COMM4153 NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT JOURN.docx

COMM4153: NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION
OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT: JOURNAL 1
Dr. Elaine Hsieh
DUE: May 1, 2020
Credibility and Competence
Activity:
1. You can do this activity either in-person (with family
members or any person you are
currently not exercising social distancing) or online. Please
either print 3 copies or email the
file to them so that they can fill the form out for you.
2. Find a cause/topic that you believe in. The topic has to be a
topic appropriate for a persuasive
speech (i.e., you have to SELL that idea to your conversational
partner).
3. Have a conversation (at least 10 minutes) with someone, try
to bring in this topic gently. You
can say that you learned about something in class, in the news,
from friends, and was really
convinced by it and thought it’d be a good idea to share with
them.
4. After the conversation, ask your listener to fill the following
survey.
5. You have to repeat step 3 and 4 three times (i.e., having at
least 3 individuals to listen to your

comments and evaluate you).
Journal Write-up: Requirements [Be sure to address each item]
1. Use the first paragraph to provide background information:
what was the topic chosen?
Who are the listeners and where did the conversation take
place?
2. Based on their response, did they have similar perceptions or
suggestions on certain
elements? What are they?
3. Based on the lectures and readings, which dimension of
credibility are you most good at?
4. Based on lectures and readings, which dimension of
credibility do you need to work on
more?
5. Write 5 things that you can work on to improve your
credibility in the future?
6. Include the 3 completed evaluation forms with your journal
when you submit the journal
assignment via Canvas.
7. Make sure you incorporate the course content we covered,
including PowerPoint, course
readings, and additional videos that I have designated, on
credibility and competence in
your analysis.
NONVERBAL CUE EVALUATION

Communicator: ______________________ Evaluator:
_________________________
Please reflect the communicator’s nonverbal cues very carefully
to determine which cues had a
positive and negative impact on credibility. The communicator
should use these evaluations to
make the adjustments in persuasive communication that are
necessary to develop personal
credibility.
During the discussion, did the communicator:
Eye Behaviors Yes No
+ 1 sustain eye contact with the listener?
+ 2 look directly at the customer?
– 3 look down or away before making a point?
– 4 exhibit shifty eyes?
– 5 blink excessively?
Gestures
+ 1 use hand and head gestures to emphasize points/
+ 2 use gestures to signal a desire to continue talking?
+ 3 keep hands and elbows out and away from the body?
+ 4 avoid using distracting hand-to-face gestures?
– 5 exhibit any weak and tentative gestures?
– 6 clear throat?
– 7 smile out of context?
– 8 fidget?
– 9 put hand in pockets or on objects in the room?
Postures
+ 1 assume an open and relaxed posture?
+ 2 use postural shifts to indicate interest?
+ 3 lean forward while making a point?
+ 4 face the customer directly?
– 5 exhibit bodily tension?

– 6 appear rigid?
– 7 communicate with crossed arms and/or legs?
Vocal Cues
+ 1 use a conversational speaking style?
+ 2 emphasize important points with change in pitch and
volume?
+ 3 communicate with sufficient volume?
+ 4 speak at an appropriate rate?
– 5 speak with a limited pitch rate?
– 6 sound flat, tense, or nasal?
– 7 pause at length before answering questions?
– 8 use nonfluencies such as “ah” and word repetitions?
– 9 interrupt the audience?
Write an evaluation of persuasive communication. Begin by
reviewing the assessments you have
made earlier. Then identify the communicative cues that you
felt had a positive or negative
impact on credibility. Be sure to identify points not covered on
the evaluation sheet.
Desirable Aspects of Communication:
Undesirable Aspects of Communication:

Suggestions for Improvement:
Format: 1-inch margins, 12 Point font, double spaced, Times
New Roman, headings for each question, minimum of 4 pages.
Summarize the religions we have covered this semester:
Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, Christianity. You must
answer the following questions:
1. Identify at least 3 common themes you believe are shared by
all the religions we’ve covered for this course. Describe those
themes in detail and how they’re present in each religion. Be
very specific! Cite the book and page number(s) for full credit.
This will require some thought and integration. It’s up to you to
identify these themes and how these themes are present shared
across religions. I will accept a variety of answers, but you
must show sufficient evidence from the text to back up your
claims. You may use the PowerPoint slides, but you can’t rely
solely on these.
2. Using the key themes you've identified; how do these themes
help you better understand religion today? Why is it important
to study religion? What did you gain by learning about these
religions?
3. How does this course add to or improve your own
understanding of the world? How will you integrate the ideas,
themes, and information from this course into your own life,
college major, and/or career path?
Please be specific in your responses! Cite the book! You must
meet the 4-page minimum!

224
Chapter 11
Selling Yourself
Nonverbally
In an interview presented by CBS ielevision on November 4
1979 CBS
R · , correspondent
og;,~ Mudd aske~ ~ena~?r Ted Ke~nedy, "What's the present
state of vour man·1age, Sen-
ator· Kenne~y n~phed, ':"ell, I think that, uh, it's a, Uh, uh,
we've had um, some uh, dif-
ficult Uh,~· umes but I th~n,k we uh, have uh, oat: I think been
able to make some uh, very
g~~d orog1ess anc1 uh, Uh, it~ uh, uh, I ~ould say that it's uh,
uh, it's it's um delighted that
e re able to, to share, share the time and the, the relationship
that we do share" (CBS Tel _
•=~!~~ e
. The voe~ i~,age Ke~ned~ proJec~ed was highly undesirable
for a man trying to sell
himself as a c1ed1ble pres1dent1al candidate. Consider for a
moment how Kennedy's vocal
message might have affected his credibility in your eyes. Did
his frequent hesitat1o~s stam-
mer~ng, .and.speech errors make him seem more or less
competent, trustwoithy, and dyna-
mic. Did hts vocal message help convince you that he was

seeking to give Mudd a
forthnght and boniest answer?
Kennedy's credibility _was senously dan1aged because 11e
proJecied an image he quite
cJ~arly did not wish to project. Students of mine who have
analyzed Kennedy's Interview
with Mudd approach unannn1ty in the Judgments they maJ.(e:
Kennedy's vocal cues as-
sumed a central role in communicating an image of evasiveness
and indecision that is tm-
acceptable for a presidential candidate. The student analysts
became convinced that tlle
negative 1mpress1on that Kennedy made was shaped pnmarily
by his nonverbal communi-
catron rather than by the words tha1 he uttered.
If you disagree with those Judgments, think once again about
Senator Kennedy's re-
sponse to Roger Jv.[udd's question. Kennedy did not say that
the question made him uncom-
forta_ble to the point of being amoous; he did not say that he
would be forced to be indirect
evasive, and untruthful in his response; and he did not say that
his mamage was lffeparabl;
broken. Nonetheless, those messages were all clearly
communicated. They were commu-
nicated un1nrentionally and implicitly through the
communrcat:lve medium of Kennedy's
vocal cues.
Chapter Ji/Selling Yourse(fNonverbally 225
Senator Ted Kennedy 1s not the only contemporary political
figure Whose credibility
has been seriously damaged as. a result of a single appearance

on national television. Con-
sider the cases of former President Ronald Reagan and Senator
Joseph Biden. President
Reagan's credibility was so high before the Contragate
controversy that 1t was probably un-
equaled by any previous president. However, President
Reagan·s credibility dropped pre-
c1p1tous1y after his fateful press conference of November 19,
1986; Reagan never
succeeded in resronng his personal credibility to its previous
11e1ghts after that press con-
ference. Senator Biden destroyed his own credibility as a
presidential candidate by his re-
sponse to a single question In a single interview.
On July 19, 1988, Senator Biden appeared in a pnvare ho1ne in
New Hampshire to give
a short political speech and to be interviewed by the people
assembled in the home; his ap-
pearance was bemg recorded for later rebroadcast by C-SPAN
II. Eiden seemed both an1-
mared and relaxed as he began by delivering an exiemporaneous
cainpaign speech. Then
about halfway through a question-and-answer session, a person
in the crowd said, "Senator,
I have one real quick follow-up questidn. What law sc11001 did
You attend and Where did
you place in your class?" The tension generated by this question
seemed to be reilecred in
cries of "Who cares?" from Biden's supporters. Biden appeared
to freeze for a minute; he
licked his lips and then replied in a voice that was nouceably
strident:
I think that I have a much higher IQ than you do. 1 was the only
one in my class to

have a full academic schotarshiv .... fl] ended uv in the top half
of rnv class. 1 was
the outstanding student in the political science devartment in
the end of my last
year, J graduated with three degrees from undergraduare school,
1 graduated with
165 credits and only needed 123 credits, and !would be
delighted to sa down and
comvare my IQ with yours if you like, Frank. (C-Span II, 1988)
Within a short t:lme 1t became apparent to reporters who
checked the record that Sena-
tor Biden had lied repeatedly tn responding to the question
about his academic credentials;
vrrtually every stateinent he made was verifiably false. For
example, Biden finished 76th
out of 85 in his law schooJ class rather than in the rop half as
he c1a1med, 11e received two
rather than three college degrees, and he did not win an award
as the outstanding student tn
his political science department. In this case, the verifiably
false statements in his answer
ro a single quest.loo so damaged his credibility that Senator
Eiden was forced to withdraw
a short time later as a candidate for the democratic nomination
for president
The nonverbal portion of Biden·s message seemed to be
particularly damaging to a
man trying ro make a favorable impression as a credible
presidential candidate. Senator
Biden had been charming, animared, and affable up to the point
that he responded to the
quest:lon about his academic credentials. He smiled, he
gesticulated, and he pontificated but
1n a pleasant way. In short, he co1nmun1cated nonverbally in

such a way as to be likable and
interpersonally attractive. The question about Biden's academic
credentials tnggered a dra-
matic change 1n his nonverbal corrnnunicatton style, however.
He suddenly became nonver-
bally aggressive. He becan1e the attacker. Indeed, Senator
Biden's physical tenseness,
strident voice, direct attack on his questioner, and defensive
manner provided a clear signal
to those attending the press conference 1n New Hampshire and
those who watched it on
television that Biden's tn1stworthiness had become the matter of
oveniding concern.
226 Part 2/Develovmg the Successful Communicator
Next, consider the case of Presiden
loo President" because the Amencan p:b~i~nald R~a~m~.
R:agan had-been called the "Tef-
sponsible for the misdeeds of his . seerne s1nclr~ed to hold him
personally re-
his first four years in office and ~:1~rid1tna~s. or even for his
own Inrsdeeds. Throughout
credibility had never been senously cha~l~ng~ds;:~n~ ter:,
Presi~e~t Reagan's personal
efforts to mislead the public with regard to h. . J e Con agate
cns1s, and Reagan's own
versial, however., that President Rea an, is ro e in o~~a.gate,
soon became so contro-
sustained attacJc. g s personal cred1b1hty came under repeated
and
Reagan and his advisors recognized th t .
rtv was se:ious. A.lthough the president ha~ a~:i~:~~~~d~he

