractive individuals, and (b) attractive individuals experience more positive outcomes in life (e.g., occupational success, popularity, dating experience, sexual experience, physical health) than less attractive individuals."
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/16753/the_effects_of_physical_attractiveness_on_jobrelated_outcomes/index.html
The effects of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes
Posted on: Friday, 11 July 2003, 06:00 CDT
Discussion
Attractiveness can have a nontrivial, positive impact on individuals' job-related outcomes, even when job- relevant information about them is available to decision makers.
In spite of this study's failure to find a moderating effect of individuating information on the relationship between attractiveness and various job-related outcomes, we believe that this type of information can reduce the degree of reliance that decision makers place on attractiveness. Moreover, we suspect that our failure to find a moderating effect may have been attributable to two factors. First, our study may not have had enough statistical power to detect the effect. Second, the rather crude way in which the individuating information variable was operationalized in our study may have led to the failure to find such an effect.
Between- Versus Within-Subjects Designs
Our meta-analysis showed that the effect of attractiveness may be especially pronounced in research calling for evaluators to sequentially observe and evaluate several individuals who differ in terms of attractiveness (e.g., as is true of research using within- subjects designs). Under such conditions, differences in attractiveness among targets are likely to be more salient than when only one target is observed and evaluated (e.g., as is true of research using between-subjects designs). The same results are consistent with those of studies by Eagly et al. (1991) and Olian et al. (1988). However, similar to a note of caution advanced by Olian et al. (1988), we recognize that this study's findings may not generalize to actual employment situations. The reason for this is that the studies considered by our meta-analysis involved research in which participants made judgments about hypothetical, as opposed to actual, job applicants or incumbents. Nevertheless, it deserves noting that the strategy followed in research using within-subjects designs more closely reflects what occurs in "real world" selection contexts than that followed in research using between-subjects designs (e.g., Olian et al., 1988). That is, organizational decision makers typically evaluate two or more job applicants or job incumbents within a relatively short time interval. Thus, we believe that the closer in time two or more applicants or incumbents are evaluated by raters (e.g., personnel interviewers), the greater will be the bias in ratings attributable to differences in attractiveness among them.
Time Period of Attractiveness Research
As noted above, our meta-analysis showed differences in the magnitude of the attractiveness effect as a function of period during which studies were published: The strength of the same bias during the 1995-1999 period was smaller than the strength of the bias for the 1975-1979 and 1980-1984 periods (p < .01). These results suggest that the strength of attractiveness bias has decreased in recent years. However, at this point in time, the reasons for this decrease are not known.
Making Facial Expressions, Do Some of Us Have an Advantage?
The other day I went to an estate sale. A few minutes after entering the house I asked the woman running the sale the price of a Christmas ornament and she smiled and said, "You walked into the house with the biggest smile I have ever seen then you actually smiled more as you started looking at things. You brought all this positive energy into the house. Can you come back tomorrow?" I know it sounds weird, but I have had these wierd kinds of comment made all my life. I seem to have a big ole' Bozo the clown smile. I mean it is really big. If you are not old enough to remember Bozo, picture the Joker in Bat Man only happy and not quite as much lipstick. Well maybe more lipstick in my case, but a more flattering color. I have always wondered about my unusually large and expressive smile. My mother swears I came out of the womb smiling. I certainly had the smile as a child. I remember there where ads for the secrets for building big arm muscles in the back of comic books when I was a kid. Aimed at scrawny boys, the ads promised you could build the muscles of a brawny body builder if you only sent them some money. What if only certain people had lots of muscles to build and others, the scrawnies, had fewer muscles in the first place? Perhaps we would not have a level playing field no matter how we worked on building the few muscles we had.
Well, as far as the muscles that control facial expressions, this lack of level playing field has been proven. New research by Dr Bridget Waller a scientist at the University of Portsmouth has found that not everyone has all the muscles that can control our facial expression. Some of us have more and some of us have less--in some cases as little as 60% of the muscles needed. Think of how having more or fewer facial expression forming muscles in your face could affect your ability to interact less or more effectively with others; to bond less or more with people.
