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 …

1
CREDIBILITY IN
NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION
THREE DIMENSIONS OF CREDIBILITY
Credibility is an essential for successful persuasive
communication
The speaker’s credibility is evaluated by the message receiver
Competence
Trustworthiness
dimensions for
credibility
Dynamism
measuring how
“potent” the communicator’s behavior is
EXERCISE: PERSUASION
Find a topic/cause/issue that you believe in
Ex.:

2
COMPETENCE
Most important dimension
to be recognized as an expert in the subject discussed and,
as a result, gaining confidence
has traditionally been perceived as an element that’s
gained through verbal communication (i.e., information);
but now, NV is recognized as an important element
“tension-leakage” cues would be judged less competent:
nonfluencey, shifty eyes, lip moistening.
TRUSTWORTHINESS
trustworthiness is a measure of our character as seen by those
persons
with whom we interact
based on assessment of an individual’s personal qualities,
intentions,
and attitude
generally evaluated through nonverbal
DYNAMISM

defines people’s credibility or image in terms of the level of
confidence they are perceived to have.
trigger a reciprocal feeling of confidence in those with whom
we
communicate.
“shy, introverted, soft-spoken individual is generally perceived
as less credible than the assertive extroverted and forceful
individual.”
3
INFLUENCING ATTITUDES & BEHAVIORS
Direct-Effects/Social Meanings Model of Immediacy
al immediacy substantially enhances a
persuader's change of gaining compliance
-& Gaze have additive effects on compliance
petition,
asking for a favor, or seeking assistance from a stranger, the
combination of touch and gaze considerably increases one’s
chance
of achieving compliances
THEORIES ABOUT INCREASING
CREDIBILITY
1. Direct-Effects/Social Meaning Models

2. Communication Accommodation Model
3. Expectancy Violations Theory
EXPLAINING
DIRECT-EFFECTS/SOCIAL MEANING MODELS
Power
command tone of voice) give an added persuasive boost to
immediacy behaviors
Attention
compliance
sensory stimulation
4
EXPLAINING
DIRECT-EFFECTS/SOCIAL MEANING MODELS
Warmth
Liking
like, evaluate highly and prefer; and they avoid or move
away from things they dislike, evaluate negatively or
don’t prefer

COMMUNICATION-ACCOMMODATION THEORY
attractive, pleasant, and intelligible
to the style or rate of the interactant, event though most
speakers are unaware of this accommodating
speak at the same rate and share similar voice tones as
their own (i.e., matching of vocal cues)
EXPECTANCY VIOLATIONS THEORY
rewarding communicators are more persuasive when they
violate expectancies BUT unrewarding communicators are
more persuasive when their behavior is consistent with
expectancies
dible,
knowledgeable, and competent (e.g., physical and vocal
attractiveness)
distraction models: irrelevant distractions may reduce
persuasion
5
BEHAVIORS TO ESTABLISH CREDIBILITY
Eye Behavior

demonstrating confidence
of eye
behavior
Gestures and Postures
Voice
of the speaker’s
personality traits
and personal qualities
incompletions, pauses filled with
ah, phrases like “you know”
Online course Lectures and Materials
3/22-27: Communicative Competence-Credibility and
Persuasion
Communicative Competence:
The readings and lectures will provide you with the background
to understand (1) why credibility is essential to one's ability to
persuade others; (2) how to develop communicative
competence.
Learning Objectives:
Throughout this lesson, you should be able to:
Explain the different dimensions of credibility
Recognize the different strategies to improve your credibility
Identify different ways credibility can be essential to improve
one's ability to persuade others.

Journal 1 requirements:
Credibility and Competence
For instructions and Evaluation Forms, please use: COMM4153
Journal1 competence-S2020.pdf
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.

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 cargillfilberto

More from cargillfilberto (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

COMM4153 NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT JOURN.docx