President's personal credibil-
months, his advisors realized that they would h ng a ~ress
conference for many
ence was finally scheduled for November 19 s~~~6 ~~~~
~c~ed.u~e one. The press confer-
Reagan approached the podiunl at the ' £ e evis1on, 1986). As
President
things, at nun1mu:m: This would be the press con ~rence, he
undoubtedly recognized two
arid the c_entral issue in question was his~~:~~~:io~r~~~J~~~~
conference he had ever held,
President Reagan had earned the title of the "Gre C ,,
peatedly demonstrated an ability to conununicate in a
a~oi~=mu~icat~~d because he _had re-
nety. of public situations H . an con i ent manner in a va-
cbanneJs of comrnunicati~n ~ ;e~~f~%~c:~~r~::e~~;: ~=taus~1
he used the nonverbal
tered. He shook his head from side to side toe . ~eva e the
words that he ut-
a policy, and he nodded his head up and dow m~~~siz~ ~s
disagree1nent with an action or
used seemingly spontaneous aestures w 11 tln Id e wis ed others
to agree with him. He
"" , e - me pauses and appro t
tron to add emp11asis and believability t ~" ' pna e
vocal:.modula-
• c • o uie points that he made.
His air of confidence started with a see mi . .
that the s1nile and the low key but ngl~ genuine smile. Fnends
and foes agreed
- expressive bodily commu tJ. •

of the most likable presidents of all time. He rarel exhibited
nica on helped make him one
been previously identified as tndicarors of anx1et~. In short,
~:s~~:~:~::~~r~s that have
Great Communicator, seemed to personify the confident ubr
eagan, the
press conference of November 19, 1986. p ic man as he
prepared for the
The press conference had hardly begun whe
;:::::~~:~~: ::~~o:~~~1~a~~:e~~
hes1tated"~!1~~~~~1:;;:::'d~:!1~;~::r ::~:~
vntually incoherent. At one po1nr dunn: ~:em;::: ~~~~:~~~~:nd
at times he seemed to be
Wallace came close to calling the President a liar W 11 , NBC
news reporter Chns
denial that he was trading arms for hostages the
.UruateadcSetnoted that in spite of Reagan's
. h' ' ares always seemed to make a
inaJ01 arms s ip~tent to Iran rm1nediately before a hostage was
rel~ased. Chns ur II
turned to the President and asked "A 11 . . na ace
P
'd R . ' ~ re we a to believe that that was JUSt a coincidence?"
res1 ent eagan replied: ·
Chns ... 1 did~ 't know anything ab~ut that until I saw the press
on lt because we
certainly nevl.r had any contact with anything of the kind And h
S !R

vaus d h k h' · · ,a· o eagan
d S es an sd a es is.head back and.forth honzontally as if to
deny that the Untt-
e' tates ha been shzpf!ing arms. to Iran/. There's. lt's;ust-ah. Ah.
So. But ah
Its ;ust that-ah-we dzd s01nething for-ah--a varticutar /reason/. ,
.
Chapter 11 !Selling Yourself Nonverbally 227
CBS reporter Bill Plante also addressed a question to President
Reagan. Plante pref-
aced his question to Reagan by not.log that President Reagan
had said that the equipment
that the United States shipped to han did not alter the military
balance, but Plante wanted
to touch on "several things." Bill Plante said, "The Unired
States apparently condoned ship-
ments by Israel and other countnes. So how can you say that 1t
didn't break the law?"
President Reagan replied:
Bill, everything you have said here zs based on a supposition
that is false. Ah. We
did not condone and do not condone the shipment of arms from
other countnes.
Ana,- ah, as ro whar was the other point that vou~ah-made here
ah f Reagan
pauses with a confused look on his face as if to suggest that he
has _forgotten Plante S
question. He turns to Plante.for help and Planrn reminds him
that the question had
to do with the "miti-tank missiles"!. Oh, no. Ah-about that, it
didn't ah, that it

didn ·r, ah [pause I that lt did vzotate the law.
The verbal portion of Reagan's communication in this interview
can be JUdged on its
own merits. Students of mine who have watched the interview
agree that his verbal state-
ments had a devastatingly negative impact on his perceived
competence. You can make
your own assessments of how Reagan's verbal commun1cat1on
affected your perception of
his competence.
Reagan's nonverbal commun1cat1on probably had an even more
negative impact on his
perceived credibility-particularly his rrustworthiness and
dynamism. If vou had watcl1ed
this press conference, you might have wondered if you really
were watching the man known
as the Great Communicator. Almost all of the old and familiar
nonverbal signs of confi~
dence were·gone. In their place were a.wide array of nonverbal
behaviors known to com-
municate uncertm.nty, discomfort, and anxiety. President
Reagan·s eyes frequently shifted
from side to side, he typically looked down while beginmng ro
answer a questlon, he licked
his lips frequently and was highly nonfluent, his eyes had a dull
appearance, his voice com-
municated doubt and uncertrunty, and, finally, President Reagan
frequently had a confused
if not befuddled expression on his face.
The interviews JUSt discussed dramatize the potentially
powerful impact of nonverbal

cues on perceived credibility. Nonverbal factors are known to
be particularly important for
the person who wishes to be regarded as a leader. In fact,
perceptions of leadership poreritial
and leadership qualities are often more strongly affected by
nonverbal than verbal cues
(Gitter, Black, &Fishman. 1975). Both frequency and specific
kinds of nonverbal cues have
been shown to exert a srrong influence on perceptions of
leadership (Bmrd, 1977).
Successful communication reQuires the development of an
zmage of personal credibil-
ity. As James Gray, Jr., wrote in The Winning Image (1982),
"your image 1s a tool for com-
municating and for reveaiing your inherent qualities, your
competence, abilities, and
leadership. It is a reflection of qualities that others associate
with you. a reflection that bears
long-lasting influence in your bid for success" (p. 6). You need
not be a presidential candi-
date to be concerned about the impact of your credibility on
your bid for success.
My work as a communication consultant in a presidential
campaign and as a commu-
nication trainer of corporate salespeople bas convinced me that
successful communicators
11
228 Part 2/Devetopmg the Successful Communicator

must master the art of selling the1nse1ves nonverbally. You
will not, vote for the politician
or buy fro1n the salesperson unless you find that person to be
sufficiently credible.
This chapter focuses on the role of nonverbal communication in
the development of
personal credibility. The nonverbal commurucat1on behaviors
of presidential candidates
and corporate sales representatives are used to illustrate the
specific perceptual effects of
such behaviors on credibility. Specific guidelines for
developing credibility are presented,
and the nonverbat profile of the credible corrununicator rs
highlighted.
If you doub1: the importance of credibility in personal selling,
consider the case of the
agntech salesperson in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas. The
prospect is a vegetable farmer
in the valley who has more than 50,000 acres rn cultivahon. The
salesperson must try roper~
suade the farmer to purchase a liquid hormone that will be
sprayed on his vegetables and
will allegedly irn:rease his yield by up to 25 percent. Because
the liquid hormone ts a new
product, results from field research are still limited. The farmer
recognizes that a decision
to use the salesperson's product on all of his vegetables will
cost him manv thousands of
dollars. He does .nor want to make the wrong dec1s1on.
Salespeople 1n t11e Rio Grande Valley who actually find
t11emse1ves in such a selling
s1tuat1on tell me that their personal credibility 1s frequently
tJ1e critical issue. Thelf compa~

ny·s credibility migJ:it have been important in arranging the
sales call, but it is th elf personal
credibility that is of most concern to the farmers. Do the
farmers find them to be knowl-
edgeable and. trnstworthy enough to buy from them? One
farmer told an agritech salesper-
son, "I can·t buy from you. I give old Ned all of my business.
He knows what he rs doing.
I trust him. I give Ned all of my business because he has never
done me wrong,"
The farmers ifound "old Ned" to be credible IJecause to them he
was believable. Cred-
ibility ts a measure of how believable you are to those with
whom you interact. The deve1-
op1nent of high credibility does not, of course, provide any
assurance that you will achieve
your objecttves.11any other factors mav also affect persuasive
effectiveness (Brembeck &
H.owell, 1976). Generally, 11owever, the higher your
credibility, the greateryourchancesfor
success as a versuader (Burgoon & Saine, 1978).
Dimensions of Credibility
Credibility is a concept that has been studied extensively by
cornn1un1cation scholars for at
least three decades. These scholars have disagreed about how
many dimensions define cred-
ibility and about the methodological procedures that should be
used to discover such dimen-
sions (Infante, Par.leer, Clarke, Wilson, & Natho, 1983; Liska,
1978; Tucker, 1972). There
does seem to be a consensus among credibility sc1101ars with
regard to two important defin1-
tional points, however: (a) the two most important dimensions

of credibility are comverence
and trustworthiness; (2) competence 1s clearly the more
important di1nens1on of credibility.
Although comvetence and trustworthiness are clearly the two
most important compo-
nents of credibility, a third component, dynamism, is also
frequently cited by speech con1-
mun1cation scholms (Brembeck & Howell, 1976). Therefore,
credibility 1s defined in this
book by the three components JUSt identified.
We should note that Infante (1980) argued that dynamism scales
are evaluative scales
that measure how "potent" a communicator's behavior is. He
maintained that dynanus1n
Chapter 11 /Selling Yourself Nonverbally 229
d . " 1 person perception set" that applies to
scales should, therefore, be include in the g~n:r:tworthiness
scales are properly used as
1mpress1on fonnauon, whereas competence~; at:ude roward tile
commun1cat1on source.
meas-lrements of a communication r~~1verort (1966) that
identified two defining dimen-
McCros~e: .and Dunham's spe~1aut~:i·1tauveness and
trustworthiness or character-
sions of cred1b1htv--con1petence 0 . . . N t nl did McCroskeY
and Dun-
bas proven to be a benchmark for credi~l.1t:::s:s~~~· tw~ ~o:t
i1nportanr dimensions of
ham identify comperence and trustwor fin accounted for by the
two factors sug-
credibility, but also the figures they cite or van~nc~ as

trustworthiness. Although as many
ested that competence is almost twice as impor an - . . . (Bur
oon
g . - f d.b.l"t have been identified in emp1ncal research g •
as five dimensions o er~ 1 .iiy
·eshasbeenthatcompetenceandtrusr-
1976), the most common finding I~ subsed~~:~ss1~:: of
credibility (Lu1 & Standing, 1989;
worthiness are the two central def1n1ngph·1r & Dho1akia
1978). As was pointed our in
McCroskey & Young, 1981; Sternthal, I ips. derance ~f
impression managen1ent re-
ch 10 presston manage.ment, the p_repon apter on Im fl db the
two dimensions of co1npetence and
searchers also conclude that credibility is de ·1ne _Yde ti'fied
as a third but much less unpor-
rtl · B se dynamism has also been l n trustwo 1iness. ecau ti .
redibility will be treated as tnree-
rant dimension than competence and trustwor uness, c
dimensional in this chapter. amic a commuiucator is Judged to
be will vary,
How competenr, trustwo1thy, and dvn tattoo or arnzattonal
affiliation, personal ap-
depending on such factor~ as person~~~~:anve ~eha~1ors.
Although individuals have the
pearan_ce, and, most impo~tantty, coin trot over thetr perceived
credibility, we should recog-
potennal to exercise considerable con_ r ties or charactensttcs
of the source. On
n1ze that credibility ts not defin:d by. t~herent qua I t of the
message sender bY Ille
the contrary, credibility or behevabihty ts the percep ion

receiver. ti . s and dynamisrri. can be positivelv or
A person·s perceived_compeie~ce. ~~s:o~~~:~-s,
co1nmun1cation. For example, pro-
negativety affected in a given s1tua ton·- th lectures will lower
thetr perceived com-
fessors who provide tnaccurare tnformauon in
eiti'.ustworthiness and dynamism inay varY
d' · d 1' rce1ved competence. ' · petence. An in tv1 ua s pe · t
ation· therefore. those rerms may be
from extremelv high to extremely tow in. a. ~1ven si u ,
properly identified as dimensions of credibility.
Competence
d·b·r I dividuals who are recognized as ex-
Competence is an important d_in1ens1~n of ere~ I rt~.se~y
zncomvetence is a word with un-
perts on a given sub. ject insprre confidence. onve -s' associated
with excellence. For
1 society comperence l flattenng connotations. n our. ' d f their
academic excellence receive such
· · th tare widely recognize or
example, umversitres a f ltv members have been JUdged to be
unusually
recognition in large part because their acu
competent. . . al' . - d level of competence may be assessed
As Table 11.1 suggests, an ind1v1du s pe1cetivefl ct how
competent qualified, well-
. ·d set of scales tha re e '

by rating that ind1vi ual on a . .
1
. d d to be When individuals exhibit commu-
1nformed. and intelligent tha1 ind1vidua IS JU ;e t
thetr.competence, tl1etr competence rat-
nicat1ve behaviors that raise senous doubts a ou
ings usually drop sharply.
230
Part 2/Developmg the Successful Communtcator
TABLEll.1
lV[easuring Personal Credibility
Dimensions of Cre.dibi!ity
Comperence
1. competent/inco-mpetent
2. Qualified/unqualified
3. well-informed/poorly mformect
4. mtelligenuUmntelligem
Trustworthiness
L honest/dishonest
2. straightforwardlevasrve