In her study published in the American Psychological Association journal, Dr. Wallers discusses the first systematic study on cadavers to discover the variations of musculature structure in the face as they control facial expressions. It appears that the face is the only part of the body to have this unique set of differences. I have read the study and I am stunned. It seems that these variations in allotment of muscles cause some people to have a unique facial signature--in my case, a bozo like smile. People without certain muscles can compensate for their lack using other muscles, but it may involve extra effort. What if the phenomena of personality type differences such as introversion and extroversion was affected by having more or less of the facial muscles required to make facial expressions? I know research says that task-orientated individuals especially those in the "Get it Right" DISC personality type of my "techie" audiences can't understand while the "touchy feelies" in the "Get Along" "Get Appreciated" categories smile so much or show so much emotion. In the same vein the "touchie feelies" can't understand why the "techies" don't show any noticeable positive emotions. To which the techies reply, "I am not going to give a fake smile." Could it seem forced and fake to them because it takes more effort? Hummm, that could be interesting research. What do you think? Oh, one more interesting tid bit. The only other part of the body where they have seen differences in muscles between people: the forearm. I always knew Popeye wasn't really eating all the spinach.
Here is a link to the study. And below that some of the findings.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090211161852.htm
Dr Waller is from the Centre for the Study of Emotion in the Department of Psychology. She collaborated with anatomists at the University of Pittsburgh and Duquesne University in the USA.
They found that all humans have a core set of five facial muscles which they believe control our ability to produce a set of standard expressions which convey anger, happiness, surprise, fear, sadness and disgust. But there are up to nineteen muscles which may be present in the face and many people do not possess all of them. for example, The Risorius muscle, which experts believe controls our ability to create an expression of extreme fear, is found in only two thirds of the population.
Dr Waller said: “Everyone communicates using a set of common signals and so we would expect to find that the muscles do not vary among individuals. The results are surprising - in some individuals we found only 60 per cent of the available muscles.”
She said that everyone is able to produce the same basic facial expressions and movements but we also have individual variations.
“Some less common facial expressions may be unique to certain people,” she said. “The ability to produce subtly different variants of facial expressions may allow us to develop individual ‘signatures’ that are specific to certain individuals.”
She said that there are significant implications for the importance of facial expression in society.
“Facial expression serves an essential function in society and may be a form of social bonding,” Dr Waller said. “It allows us to synchronise our behaviour and understand each other better.”
Dr Waller has completed studies which examined facial expressions in apes. She said that primates who live within social groups have a more elaborate communication repertoire including more complex facial expressions.
“There is a theory that language evolved to help us bond us together in social groups and we may be able to apply the same theory to facial expressions,” she said.
The face is the only part of the human anatomy which has been found to display such a massive variation in muscle structure. In the only other example of muscular differences, the forearm has a muscle which approximately fifteen per cent of the population don’t have.
Dr Anne Burrows from Duquesne University was one of the anatomists on the study. She said: “The problems with quantifying facial musculature is that they're not like other muscles. They're fairly flat, difficult to separate from surrounding connective tissue and they all attach to one another. They are very unlike muscles of the limbs, for example.
“The variation we see in the face is absolutely unique,” said Dr Waller.
Dr Waller said that actors need not worry because people will compensate for a lack of one muscle by using another to develop a similar expression. And people can learn to develop a facial expression by practising in front of a mirror.
“As humans we are able to change the level of control we have over our facial expressions,” said Dr Waller. “There is a great deal of asymmetry in the face and the left side is generally more expressive than the right. But someone who is unable to raise one eyebrow without raising the other could in fact learn to raise just one.”
The implication for those actors who have had botox speaks for itself.
________________________________________
Adapted from materials provided by University of Portsmouth, via AlphaGalileo
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)