3. trustwor!:hv/untnlstworthy
4. smcere/insmcere
Dynamism
l. assertiveiunassertive
2. bold/thnid
-'· forceful/meek
4. active/inactive
Commun1cator·s Name
Initial
Credibility
Terminal
Credibility
.Until recently, competence was thought to be
manifest content of a person·s perceived almost solely
according to the
speech commun1catio Th
much relevant ami useful informati d . . . n. e key questions.
were (a) how
familiar ts the individual with th to~ oes an individual have on a
given suqject (b) how
a Inlorrnanon and (c) d t . . '
mation effectively to support carefuU qualifie, . oes he
indiv1dua1 use that infor-
that our nonverba_l communication of:en exerts~
~nerahzations? We now know, however,

are perceived to be. amanc influence on now competent we
In the 1968 presidential campaign Richard Ni ,
of the poteritial of nonverbal cues to h• N' xon s advisors made
unprecedented use
en ance ixon's pe d
sors recognized tt1at many Americans do ot rceive competence.
Nixon's advr-
very croseJy, but they may be strongly aff:-Cte:~n~tor ~e
conrent of a politician's speech
ally. Thus, Joe McGinn1ss wrote that y mphcrt messages
communicated v1su-
{the/ words would be the same ones Nixon alwa s
ranee speech. But they would ll fi y used~the words of the
accep-
a seem resh and li l b
tures Would flash on the SC"een h ·z :.r· ve y ecause a senes of
still PlC-
· _ '' w z e lvlxon spoke lf ·1 Pennit television to create a N: · 1
were done nght, it would
~ ixon zmage that was enttret
wonts .... The flashing pictures would be care y zndependent of
the
s1on that somehow Nixa fally selected to create the imvres-
. n represented competenc fi
(McG1nn1ss, 1969, p. 85) e, respect or tradition, serenity.
Chavter II/Selling Yourself Nonverbally 231
Trustworthiness

Not too long ago, a recent acquaintance invited me to go deep-
sea fishing with him 1n the
Gulf of Mexico. I raised some questions about the safety of
such a venture in a relatively
small boat. He understood that my unstated question (Did I trust
hiin enough to go deep-
sea fishing with him?) was more important than nly implicit
questions about his compe-
tence as a seaman. I have not yet answered that question in my
own mind. I do recognize,
however, that my response will be determined by how
trustworthy I judge hi1n to be.
As a dimension of credibility, trustworthiness is a ineasure of
our character as seen by
those persons with whom we interact. Our presumed level of
trustworthiness is based on an
assessment of our personal qualities, intennons. and attitudes.
The dominant sources of in-
fo1mation that are used to detennine how trustworthy people are
JUdged to be inay be non-
verbal (McMahan, 1976), because individuals will not usually
tell you how 11onest or
sincere they acrually are. Their actions are usually more
nnportant than their words.
As Table ll.l 1ndicates, you can assess a person's perceived
level of trustworthiness
by raung thar individual on a set of scales that reveal how
l1onest, straightforward, trust-
worthy, and sincere you Judge that individual to be. Successful
co1nmun1caiors almost in-
variably receive high ratings on this dhnens1on of credibilitv.
Dynamism

The third dimension of credibility-dynamzsm--d.efines people's
credibility or nnage In
terms of the level of confidence they are perceived to have. The
ability to project a feeling
of confidence 1s important beca11se 1t is apt to trigger a
reciprocal feeling of confidence in
those with whom we communicate. Further, the more dynamic
we are perceived to be, the
more credible we are apt to be. According to one authonty, the
"shy, introverted, soft-spoken
individuai is generally perceived as less credible than the
assertive, extroverted, and force-
ful individual. The great leaders Ill history have generally been
dynamic people. They were
assertJ.ve and dynaffilc people" (De Vito, 1980).
A commun1cator;s level of dynamism can be accurately
assessed by rating that individ-
ual on a set of scales that reflect how asse1Uve, bold, forceful,
and active he or she ISJUdged
to be. The meek may ultimate! y inl1ent the earth, but for the
inoi:nent, at least, they have a
serious credibility proble1n. Political satirists who delighted in
their cancatures of the 1984
presidential candidate Walter Mondale as weak and indecisive
obviously recognized the
importance of dynam1sn1 in shaping perceptions of credibility.
In the 1988 presidential
campaign, George Bush was the frequent target of political
satirists because of a dvnmnism
deficit so senous that he was widely perceived to be a "wimp."
Such caricatures had a hu-
morous impact precisely because of the incongruous and
implausible image conjured up by
presidential candidates so lacking 1n dynamism.

The development of a communicator's credibility requnes that
individual dimensions of
credibility be assessed at two points in time: Initial credibility
is the credibility the commu-
nicator possesses before communicauon begins. Terminal
credibility is the credibilitv that
the communicator 1s seen to possess an er communication
occurs 1n a given situation. Tenn1-
nal credibility is the product of the com1nun1cator's initial
credibility and the credibility that
was derived as a result of the individual's communicative
behaviors (De Vito, 1980).
232 Part 21 Develoµmg the Successful Communicator
The scales l!n Table 11.l·should be 11
credibility. Write in the name of th. e co sed _to inake an
accurate evaluation of a person's
- mmun1cator and t th d" ·d
measuring level of competenc. e trust th' , ra e e rn ivr ual on
the 12 scales
• wor iness and dyna1msm Th · · "
should be 10 the Initial Credibility column. '' · e in1tia1 set of
ratings
Imagine that the 12 sets oftenns are on 12 s b.
scale to rate the person wr"th a
7
t .d ·r eparate rpolar scales. Use a seven-point

• 01entiythetermonth1ft·d r·
identify the term on the right side of th f e. e SI e o the scale
and a l to
extremely compi'tent before com e scale. or example, if you
Judge an individual to be
the Initial Credi!;ility cOiumn. If ;,~n~~~~~~ ::~~n:, you would
put a 7 in the first blank 1n
competent put a 4 in the same blank A w11ether the person rs
co1npetent or in-
rece1ve a r~tlng of I. Any value from. 7 thperson perceived as
extremely incompetent would
rough 1 may be used
After the co.mmunrcat.Ion rs completed cover u f .
again in the Ternnnal Credibility colu ; l . !Pd the irst column
and rate the person
- · mn . .1.ou s iou then have a b f af
of the communicator·s-credibility. e ore-and- ter profile
Illustrating the Impact of Nonverbal Cues on Credibility
Presidennal candi:dates engage in the ty e of ers .
interest in this COllntry. Millions of peo~le s~d ~~al selh?g
th~t has generated widespread
those people then make their own Jud Y e candidates efforts to
sell th.emselves;
.,. gments as to how the candidates· co
lected t11etr credibility Because of the h' 1 .. b .1
. ' rnmurucation af-
forts, the presidentiai debates represent~~~:;~; :e~c~ef :~;
i~l:~~d:tes~ commun1cauve ef-

can affect credibility. a rng ow nonverbal cues
1976~ter the first t~1ev1sed presidential debate between Jimmy
Carter and Gerald Ford in
, was contacted by Rafshoon Adve ti R f h
that campaign. As the Rafsho r sing. a s oon was Carter's media
advisor in
~;t~::.~:1~a~:~1:::v~;~,:::~~:~2::~:;;;:~:~~~::~~~~~,o~:~t~o~~
db:;:~b~:;
!:~~~onal factors that are usually tl~ought
:~::c~::~:~:~t~~~r:a~~=:~;~~o~~: ~~ ;~:
genera~:::t~~~~~~:a~~~d command of his infonnation, and he
took pains to qualify the
In terms of hi:; speech commu 1 C of Gerald Ford N· th nica
ion, arter appeared to have been at !east the equal
loss in the sec~nd one eless, the polls showed that Carter had
lost the first debate, and a
chances. The reqm'~:ir~~ :eu~ai:hoaosenous and possibly
catastrophic blow to Carter;s
"' · n representative was srmp!e Would I al C
ter's nonverbal cues in the first d b - · an yze ar-
used to enhai1ce Carter's credibil~tya~~ lt~~:~~~~d a:::~~:? a
nonverbal profile that might be
The Selling of Presidential Candidates
~~:;: :~~~~!~~~;~~~ ~~~~d:ho ~~proached the first
presidenri.al debate with some senous
irists wondered aloud whether~ does raised questions abou.t his
con1petence. Political sat-
or was smart enough to think and chew u

ilme. He was pictured on Saturday Night Live as an amiable but
uncoor1in~t:~ ~~~~~~
r
I
Chapter Ji/Selling Yourself Nonverbally 233
who fell off a ladder onto the Whiie House Chnstmas tree while
trying ro tnm it. Few had
forgotten the satisfaction Lyndon Johnson seemed to get fro1n
saying that Gerald Ford had
plaved much too much football "without a helmet."
Ford's own actions seen1ed to suggest that he might have been
competent enough to
have been a U.S. congressman from Michigan but raised doubts
about his competence as
president. Newspaper phorographs frequently showed Ford
hitting his llead on the door of
the presidential helicopter wllen exiling or falling on the ski
slopes of Colorado. Some pho-
tos even showed one of his golf balls bouncing off the head of a
spectator after an errant tee
shot. Ford made matters even worse by his propensity for
making such gaffes as appearing
before a political rally in Nebraska and solemnly ren1arking
11ow pleased he was to be in
Kansas. Things were so bad at one point that Ford reportedly
said he really emoyed "watcll-
1ng" something on radio (Schlenker, 1980).
As the candidates approached the firsr presidential debate, there
seemed good reason
to believe that Gerald Ford had a senous credibility problem.
The inedia had frequently de-

picted Ford as marg1nallv competent, at best. In contrast, his
opponent. Jimmv Carter, was
thought to possess a first-rate mind. Aside from an adm1ss1on
that he was occasionally over-
con1e by "lustful" thoughts, Carter had done little to damage his
personal credibility, whic11
had not been challenged as frequentlv or persistently as Ford's.
Although one of Carter's
opponents in the presidential pnmanes had run a television spot
thar showed Carter talking
out of both sides of his mouth, his trusrworthiness had not
become an issue .
My careful analysis of the videotape of the first Ford-Carter
debate resulted in so1ne
unant1c1pated conclusions (CBS Telev1s1on, 1976). Gerald
Ford projected an image of
supenor credibility. He did so by skillful use of visual cues. In
contrast, Ji1nmy Carter's
nonverbal cormnunication was so 1neffecnve as to raise senous
questions about his compe-
tence, trustworthiness, and dyna1msm. Because I assessed the
candidates· eye behaviors,
gestures, postures, and vocal cues to be the nonverbal factors
that n1ost strongly affected the
images they proJected, mv analysis of Ford's and Carter's
nonverbal behaviors focused on
those factors.
As I have already indicated in Chapter 3, eye behaviors are
known to affect strongly
the way we are perceived. The eye behaviors of the two
candidates conrrasted strildngly 111
the first debate. Carter allnost always paused and looked down
or away before answenng a

question. The characreristlc direct.Ion of Carter's gaze was
downcast when not speaking; in~
siead of looking at Ford when Ford was speaking, Carter stared
off into space or down at
his notes. Carter also exhibited a high blink rate and often
appeared shifty eyed. Ford, 1n
contrast, sustained direct eve contact with the reporters when
answenng their quest10ns and
looked at Carter when Carter was speaking.
In my recormnendatrons to Carter's media advisors, I
emphasized that Carter nlust stop
looking down at the beginning of each answer. must susrain eve
contact with Ford while
Ford is speaking, and must avoid the downcast eyes in all
s1tuat1ons during the second pres~
idential debate. To look down before answenng a quesnon and
to exhibir shifty eyes while
answenng would likely affect Carter's perceived competence
and trustworthiness negatively
(Burgoon & Saine, 1978). The unwillingness to establish or
maintain eye conract with Ford
dunng tile first debate quite clearly suggested a Jack of
assertiveness and even timidity, both
of which are associated with the nondynainic individual. Worst
of all, Carter's characrens-
tically downcast eves connoted qualities inconsistent with the
desired i1nage of a man trv1ng
234
Pact 2/DMtoomg th' Succ,,.ful Commumcatoc ~. . ----------------
-----~-----'"----'------'------ I . . __ Chapter JI/Selling Yourself

Nonverbally 235
to sell himself as the nation's leader F th '1 ·
iors, when compared with Carter's . or ose_reasons, I concluded
that Ford's eye behav-
Ford to project an Image of supen~rplayed an important ro1e.1n
the first debate and helped t
F competence, trustworthiness and dy - j
ord and Carter exhibited gestures that ct·f£ d - , nam1sm.
and kind. Many but not all of Ford' I ere noticeably, with regard
to both number ·1
· - ' ' s gestures seemed calculated to c 1 that he was a powerful
person His fr rea e the impression I
bled a subdued karate chop Ford co eq~:n~h~?d tgestures were
so forceful that they resem- I
nodding and shoulder inove~ent to a~ ine rs orceful hand
gestures with frequent head !
ing verbally. In short Ford used illustr ~mphasis and feeling to
the points thathe was mak-
dynamic. , a or gestures purposefully to make him seem more
In contrast, Carter used few gesrures The esture .
for the most part and took the form of d. g s he did use were
Weak and tentatJ.ve,
' a aptor gestures Carter's gentle h d
gested a lack of confidence and an ele t d 1 f · an gestures sug-
lips, moved his hands in and out of h .va e eve! o anxiety. For
example, Carter licked his
" is pockets and sometJ.mes put his h
prayerful position. The aggregate eft . ' ands together in a
make him appear ro be anxious. ecr was to depress Carter's
perceived dynamism and

In my recommendations, I stressed that Carter sh l
hand gestures to emphasize the points b th_· ou d use many, and
more forceful,
would have to eliminate the gestures th ~ ou w l~h he felt
deeply. At the san1e time, he
about his answers Ford's gestures ga ah~uggestd·ed. ~e was
hesitant, uncertain, or tentative
· ve im an a 1tiona.r advantage 0 c 1 h eye behaviors were more
important than e _ . ver arter, a t ough
selves nonverbally. g stures in the candidates' efforts to sell
u1em-
Posture ts very significant for individuals who w. h
because it is known to be a potent source of inf or rs to be
perceived as credible leaders.
the Ford-Carter debate Ford made sk'Jlf I fm~tlon about another
person's power. In
' i u use o the image building pot r " f
types of postures. If you have viewed . d - en ial o certain
Ford's charactenstlc Posture was that of :~a:~~~pe~i~ ~~e
debate, perhaps you n.oticed that
Ping the opposite sides of the podiun1 H f1 is feet and arms
spread widely, gnp-
questJ.on and increased the forward lea~ e usua y leaned
forward as he began to answer a
him to project an image of supenor po dunng the answer. Ford's
widespread stance helped
wer; as he spoke the forward lean
sense of confidence and immediacy· and h. f .
1
' communicated a

responsive to the reporter's quest1o~s. Al~~u a~~ fr~~uent
postural shifts made him seem
ated, they were .synchronized with his g or s postures were
somewhat exagger-
that this was not a man who was apt to :~:tures :~.such~ manner
as to suggest quite clearly
tree. a out o is hehcopteror onto the family Chnstmas
Carter, in contrast, rarely if ever spread his ar _ .
forward. In fact .his relative bodily ngidi ms e~pansi':'ely In
front of him or leaned
peared to be almost a prayerful p~se su ty, ~hen combined with
hands clasped in what ap-
try1ng to pro_Ject the im~ge of a dyn, a g_ges ed a passiv1sm
that was not useful for a person
rmc leader and man of act L
viewed as active rather than passive. ion. eaders are usually
In short, Ford exhibited many of th · . .
in Chapter 4, and Carter exhibited a dis: positive rndrcators of
perceived power identified
to be indicators of powerlessness Mv re ess1ng number of
nonverbal cues that are known
tures and postures associated with pe~ce~~mme~datron to
Carter was to accentuate the ges-
and postures associated with powerlessnes~~s o power and to
de-emphasize those gestures
I
Neither candidate used the image-molding potential of vocal
cues ro good effect.
Ford's voice lacked the orotund quality that would make it
pleasing, and his tendency to

give vocal emphasis to unimportant words, as opposed to
thought units, hardly had the ef-
fect of accentuating his intellectual capacity. At the same time,
Ford's substantial volume
helped him communicate a sense of emouonal intensity.
Carter's use of his voice was less tt1an desirable for at least
three reasons. First, his
speaking rate was much too fast. At a number of points in the
debate, Carter's speaking rate
Vas in the range of 200 to 260 words per minute. A speaking
rate of over 275 words per
nunute makes comprehension difficult, particularly if the
communicator is using a regional
dialect. When speaking at 200 to 260 words per minute,
Carter·had exceeded the range for
conversational speech by around 100 words per 1n1nute. Such a
rapid speaking rate also cre-
ates the impression that a person is anxious.
Secondly, Carter exhibited a very narrow pitch and volume
range and. dropped his
voice at the end of sentences. Anything approaching inonotone
speech makes the commu-
nicator seem to be emotionally urunvolved, uninteresting, and
nondynamic. The personality
traits and personal qualities usually ascribed to a commun1caror
who is vocally unexpres-
sive are pnmarily negative.
Third. Carter paused frequently, filled a·number of his pauses
with nonfluencres such
as __ "ah_," and repeated certain words. By exhibiting those
vocal phenomena, Carter rein-
forced t11e impression that he lacked confidence. To be
versuasive, the communicator must

sound confidenr. We know that
fthel ideal voice is smooth, free pf hesitation, and clear;
vossesses good tone and
volume, and vanes in sveech rate. Public sveaking exverts and
coaches agree that
sveakers who control loudness, vitch, fluency, resonance, and
rate of sveech are
thought to be more active and dynamic, more versuasive. (Gray,
1982, pp. 85-86)
I recommended that Carter ta.Ice the necessary actions to
develop a more confidenr
speaking voice in the second presidential debate with Gerald
Ford. To communicare greater
emotJ.onal involvement and com1Uitn1ent to the positions he
was taking, Carter had to use
greater variation in pitch and volume. To become more
conversational, he would have to
slow· down his speaking rate. Finally, he would have to
1Uini1Uize nonfluencies because non-
fluenc1es are usually perceived to be strong and reliable
indicators of an elevated level of
anxiety.
Although some of Carter's inedia advisors were concerned about
the impact of his per-
sonal appearance in the debates, I do not believe the candidates'
personal appearances
strongly affected the images they projected. Personal
appearance is particularly important
in shaping the first impression an individual makes. but both
candidates were already well-
.known by the electorate.
Carter was subsequently bnefed on the probable perceptual

impact of specific kinds of
commun1cat1ve behaviors before his second debate with Gerald
Ford. Polls showed that
Carter won the second debate, in the op1n1on of the Amen can
electorate. However, a Gallup
poll conducred for Newsweek magazine (Cooper, 1979)
indicared that 50 percent were not
sure. Those polled also felt that Carter was better informed
t11an Ford and that Carter would
be more honest and open with the public about his foreign
policy. In short, Carter was
236
Judged to be more credible on the important dimensions of
competence and trustworthi-
ness. Ken Cooper (1979) concluded that "the NVC rnonverbal
commun1cationl informa-
tion these two <:andidates transmitted in the debates explains
the results of the poll, and
ultimately the choice Amencans made for President" (p. 185).
I certainly would not clarm that Carter's nonverbal
commun1cation 1n the second debate
with Ford was responsible for his victory in that debate. Dunng
the second debate, however,
Carter controlled his eye behavior and used gestures, postures,
and vocal cues much rnore
skillfully than he had done 1n the first debate-for the purpose of
selling himself nonverbally.
His media advisors apparently also felt that nonverbal factors
played an important role in the
second debate .. After Carter was eJ.ected, I got another call
from a Rafshoon representauve.

He generously offered to contribute all of the television
videotapes and radio audiotapes of
commercials use:d in tile pnmanes and the presidential
campaign to me, and tl1roug11 me to
the University of Georgia, as a gesture of appreCianon for my
analysis of the role nonverbal
factors played in affecting Jimmy Carter's Image in his debates
with Ford.
Dunng the presidential can1paign of 1988, I was aslced by The
Washington Post to an-
alyze tile i1npact of then-Governor Michael D'fikakis's
nonverbal cues on his personal
credibilitv. Other analysts of Political communication also
contributed to an article wnt-
1en by Lloyd Grove that was titled "Dukalds: If He Only Had.a
Heart (His Video-Image
Scorecard-Brains 10, Wannth 0)" (1988). I subsequently
expanded that bnef analysis re-
ported in the newspaper article for a convention paper in which
I c01npared DUkakis and
Bust not only with regard to how well they did on the important
image din1ension of credi-
bility, but a1so on the three other image dimensions of
likability, interpersonal attractiveness,
and dOllllnance. Part of that analysis is provided in Chapter 10
on Impression management.
My analysis of the firstDukakis-Bush debate (1988) led me to
conclude that DuLcakis's
"grearest strength.is his commun1canon of competence." As I
have already no red, a number
of studies indicate that people tend to key ln on eye behaviors
as an indication of how well
candidates know What they are talking abour. Duleakis's eye
contact in the first presidential

debate with George Bush was remarkable by a!mosi any
standard. When asked a quesnon,
he maintained eye contact with the questioner; Ile almost never
looked down before Ile re-
sponded; and whenever Bush was talking, he ma1ntarned eye
contact with Bush.
Only Dukalds 's high blink rate and slightly accelerated
speaking rate (up to 195 words
a llllnute, or a bit beyond the conversational norm) suggested
that he was nervous or laclcect
confidence; these behaviors could have had a negative impact
on the dynamism dimension
of credibility. Bush, by contrast, seldon1 inainta1ned eye
contact, looked down often before
answenng a question, and occas1onally rolled his eyes upward,
all probably indicators of
discomfort. Finally, Dukakis had min1n1a1 response latency
(the tJ.me rt take to begin roan-
swer), whereas Bush's performance was marked by long pauses
and false starts. The less
time people take to respond to a question, the more competent
they will be Perceived to be.
Nonverbally, as well as verbally, Dukakis clearly communicated
the impression that he had
a decided edge rn competence over George Bush.
Trustworthiness was the credibility dimension with which
Dukakis had a senous prob-
1e1n. It has afready been established that we tend to trust most
those individuals who are
open, straightforward, and emotionally disclosing. Governor
Dukakis was called the "Ice
Man" for areason--there was almost nothing ln his nonverbal
communrcatJ.on (the Pnmary
ineans of expressing emotion) to suggest that he had feelings.

When you express a feeling,
Chapter 11 /Selling Yourself Nonverbally 237
. k you might be reJ- ected If vou do not c01mnun1cate any
emotion, you avoid Y
oun1nans - · . b· ted Theun-
d"ff e t type ofnsk-you in10-ht not e rrus ·
the risk offreJtecftionD, bkuat·1a~osuwr~1snt~at1 r::n~ of the
things he did ;onverbally reinforced the
fortunate ac or u - . H" was 1no-
idea that he is an emot10nally undisc1os1ng man who lacks
spontane1~v. is voice .
notonous and with his mecl;anical hand gestures, he almost
looked like a t~y so'.drer.
D k~is's bigo-est liability in tenns of trusrworthiness was
probably his smile. When
Duka~s smiled du;mg the first debaie with Bush, viewecs saw a
Jot of teeth but no,cr~w ~;
eet around the eves. Duleakis's srr1ile is a lower-face
phenomenon; there _is rea.son o ?u
~e smcenty of a smile thm isn't reflected throughout the face.
Because his smile was ·fr~~td
in the lower part of his face, Dukakis often appeared to mask
em?tions_ rather than exhi 1 -
rng the felt happy smile that is associated with the emot1onallv
disc1~~1ng personf ed"bil-
In short Dukakis was extraordinarily srrong on the competence
unens1on o er l
h~d a definite deficit in terms of trustworthiness. We have
already seen that he
ny, but he G ·g Bush in that he dominated hi1n visually.

However,
~a:k:~'~:~ ::~i:a;:n~::r de~~:, ~n two of. fue other image
dimensi~is;;~~~i;~~ ~;~
interpersonal attractiveness-that the overall 1mpress1on made
by Ge~':'e: l Dukakis
. 'd t·a1 debate was more favorable than the impression n1ade
by ic ae .
presi en 1 f 1996 A for the moment tllar Finally Jet us consider
tile presidential campaign o . ssume R t D l 's
~:~~:~a~~:g:c,~~~~~
~~:~:~;~~o.~~~a~:~~:::!~~z~;,~;J;2;1:'.~~~ie~~
defining features of Dole's nonv;~a~ ~~:~~xhibited by Dole that
affect his credibility in
identify thos.e.nonv:rb:~~~~~ ~ays eD~le'~ cmnpmgn inanager
has asked you to answer the
strongly positive ru:Hn "do Senator.Dole's eye behaviors,
gestures, postures, and vocal cues
following questton. ow ' - . f th mpact of
. dibTt ? Although you have been asked to ocus on e 1
affect his personal ere
1
_ 1 Y · . d"bT ou will also comment bneflv
Dole's nonverbal communication on hrs personal ere I 1 ttV, y ,
. r on -
p . d t B ·n Clinton ·s nonverbal com1nun1cauon sty le by way
of co1npa 1s . .
on ~~:~1 po:itive side Senator Dote 11as nsen to one of tlle
most orest1g10us tad~rsh:
positions in tl~e United S~~te; af:: s:~~1:~:~ ~:~:n1:t;~~~~~:t~

~~~:::;:~:: R:~~~l~a~
JOnty leader; or a numbet o ye ti olitic1an a Washington insider
w110 is skilled at tile
party. Dole is perceived as a prag1na c Pd al ~i,ng In fact some
critics have labeled hi1n
art of vote counting, comprorruse, and e m . ,
"The Great Equivocator" because of his propensity to
co1npronuse. h . cter and
There
1
s reason to_ think that Dole lS cr:::epde~so~
~1~~do:u::~;;e~~~b~t:~e
10
~arge
brave detenmnation. His image as a cour~ after he was severely
wounded in Italy dunng
part to his military service and to tile fact at t to d·e Dole's
wounds crushed his vertebrae
World War II ~e was sent hon1e in a _bo~~h~a~m an~ hand
virtually useless. Because he has
and mangled !us nght aim, leaving his i:o -
1
· 1 is nght hand so that his
very lirruted use of his nght ann todayd~e. ~la~es:-
~:~i~~;tn~~;: ~Duffy & Gibbs, 1995).
fingers will ~ot splay and he greets 11~i~:~i~~Ys D~le
managed to ~inerge as a maJor figure
In spne of his rather severe phvs1ca _ •
in national politics. . bl "th which Dole n1ust cope successfully

Political insiders identify four nna?e pro e1ns w1 d n a culture
that values
~no~:. ~~:~b~:;i~:::~~nca;~;,~fsn~t~t~s r:~~~~~h~~;~:c:si~:;
~ta time when the mood
238 Part 21 Develomng the Successful Commumcator
of the country ~avo~s the outsider, and the perception by the
nght wing of the Republican
party that Dole s nuddle-of-the-road pragmatism is much too
distant from their own zeal-
ous brand of conservatism. Because of his pragmatism and his
willingness to compronuse
on the issues, Dole-like President Clinton-has been criticized as
a man without convic-
tions who vacilitaites on the issues (Kilgore, 1995).
Dole and his advisors are particularly concerned with his image
as a septuagenanan.
They could not have been pleased when Time magazine (Duffy
&.Gibbs, 1995), 1n an issue
that featured Dole in its lead article, raised this ominous
question next to his photograph on
the front coven "Is Dole Too. Old for the Job?"
An emJy effort by Dole's advisors to cope with the age issue
was not promising. Thev
~t-arted bY_ getting a photograph of Dole published in many
leading newspapers that showed
h~ walking _on a treadmill. Alas, Dole was incongruously
attired in a formal, long~sleeved
shirt along with black-and-white smped shorts that Joolced like
they nugllt be his underwear

rather than his running sJ1orts. The unintended and silent
message that this posed photo-
graph commuiucaited was,not helpful: Senator Dole is 1n fact
too old and too old-fashioned
to be president The further inference is surely that Dole is
totally out of contact with yup-
p1es and the younger generation.
Dole's image advisors tned to recover by issuing detailed results
from a medical exam
ttiat showed Dole to be in very good health for a 1nan of his
age. They released a nine-page
document on Dole's 72nd birthday that offered the most detailed
and complete medical in-
formation ever re I eased on a presidential ~didate. Dole
himself tned to blunt the age issue
by saving, "I'll put Strom Thunnond on the ticket for age
balance." At the same rime, Dole
probably recognizes that although couniries like Japan venerate
the old the United States
tends to celebrate youtti.
Th_e other part of Dole's image that is most problematic 1s his
reputation for being abra-
sive. His penchant for putting down political opponents with
what has been seen as mean-
spirited humor and a glowenng, dour demeanor has resulted in
some persisting nicknames
that suggest the nature of this part of Dole's iinage problein:
"Nixon's Doberman p1nscher,"
"hatchet man," and "Nasty Bob." Dunng the 1988 presidential
campaign, Dole delighted
1n referring to the ideas of Democratic candidate Michael
Duka.Ids as "Du-cockeyed." I-Iis
biting humor 1s also reflected in tl1e way he has greeted female
acquaintances on the srreets

of his hometown of RusselL Nebraska: "So vou JUSt visited the
beauty parlor today, eh? Ob-
viously 1t was closed" (Harzog, 1995).
The nonvertial commun1cauve behaviors that Senaror Dole and
President Clinton ex-
hibit dunng the presidential campaign of 1996 will undoubtedly
play a cenrralrole 1n min-
1miz1ng or exacerbating the image problems they brought to the
campaign. Surely, the
dominant features of their nonverbal communication styles will
strongly affect their per-
sonal credibility. The following analysis is based on close
observation of videotapes of Sen-
ator Robert Dole's appearances on ABC's Nightline on June 29
and on November 29, 1994,
and on CBS's Face the Nation on October?, 1995.
Dole's eye behaviors should help ro enhance perceptions that he
1s a competent person.
He does an exce!ilent JOb sustaining eye contact while both
listening and speaking. In addi-
tl.on, he rarely pauses and looks down before responding to a
question.
In other respects, however, Dole's eye behaviors are a disaster.
The most outstandingly
negauve feature of his eye behaviors is a blink rate so high as
almost to defy belief. In three
T
i Chapter 11 I Selling Yourself Nonverbally 239
recent television appearances Dole's blink rate ranged from 150
to 160 blinks per minute.
In addition. some of his eye blinks come with such machine-gun

rapidity that they suggesr
that Dote is about to have some rype of seizure. This blink rate
is apt to strongly depress his
ratings on the dynamism dimension of personal credibility.
Dynanusm, as reflected bv a
more midrange blink rate, tends 10 correlate highly with the
perception that an individual is
confident As the blink rate increases, however, perceived
confidence rends to decrease. As
you will recall, one:. of the nonverbal factors Judged to have
the most negative impact on Jim-
my Carter's confidence level in his debate with Gerald Ford was
his high blink rate. Without
a doubt, Dole's bllllk rate is much faster than Carter's.
In his rwo appeara,nces on Nightline, Dole exhibited almost no
tendency to be shifty
eyed. Iri his appearance on Face the Nation, however, Dole was
extremely shifty eved; he
has also been observed to be shifty eved in other public
appearances. Dunng his appearance
on Face the Nation, Do1e·s eye-shift rate ranged from 130 to
156 shifts a minute. With an
accelerated eye-shift rare such·as this, Dole's eyes appear to be
darting from side to side,
giving the effect that they are almost dancing. Harzog (1995),
who observed Dole's video-
taped appearance at tile 1988 Republican convention, also
concluded that Dole is highly
shifty eyed. She noted that Dole's shifty-eyed behavior detracts
fro1n perceptions of trust-
worthiness, and hence, from perceptions of credibility. If Dole's
eyes exhibit a high degree
of shiftiness dunng tile n1tense pressure he will experience
during the 1996 presidential
campaign, the shifting eyes will surely make observers perceive

hin1 much more negauve1y
on tile trustworthiness din1ension of credibility. Our sociery
has a strong eve behavior ste-
reotype that specifies that shifty-eyed people are unrrusrworthy.
In terms of gestures and posture, Dole is strikingly impassive,
unexpressive, and unas-
sertive. A good part of his problem mav be attributed to his
senous war InJunes. In the three
televised appearances studied, the cameras were sufficienuv
close up that only Senator
Dole's face and shoulders and about s1x inches of his upper
torso were visible. Perhaps
tl1ere 1s an unwritten agreement among television people tllat
Dole's cnppled nght arm and
hand will rarely be shown on the atr. In one sense, this may be
an advantage to Dole because
it tends to diveit attention from his physical disability. On the
other hai1d, Dole loses the
great potential to be expressive and assertive that hand gestures
would give him.
If presidential candidate Michael Dukakis was called the "Ice
Man" because he com-
municated so little about his emotions, Senator Dole nught be
called the "Immobile Man"
because of his lack of bodily movement. Dole rs unusually stiff
on television. Because of.
the relatively tight close-up.s, the onlv bodily move1nent that
Dole 1s observed to exhibit
with some degree of frequency is a slight but perceptible head
nod as if to affinn the point
he is making. Very rarely Dole's left hand will appear bnefly on
screen making a gesture of
limited intensity. Thus. Dole's absence of gestures enhance the
perception tl1at he lacks dy-

namism. DynamiSm, or assertiveness, in turn is viewed as
essential to projecting the visual
image of a leader. Dole uses few gestures and the occasional
gesture he does use is not par-
ticularly firm.
Posture 1s, of course, extren1ely important 1n shaping
Judgments of dynamism, partic-
ularly the power dimension. Harzog (1995) argued that Dole's
upnght posture helps him
"exude a great deal of presence." The salient po1n1, however,
1s that Dole's posture appears
to be fixed, rigid, and unchanging. Such immobility tends to
define one as tacking ctyna-
1msm. Indeed, communicators who are perceived as dynamic
assume an open and relaxed
I~
,,
,,
240 Part 21 Developing the Successful Communicator
posture, use postural shifts ro commun1cate interest in what
they are saying or 1n ttlose with
whom they are co1n1nun1catlng, and lean forward to emphasize
a point they are making.
Senator Dole, the Immobile Man, does none of these things.
Finally, what about Senator Dole's vocal cues? He speaks with a
deep, orotund voice,
at a conversational rate (a slightly elevated 195 words per
minute), and he pauses effectively

to give emphasis ro the points he is making. In addition, he
sometimes emphasizes his
points by slightJy increasing his speaking rate or volume. These
factors should enhance
Judgments made of Dole on the competence dirnens1on of
credibility.
The fact tha.t Dole's "gravelly" voice sometimes sounds flat;
nasal, and harsh means
that he is apt to tle perceived as a somewhat unpleasant
individual. Vocally, Dole's greatest
deficiency is that he speaks with a very limned pitch range. His
near monotone delivery
usually reinforces the impression that he is unexciting and
surely uninteresting. -
Finally, Dole is gene.rally fluent but when under pressure he
has a tendency 10 become
dysfluei1t. Vhen Forrest Sawyer told Dole on Nightline that 70
percent of those polled dis-
approve of what the Republicans are doing on health care, Dole
because noticeably dysflu-
enr. He replied after a pause, /'Well, it's, ah, it's Lpausej a
different poll than I ha~e seen."
Under the extren1e pressure he v.rill experience dunng the
presidential campaign, therefore,
Dole exhibits a predisposition that may result in high
dysfluency. High dysfluency, 1n turn,
can negatively a:ffect the way one is percei~d on both the
competence and trustworthiness
ditnens1ons of credibility.
The feature~; of Senator Dole's nonverbal communication style
Jnst identified will in
all probability re.suit in him bemg perceived by the public and
cancatured by the media as

a would-be leader sorely Jacking u1 dynam1s1n. His stiff and
unexpress1ve public demeanor
is not likely 10 be useful as he tnes to defuse the age issue. In
addition, because of his non-
verbal cues Senator Dole is apt to be perceived as a person
lacking 1n likability. He may
certainly be perceived as dour, forbidding, and unapproachable.
If so, this part of his image
may be attribute(1 to the fact that he alinost never smiles in
public, has extreinely heavy and
bushy eyebrows that make his dour expressions even more
forbidding if not threatemng, has
deep lines permanently etched across his forel1ead, and perhaps
most importantly, lacks
bodily 1nove1nents. Thus, he fails 10 display many of the
nonverbal behaviors that correlate
strongly with positive perceptions that a person is likable.
If Senator Dole might Justifiably be called the Immobile Man,
President Clinton nught
be called the "Friendly Man." In this instance the striking
contrast in the images that the
public may clairrL for each candidate may not of course be tl1e
decisive factor that detemnnes
the outcome of the presidential race. First, victory or defeat
may well pnmarily result from
situational factors that neither presidential candidate can
control, such as the state of the
economy, the degree of conflict at the 1ntemat1onal level, and
so forth. Then too the objec-
tive analyst will recognize that "candidate" Bill Clinton must
also confront senous image
problems. Like Dole he has been criticized ,as being a vacillator
who waffles on the issues
when under pressure. His ultraconservative opponents have
pilloned him 1n the media by

clanning almost unbelievably negative images for him, such as
identifying Clinton as a~
immoral philanderer who cheats on his wife, a draft dodger. a
liar, someone with direct
links to the underworld, one who panders to public opinion, and
so on.
You are working as an image analyst for Senator Dole so you
must tal<e a realistic look
at the commun1cat1ve assets President Clinton bnngs to the
1996 presidential campaign in
r
I
Chapter JI/Selling Yourself Nonverbally 241
tenns of his nonverbal communication style. First, you
recognize that Clinton has revolu-
tionized campaigning by using interactive media for the first
time. He relishes tl1e opportu-
nity to appear live before a s1nall audience in a television
studio and interact with members
of the audience in an informal, unrehearsed manner without
using nores. Second, you rec-
ognize that Clinton is strong precisely where Dole is weak-lle
uses nonverbal communi-
cation skillfully to mal<e hiinself appeai· to be a highly likable,
sincere, and dynamic person.
As Senat~r Dole's image analyst, you would be well advised to
study a videotape of
Clinton's appearance on MTV's "Music Television-Choose or
Lose." Clinton appeared
live on this program dunng the 1992 presidential campaign and
interacted with a small au-

dience in the television studio.
Clinton is a confident and skilled communicator. Unlike Senator
Dole, he does not ex-
hibit highly distracting nonverbal behaviors that suggest that
11e lacks confidence. Whereas
Dole exhibits an almost unbelievably high blinlc rate as well as
shifty eves, Clinton sustains
direct eve contact with his audience. Clinton blintcs a low two
to three times a minute, for
example.
In contrast to Senator Dole, the Immobile Man, President
Clinton uses bodily n1ove-
menis forcefullv and naturally to emphasize the most important
points he ts making. Sig-
nificantly, his bodily .inovements are synchronized with vocal
cues such as the pause for
effect and an increase 1n the rate or volume of his voice for
einphas1s. Dunng his appearance
on MTV. Clinton said, "We have quadrupled the national debt
in 12 years." While making
this stat~ment, Clinton spread his arms wide in an expansive
gesture as if to emphasize how
fast the national debt has increased. In addition, when Clinton
wants to einphasize a point
or focus the audience's attention, he holds up a finger.
In contrast to Senator Dole, Clinton's posture is open and
relaxed. Moreover, Clinton
looks like he 1s enJoving himself while interacting with an
audience. If you had to choose
a single word to charactenze Clinton's .nonverbal
communication style, it would probably

be "pleasant." In contrast, Senator Dole often looks stern,
serious, and unapproachable dur-
ing his appearances in public. Clinron's great edge in
pleasanmess and likability 1nay cer-
tainly be traced to the fact that lle seems 10 minimize the
distance between himself and those
with-whom he inreracts, and he does so with a style tl1at
accentuates informality and close
personal contact. Dole in contrast appears to cultivate a stiff
informality that makes 1t diffi-
cult for people to get close to hirn at least in a figurative sense.
In short, Senator Dole may bnng a number of political assets to
the 1996 presidential
campaign that President Clinton can nor match. In terms of
building his personal credibility,
however, Dole's nonverbal com1nun1cation style is not one of
those advanrages.
The Selling of Corporate Sale Representatives
Nonverbal factors qune clearly do Play a central role in
deternun1ng how successfully presi-
dential candidates and others sell themselves nonverbally.
Although mosr of you are nor
likely to be a presidential candidate, you may someday be in a
situation 1n which the selling
of your abilities 1s imporrant. Most of us attach importance to
success in the job interview,
where the ability to sell oneself is pitted against the abilities of
compenng JOb applicanrs.
Modem corporations recognize that you must sell yourself to
potential custoiners be-
fore they will buy from you. The sales rrain1ng manual of one
corporation, Burst Inc., iden-

242 Part 21 Developing the Successful Communicator
tifies "Sell Yourself First" as a pnnciple of overriding
importance in saies training. Sales
trainees are rem.inded to sell themselves first, even though
some "people think it's an old
worn-out cliche, but it's not worn out. It's absolutely essential
for success rn selling or any
other occupation."
My own expenence in presenting sales and communication
programs to corporate
sales repr.esentatives has convinced me that nonverbal factors
are vnally important 1n per-
sonal ·selling. The case of Omar Johnson helped to convince
me. Omar is a sales represen-
tative for a pharmaceutical con1pany. He has been reasonably
successful because he works
hard and has good product knowledge. He does not make a good
first impression, however,
pnmarilv because he stutters, fills his frequent pauses with
nonfluencies, and is vocally
unexpress1ve.
Recently, a sales manager received a telephone call fro1n a
salesman who wanted to
discuss an upcoi:n1ng visit he was to make with a sales
prospect. After talking to the sales-
man for five nunutes, the sales manager realized he did not
know to whom he was talking
so he asked, "Who is' this?" The caller replied in a carefully
modulared voice, which wa~
free of stutters or nonfluenc1es, "Why this is Omar Johnson.

Don't you know who I mn? I
have worked f~r. you for 10 ye<U"s." The sales manager was
amazed because Omar projecred
such a totally different image, by vocal means, that he was
unrecognizable. "What have you
done, Omar?" said the sales manager. "You have changed
dramatically. You now seem to
be confident and forc~ful." Omar explained, it "is the sales and
commun1catJ.on program
that I recently attended. I saw myself on the SIX-foot television
screen for the first time and
I listened to iny:;elf. I looked and sounded like a fool. Since
then, I've practiced my ~ales
presentation on a tape recorder, and I'm·a new man." -
The sales rnanager subsequently accon1pan1ed Omar when he
made a sales presenta-
uon to a prospe7t.- Omar used his newly acquired
communication skills to proJect an unage
of a much more competent, trustworthy, and dynamic
salesperson. He persuaded the pros-
pect to use a large quantity of the product that he was selling.
Omar's sales manager was so
nnpressed tllat he recommended that all of his company·s
salespeople be required to take a
sales and communication training program. The company is
currently implementing the
sales manager's recommendahon._The training program
einphas1zes the central role of non-
verbal cues in developing the credibility of the corporate sales
representative.
I have had the opportunity to observe and analyze the
persuasive efforts of individuals
who were selling products thar ranged from. wine to electrical
appiiances to fertilizer. Al-

though product salespeople and politicians must both sell
the1nselves first, the selling situ-
ations they encounter are different in important respects.
Politicians who attempt to sell
themselves on television via a persuasive speech have control
over many situauonal van-
ables. Their captive audiences have no opportunity to provide
immediate feedback, there-
fore the politician need not make any on-the-spot adjustments in
a preplanned message. The
well-known politician need not be concerned about exercising
the listening skills associated
with effecuve communicative interaction, because no direct
interaction with another indi-
vidual occurs.
But corporate sales representatives engage in interpersonal
rather than public commmu-
catlon. Because they interact directly with prospective
customers, they cannot adhere ngidly
to a preplanned rext. {(hey frequently encounter sales resistance
that is both unanticipated
and unwelcome or questions that directly challenge their
credibility. To be successful, they
Chapter 11/Selling Yourself Nonverbally 243
must be able to adjust to the continually changing demands of
distincnve kinds of coinmu-
nicative situations over which they can exercise only partial
conrrol.
Because of the distinctive Situational demands of successful
product selling, the devel-
opment and maintenance of a corporate salesperson's personal
credibility are particular

Challenges. To meet the constant threats to their credibility,
Jess successful salespeople of-
ten commun1caie in ways that are either inappropriately
aggressive or unassertive. The ag-
gressive salesperson, for example, seems IO take pride in
cultivating an image of iireverence.
toughness, and insensitivity that limits sales.
The development of a salesperson's credibility places a premium
on the ability to com-
municate 1n an assertive, as opposed to an unassertive or
aggressive, manner. Judgments of
a salesperson's level of assertiveness are strongly affected by
the nature of his or l1er visual
and vocal communication.
The No.nverbal Unassertive Salesperson
Many corporate sales representatives are so unassertive visually
and vocally that they dam-
age their credibility. Visually unassettive salespeople rarely
look at the prospect dunng the
greeting or the close of a sale, and they fail to sustain eye
contact dunng the sales presen-
tation. They tend to reveal therr anxiety by means of hand-to-
face gestures and other exrra-
neous movements, and thev use few gestures to emphasize the
selling points they do make.
Therr ngid bodily posture makes them seein unresponsive to
what the customer is saying.
Nonverbally unassertive sates reoresentativesfrequentty resoond
in inapproortate nonver-
bal ways when they encounrer sales resistance or receive
negauve _feedback from the cus-
tomer. When encountenng sales resistance, many sale~people
become defensive; they cross
their anns over thelf chest, smile nervously, and laugh ar

inappropriate times.
The nonverbally unassertive salesperson usually does not sound
convincing. I was dis-
mayed when I heard one salesman ask a client, "Can I send out
five cases of our product,
then?" in such a timid and unassertive tone of voice as to almost
assure noncompliance. If
you do not sound convinced thaI you are selling a product with
many tangible benefits, how
can you expect the sales prospec,t to be convinced?
Vocally unassertive salespeople often try IO let their product
sell itself. They tend to
read to the prospective custo1nerfrom co1npany literature in an
unexpress1ve voice that sug-
gests a lack of enthusiasm about the product. Therr speaking
rate is too fast to allow pur-
poseful pauses JUSt before they malce their most important
selling points. Although they
may not speak in a monotone. their pitch and volume ranges are
narrow. Thell' anx1etv is
reflected not only in an excessive speaking rate but also in the
nonfluenc1es they utter.
I made the following recornmendattons to one vocally
unassertive salesperson, after
listening to his sales presentation:
Avoid dropping the oztch of your voice at the end of sentences,
since this practice
makes you seem less enthusiastic about the oroduct _you are
selling~and indeci-
sive. Yoitr fllst speaking rate and many filled oauses will have
the effect of eroding
your perc~zved competence. When you asked the customer

whether you could
"send. out five cases ·of our product?" you said it with a lack of
conviction that
might make it more likely that the ciisromer would hesitate, or
say no. Be sure to
enunciate clearly and speak with vocal conviction. You 1nust
sound convinced thar
_244 -----'=.:::O..::~~":___ ____ T-Part 2/Devetopmg t/ie
Successful Communicator
I
Chapter 11 I Selling Yourself Nonverbally 245
you are sellin~ a superior product. Work for greater variation in
fJltch, rate, and
volume. Practice your sales vresenrat1on with a tape recorder,
lll order to·deveto
a persuasive voice. P
The Nonverbally Aggressive Salesperson
Nonverbal.ly aggressive salespeople have a different problem
that threatens thelr perceived
rrustworth1ness. They act and sound aggressive. Their apparent
confidence borders
00
at-
ro.gance. Their v1sua1 and vocal image 1s such that customers
can hardly avoid the feelin
that they are being coerced rather than persuaded. g

The agg~essive salesperson-frequently fixes the prospect with
an unremitting stare as-
sumes a bel!1gerent postur~, and shakes a finger in the
prospect's face 1n order to em~ha-
s1ze a selling point. Exaggerared gestures and postures are
often combined w"th
manipulative questions and judgmental statemenrs, such as·
"Why ask me?"- "D 't
1
agree?"- "Isn't th t h '" d" h . . , on you
· , a ng t. _;an T at's a false economy, son." Unassertive
salespeople
:ecome defensive When they encounter sales resistance, but the
aggresstve satesverson of-
en becomes condescending. The stare becomes more
pronounced, the tone of voice be-
c01nes sarcastic, and volume becomes excessive. Nonverbal
condescension is reinforced
CARTOON 11.1
IT WOULt> ~ _A ~/El
Ml'S"lAkf:O NO'f' io
J;uY Ou~ f>ROt:>LICT ! "
by starements such as, "It would be a senous mistake not to use
our product" or "Did you
really buy that product?"
In thelf zeai to sell their product, aggressive salespeople appear
to be insensitive to t11e
needs and feelings of the prospect. They not only dominate the

prospect visually, vocally,
and verbally, but they are poor listeners. Unknowingly, they
parody the hard-sell image of
the used-car salesperson. who is commonly believed to have a
credibility problem of gigan-
tic proportions.
After evaluanng t11e unsuccessful sates presentanon of one
aggressive salesman, I
made the following recommendations to him:
Jn your sales vresentation, you were so forceful that you ran the
risk of being per-
ceived as aggressive. Avoid putting the cusromer down,
sounding argumenrative
when the customer raises objections, and pointing and shaking
your finger at him.
Nore that at times your unremitting eye contact, your srrident
and condescending
tone of voice, ·and your e1nottonally loaded gestures made-you
seem aggressive
and less emvathic than you actually are. The ring of conviction
in your voice can
be a real selling asset, but do not get carried away so that you
sound like Mr. Hard-
sell. Given your ability to esrablish rapport with the customer, I
am not sure why
you lost this advantage by beconung aggressive. Rather than
drawing the custom-
er out and letting him do the talking, it seemed that you w~re
determined to control
the conversation from your.frame of reference. Jn short, seek to
be nonverbally as-
sertive rather than aggressive.
Developing Personal Credibility

The foregoing examples were designed to illustrate the impact
of nonverbal cues on credi-
bility. A careful reading of the previous section s11ould give
you a rather good idea of what
you should and should not do if you wish to sell yourself
nonverbally. Nonetlleless, you
Inlght find it helpful to have a specific set of guidelines to use
for develop1ng your own cred-
ibility. Figure 11.1 presents such a set of guidelines. The
guidelines focus on the four
classes of nonverbal cues that are known to have the strongest
potential for affecting per-
sonal credibility, Study the guidelines carefully, for they
represent the nonverbal profile of
the credible communicator.
You will recognize that the potentially powerful impact of
nonverbal cues on perceived
credibility is not confined to presidential candidates and
corporate salespeople. The impact
of individuals' communicative behaviors/cues has been proved
to be greater than the impact
of therr verbal communication rn many different interpersonal
contexts. Significantly, the
impact of nonverbal conununication is most pronounced on the
most important dimension
of credibility, competence (Barak, Patkin, & Dell, 1982). You
also should note that the im-
pact of a person's nonverbal commun1cat1ve behaviors/cues on
perceived competence is
gr~ater dunng the early part of inreraction with another person
(Exline, 1985).
Eye behaviors are treated first because they play a central role
in the development of

personal credibility. We spend 1nuch more ume mon1tonng the
eve region of persons with
whom we interact than any other Part of thelf body; therefore.
eve behaviors strongly affect
Judgments of credibility.
246 Part 21 Devetomng the Successful Communicator
FIGURE 11.1 G "d I" ui e mes for Developing Your Nonverbal
Credibility
Eye Behavwr.
Eye behaviors represem particularly im mrtan
vi duals' credibility. A well-deve10P(!ct c~JtUra!t scues that are
used to make _]Ud~:nents abom mdi-
eye behav1prs that will raise and low · wreotype for Amencans
specifies the kinds of
Positive Eye Beha . S er a commumcaror·s credibility.
vwrs. usramecl eve conracr while talki 1 t
while others talk to you; and the mamten f d' ng
0 0
hers; susunned eye contacr
mdividual(s) with whom vou are com ance 0 irect but not
cont:muous eye contact with the
N, · mumcatmg.
egauve Eye s~~havwrs: Looking down before res on din . . . . .
looking away from the person with h P g to a question,
exh1b1tlng shiftv eves·

w om vou are commumcatmg· k ep · '
casr; excessive blinking; and eve-flutter. ' e mg your eyes aown-
Gestures
Positive Gestures: Gestures should be' used to add
tures should appear spomaneous, unrehearsed and e;:i~~:~.s to
the points you are making; ges-
whether you Wiflh to continue talkin or wish' . '.gestures-should
be used to signal
elbows should be kept away from th~ bod . another md1vidua1
to begm talking; hands and
mtens1tv ot· your feelings aiid emotlons. Y, and geslures should
be used to commumcate the
Negative Gesrures: Gestures that sugcrest a comi n nervous-
should be avoided Hand-t f . nu icator Jacks confidence, is
defensive, or 1s
.. b · o- ace gestures throat-clearmg fidget! t
mg, v1s1 le perspiratJ.on on face or body 1. _1. ki ' ' ng, uggmg
ar Cloth-head movementi;, our-of-contexr smilin~ ~~ct 1~. ng,
h~nct-wnngmg, finger-tapping, extraneous
should be avoid(:d, as thev are apt to u ~ gumacm"', and weak
and tentatl ve gestures
· n ennme a commumcatocs credibilitv.
Postures
Posture is parucuJarly unportant m commumcatJ.n an md" . ,
s1ve the commumcator is; and how strono-J a g ividual S status
or P_ower; how respon-
port with interactmn partners. 0 Y commurucator desires to
estabhsh a warm rap-

Positive Postures: Commumcators who wish to b
expans1ve1v m front of them will ass e perceived as powerful
will spread theu arms
R
' ume an open and relaxed postu e d .11 lk
dentlv. espons1 veness 1s commumcated b f _ r , an WI wa
confi-
rucatmg. Rapport is established in part b ly reau.ern and
forceful postural shifts while commu-
you begm to answer a question. y eanmg torward and smiling
(when appropnatel as
Negauve Postures: Commurucators should avoid constnc
timid or 1ack; assi•rtiveness Bodily . "d· ted postures that
suggest that thev are
- · ng1 1ty, crossed arms and legs d 1
the body, and overall bodily rensmn are apt to 1 • anns an egs
kepr c1ose to mpa1r a commumcator's credibility
Voice ·
Commurucators' vocal cues frequently play a maior role 1 h
sonalitv characcenstJcs commumcators are presuffied t n s amng
therr credibilitv. The per-
of therr voices. Vocal qualities shape impressions abou~
ha~~b~~ often determmed by the sound
Positive Vocal Cues: A'commurucator sh uld f ere 1 i ity, status,
and power.
recognizing that a moderately fast rate w·~r ~uIVe or a
conversational speaking stvle while
tlon in pitch, rate, and volume is partlcuJ~rl en ance perceived
competence. Appropnace vana-
comperent, and dvnam1c person Monoto e Ydl~portam m

pro1ecting the image ot a confident,
been found to be important for 1~dividua:~ w:0
1':;i~ ~hould be avoided. Sufficient volume has
Neganve Vocal Cues: Commurucators should avoids ~ b~
perceived as competent and dynamic.
sound flat, tense, or nasal. Nasality is t P a ng m such a way
that therr voices
sh~uld also avoid speaking at an exce:s~:; ~~~~~~ undes!fable
vocal Qualitv. Commurucators
which suggest lack of confidence and sometimes a l~~~ulff not
use frequent, lengthy pauses,
enc1es have been shown to have a markedly negative im o
competen~~· .Th·e"foll~;"mg nonflu-
words, 1men1.1ptwns or pauses m mid ''" ,
0
_ pacr on credib1htv. ahs, repeatmg
· h - r'"' ce, omitting parts of words a d tt
who WIS to enhance their credibility h ld . ' n Stu enng. Persons
s ou srnve to ehmmate the use of such nonfluenc1es.
1

Chapter Ji/Selling Yourself Nonverbally 247
Chapter 3 discussed in detail some of the reasons our eye
behaviors play such a central
role 1n developing or damaging our personal credibility.
Perhaps t11e most important reason
is that our eye behaviors directly reflect the amount of self-
confidence we are perceived to
have. We know that communicators who exhibit behavioral
"tension-leakage" cues in the

form of nonfluenc1es, shifty eyes, and lip mo1sten1ng will be
Judged to be Jess competent
than those who d.o not (_Exline, 1985). Jurich and Jurich
(1974) found that failure to sustain
eye contact correlated more highly with traditional measures of
a communicator's level of
anxiety than anv other type of nonverbal cue. In short, failure to
sustain eye contact is the
most damaging thing you can do nonverbally if you are
particularly concerned about being
perceived as confident.
Eye bel1av1ors are important determinants of credibility
(Beebe, 1974; Burgoon,
Colcer, & Coker, 1986; Burgoon, Manusov, Mineo, & Hale,
1985; Burgoon & Saine, 1978;
Edinger & Patterson, 1983; Harper, Wiens, & Matarazzo, 1978;
Hemsley & Doob, 1978;
Kleinke, 1975). Tuey are important because we are simply not
believable unless we exhibit
certain types of eye behaviors (Webbink, 1986). Figure 11.1
specifies which eye behaviors
should and should not be exhibited in developing personal
credibility. As you study Figure
11.l recall Jimmy Carter·s eye behaviors 1n his first debate with
Gerald Ford and how they
affected his credibility. Think also of the visually unassertive
and aggressive salespeople
who damaged their credibility by exhibiting too few positive
eye behaviors and too 1nany
negative eye behaviors. Do you have any dOUbt that your own
eye behaviors have a maJor
impact on your credibility?
Gestures and postm·es can also exert a strong impact on our

credibility. Before consid-
erillg Figure 11.2, you may want to return to Chapter 4. Think
about the ldnds of nonverbal
cues tl1at communicate liking versus disliking, assertiveness
versus nonassertiveness, and
power versus powerlessness. You will recognize that u1e
ctevelopinent of your personal
credibility depends to a considerable degree on how likable,
assertive, and powerful others
perceive you to be. As you become actively engaged in
developing your own credibility by
nonverbal nieans, you must seek to eliminate the gestures and
postures that have the poten-
tial to negatively affect your perceived competence,
trustworthiness, and dynam1sn1.
Finally, vocal cues are an important nonverbal determ1naniof
credibility. As I indicated
in Chapter 8, the sound of one·s voice strongly affects the
personality traits and personal
qualities that person is presumed to have. Scherer, London, and
Wolf (1973) e1nphas1zed
that the "confident voice" exhibits considerable vanatJ.on 1n
pnch and volun1e, has high en-
ergy, and uses pauses of short duration infrequentlv.
Communicators who use the "confi-
dent voice" are perceived as more competent, forceful, active,
and enthus1ast1c than those
who use the "doubtful voice." The development of personal
credibility requires the devel-
opment of a confident voice.
The "doubtful voice," which suggests a low level of self-
confidence and a high level

of anxiety, must be eli1n1nated (Cooper, 1979; Erickson. Lind,
Johnson, & Barr, 1978;
Miller, Beaber, & Valone, 1976). Speech errors or nonfluenc1es
in the form of stuttenng,
tongue slips, incoherent sounds, sentence changes,
1ncomplettons, and pauses filled with
"ah," repetitions, and phrases such as "you know," are srrong
and reliable indicators of
anx1etv.
The individual who pauses and stutters before answenng a
questJ.on will probably
be seen as less competent The individual who pauses at length
and uses 1nany sentence
248
Part 2/Devetoptng l'he Successful Commu"• ,,,.cator
FIGURE 11.2 Nonverbal Cue Evaluation
Communicator
Pl ------------ Evaluator
ease momtor the communicator's ~:------------
a positi d nonverbat cues very carefi u t
vean negat1ve1mpactoncredib'l't Th u Y
odetermmewhichcueshad
ro m-~~ tile adjustments m Persuasive cor~~ e communrcators
Should use these evaiuat1ons
cred1b1hty. urucatron that are necessarv to develop personal
Du<.ing the ~:ales presentation did tl

• le salesperson:
Eye Behaviors
(_+)I. Sustain eye comact with customer?
( +)2. Look directly at the customer?
(-)3. Lo6kctown or away before maki ·
. . - ngapomt?
(-)4. Exh1b1t shiftv eyes?
(-)5. Blink excessrv~Jy?
Gestures
(+JL
(+)2.
(+)3,
(+)4.
(-)5,
(-)6.
(-)7,
(-)8.
(-)9,
Use hand and head gestures to c h mp asrze po1rits?
Use gestures to signal a desue to continue talkin~?

Kee~ hilllds and elbows out and awav from the bo~ ?
Avoid usmg distractmg h"~ct to f -- Y ·
. . "'-" - - ace gestures?
Exh1b1t anv weak ancftentatlve gestures?
Clear throat?
Smile out of context?
Fidget?
Put hand in pockets or on objects m the room?
Posture
(+)l. Assume an open and relaxed posture? -
( + )2. Use postural shifts to mdicate inrerest?
C + )3. Lean forward while making a PO mt?
{ + )4. Face the customer directly?
(-)5. Exhibit bodily tensmn?
(-)6. Appear ngid?
(-)7 · Commumcate with crossed arms and/or legs?
Vocal Cues
(+)L Use a conversational speaking style?
( + )2. Emphasize Important pomts with Change m Pitch and
volume?
(+)3. Communicate with sufficient volume? ·
(+) 4. Speak at ~:n appropnate rate?
(-)5. Speak with a limited pitch rate?

(-)6. Sound flat, tense, or nasal?
(-)7. Pause at le11gth before answenng questions?
Yes No
Chapter JI/Selling YoursdfNonverbally 249
FIGURE 11.2 (Continued)
(-)8. Use nonfluenc1es such as "ah" and word repetitions?
(-)9. Interrupt the cuswmer?
Write an evaluauon of the persuasive commumcat10n. Begm by
rev1ewmg the assessments you
have made on page L Then identify each of the communtcative
cues that you felt had a positive
or negative impact on credibility. Be sure to identify pomts not
covered on the evaluation sheet
Desirable As peers of Commumcauon:
Undesirable Aspects of Commurncation:
Suggest10ns for Improvement:
fragments 1n trying to answer a question will probably be seen
as untrustworthy; because
such vocal cues are frequently associated with evasiveness.
Finally, the individual who ex-
hibits many nonfluenc1es will probably be seen as less than
dynamic. Nonfluenc1es corre-
late highlv with the perceived anxiety level of a nonfluent
communicator (J Urich & Jurich,
1974).

Communicators' credibility can also be affected by whether they
speak with an accent
or dialect and by what kind of accent or dialect t11ey exhibit.
Regional accents have been
rated in terms of therr credibility; 1n general, the closer you
come to speaking a standard
midwesten1 dialect, the more competent you will be Judged to
be. Although individuals
who speak a regional accent may judge you to be more
trustworthy if your own accent
sounds like theirs, thev will see vou as less competent if that
accent gets moderate to low
marks on the competence dimension of credibility (Giles &
Street, 1985).
Senator Ted Kennedy's suikingly nonfluent responses to Roger
Mudd's quesnons il-
lustrate drrunattcally the powerfully negative impact that
nonfluenc1es can have on a per-
son's credibility. What did Kennedy say when Roger Mudd
asked him if he thought that
anybody would ever really believe his explanahon of
Chappaquiddick? Kennedv replied:
Well there's the, the problem is, is from that night uh, !found,
the, the the, uh, con-
duct of behavior almost beyond belief myself. I mean that's
wh.Y it's been uh
(pause) uh, but I think that tha(s that's the way it was. That
that's, that happens
•
250 Part 21 Dev.~lopmg the Successful Communicator

to be the way it was. Now, uh, /find as I've stated it, that I've
found that the con-
duct that uh. in that evening and in, in the uh, as a result of the
mwact of the ac-
cident and the, the sense of loss, the sense of tragedy and the,
the whole set of c1rc,
cucumstances the uh, that the uh, behavior was inexplicable. So
!find that those,
uh, those types of" questions as they apply to that are quest1ons
of my own, uh,
could as well ut uh, that, that happens to be the way u was.
(CBS Television, 1979)
Figure 11. ·1 spells out in detail what vou should and should not
do if you are to use the
full potential of your voice to develop your own credibility. As
we have seen, the cultivation
of the persuasive voice is a ma1or responsibility of individuals
who wish to develop their
personal credibility.
Monitoring the Communicator's Nonverbal Cues
In order to make full use of the potential of nonverbal cues in
developing their personal
credibility, individuals must be able to monitor tile nonverbal
cues they exhibit in specific
persuasive s1tuat16ns. Figure 1L2 should be used to make a
record of the nonverbal cues
you actually do exhibit.
The: form provided in Figure 11.2 n1ay be used to make a
record of the nonverbal cues
you exhibit 1n either a real or a s1mu1ated s1tuat1on. You
illlght try to sell a product to a po-

tential customer 1n a real s1tuat1on where other individuals can
unobtrusively observe your
persuasive effort, or you could make a sales presentation 1n a
role-playing situation. In ei-
ther case, it is easy enough to ask a third party to make a record
of your nonverbal cues.
Perhaps you could have tile session videotaped. In that case,
either you or another person
could record your visual and auditory cues by placing check
marks rn tile appropnate
blanks while the videotape was being replayed.
StuO'.ents and trainees who have used the mon1tonng and
evaluation fonn provided in
Figure 11.2 have found it to be valuable. The completed form
provides a detailed profile of
tile nonv1~rbal cues you actually have exhibited in a persuasive
situation. The guidelines in
Figure 11 . .1 identify tl1e profile of nonVerbal cues you should
exhibit in order to be most
credible. By companng your actual profile with the desired
profile, you should have a clear
idea of the modifications you will have to n1ake in your
nonverbal commun1catlon if you
wish to sell yourself more effecuvely.
Summary
Selling yourself is essential for successful persuasive
co1nmunicatton. Selling yourself suc-
cessfully requll'es the development of your personal credibility.
Your credibility, 1n turn, is
defined by how comperent, trustworthy, and dynamic others
judge you to be. Co1npetence
and trustworthiness are the most important dimensions of
credibility; competence has re-

peatedly been found to be more important than trustworthiness.
Tradi!iona! treatments of credibility have been based on the
assumpuon that our per-
ceived cornpetence, trustworthiness. and dynamism are
controlled almost exclusively by
tile words we utter. This chapter provides 2nformat1on that
challenges that assumption. In
Chapter 111 Selling Your.ff{{ Nonverbally 251
fact, we now Jcnow that no·nverbal cues have the potential to
exe1t a controlling influence on
our personal credibility, In many in~tance~ andidates and
corporate sales representatives
The persuasive efforts of .Presrdentl c 'fi k" ds of nonverbal
cues affect our . . ·n tr t how and why spec11c in
analvzed 1n this chapter t us a e cal cues are highlighted as the
most
credibility. Eye behaviors, gestures, postures, and vo
important determinants of credibility. _ ·ia· potential of
nonverbal cues, care-
im use of the rmage-bu1 Ing
In order to make maximt . de lines in Figure 11. t. The
nonverbal profile pre-
ful attention should be given to the gu~ s11ould and should not
do to develop
sented in the figure spells out in det'ad1l wnat Y~thu a
svstematlc means of identifying the
"b"l' p· 11 2 prov1 es you w1
personal cred1 1 Ity. igure · . it Bv carefully comparing tile

nonverbal cues you
nonverbal profile you actually do exh1b id .. b.t y~u can
detennine what changes must
exhibit with the nonver~al cues v~~:::r~on ~~~·~e~ to sell
yourself successfully.
be made 1n your nonve1 bal comm
References
ABC Television (1994, June 29). Nightline, interview
with Senator Robert Dole.
CBS Television (1976, Sep1ember 23), The first Ford
Caner presidential debate.
CBS Television (1979,November4). CBS reports: Teddv.
CBS Television (1986, November 19). President Ronald
Reagan press conference.
ABC Television (1994, November 29). Nightline, inter·
view with Senator Robert Dote.
Baird, J.E., Jr. (1 977 ). Some nonverbal elements of
1eadership emergenct<. Southern Speech Commu-
nication Journal, 42. 352-361.
Barak, A., Patkin, J., & Dell, D. M. (1982). Effects of
certain counselor behav10rs on perceived exp~rt-
ness and attractiveness. Journal ot Counseling
PsvcholO$Y, 29, 261-267 · .
Beebe, S. A. (1974). Eve cornacc A nonverbal detenn1-

nant of speaker credibility. Communication Edu-
cation, 23, 21-25.
Brembeck, W. L., & Howell, W. s. (1976). Persuaswn:
A means Of social influence (2nd ed.). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Burgoon. J. K. 0976). The ideal source: A reexamma-
t10n of source credibility measuremen1. Central
States Speech Journal, 27, 200-206.
B
J K Coker D. A., & Coker, R. A. (1986).
urgoon, · ., ' At t t
Commu01cat1ve effecrs ot gaze behavior. es o
two contrastmg explanations. Human Communi-
cation Research, 12, 495-524.
Burgoon, J. K., Ma11usov, V., Min:~· P., & 1:1a_1:, J. L.
(1985). Effects of gaze on h1nng, cred1b1htv, at-
traction and re1anonal message mterpretatrnn.
Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 9, 133-145. .
Burgoon, J. K., & Saine, T. (1978). The unspoken dia-
logue: An mtroducuon to nonverbal commumca-
non. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
CBS Television (1995, October 7). Face the Nation, in-
terview with Senawr Robert Dote.

COMM4153 NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT JOURN.docx

COMM4153 NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT JOURN.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to COMM4153 NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT JOURN.docx

Similar to COMM4153 NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT JOURN.docx (19)

More from mccormicknadine86

More from mccormicknadine86 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

COMM4153 NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT JOURN.docx