Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-956mj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-28T18:14:03.183Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Virtual gestures: embodiment and nonverbal behavior in computer-mediated communication

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Gary Bente  and
Nicole C. Krämer
Edited by
Arvid Kappas  and
Nicole C. Krämer
Gary Bente
Affiliation:
University of Cologne, Germany
Nicole C. Krämer
Affiliation:
Universität Duisberg, Essen
Arvid Kappas
Affiliation:
Jacobs University Bremen
Nicole C. Krämer
Affiliation:
Universität Duisburg–Essen
Get access

Summary

Overview:Starting from an overview of the role of nonverbal channels in computer-mediated communication (CMC), a functional model of nonverbal behavior as a possible framework for future research is introduced. Based on this, several technologies and systems for avatar-based interaction are presented, and their impact on psychological aspects of the communication is discussed. The focus of the chapter lies on the discussion of methodological preconditions for the systematic analysis of avatar-based communication. An avatar-based communication platform is introduced that allows for real-time transmission of gaze, head movements, and gestures in net communication. Different research paradigms are discussed that might lead to a deeper understanding of the function of nonverbal cues in CMC.

Introduction

As we know from psychological research and also from our everyday experience, nonverbal behavior (NVB), such as facial expressions, gaze, gestures, postures, and body movements, has a strong impact on the process and the results of our communicative efforts. They help to structure the course of verbal exchange, they complement our speech activity, they determine our social impressions, and they affect the emotional climate of our conversations. In this sense we may consider our body as a natural communication tool that, in contrast to speech, is rarely used consciously and does not refer to an explicit semantic code. As Edward Sapir (1949 [1928]) pointed out, “We respond to gestures with an extreme alertness and, one might almost say, in accordance with an elaborate and secret code that is written nowhere, known to none, and understood by all” (p. 556).

Type
Chapter
Information
Face-to-Face Communication over the Internet
Emotions in a Web of Culture, Language, and Technology
 , pp. 176 - 210
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aguinis, H., Simonsen, M. M., and Pierce, C. A. (1998). Effects of nonverbal behavior on perceptions of power bases. Journal of Social Psychology, 138, 455–469.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Argyle, M. (1975). Bodily Communication. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Argyle, M. and Cook, M. (1976). Gaze and Mutual Gaze. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Argyle, M., Salter, V., Nicholson, H., Williams, M., and Burgess, P. (1970). The communication of inferior and superior attitudes by verbal and nonverbal signals. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9, 222–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Lemery, C. R., and Mullett, J. (1986). I show how you feel: motor mimicry as a communicative act. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 322–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bente, G. (2002). Entschlüsselung einer ungewissen Botschaft: zur Transkription und Analyse nonverbaler Kommunikationsprozesse [Decoding of an uncertain message: about the transcription and analysis of nonverbal communication processes]. In Jäger, L. and Stanitzek, G. (eds), Transkribieren [Trancription] (pp. 133–152). Munich: Fink.Google Scholar
Bente, G., Feist, A., and Elder, S. (1996). Person perception effects of computer-simulated male and female head movement. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 20, 213–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bente, G. and Krämer, N. C. (2001). Psychologische Aspekte bei der Implementierung und Evaluierung nonverbal agierender Interface-Agenten [Psychological aspects of implementation and evaluation of nonverbally operating interface agents]. In Oberquelle, H., Oppermann, R., and Krause, J. (eds), Mensch und Computer 2001 [Humans and the Computer 2001] (pp. 275–285). Stuttgart: Teubner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bente, G. and Krämer, N. C. (2002). Virtuelle Gesten: VR-Einsatz in der nonverbalen Kommunikationsforschung [Virtual gestures: use of VR in nonverbal communication research]. In Bente, G., Krämer, N. C., and Petersen, A. (eds), Virtuelle Realitäten [Virtual Reality] (pp. 81–107). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Bente, G. and Krämer, N. C. (2008). Effects of nonverbal signals. In Donsbach, W. (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Communication (pp. 3334–3339). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bente, G., Krämer, N. C., and Eschenburg, F. (2008a). Is there anybody out there? Analyzing the effects of embodiment and nonverbal behavior in avatar-mediated communication. In Konijn, E., Utz, S., Tanis, M., and Barnes, S. (eds), Mediated Interpersonal Communication (pp. 131–157). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bente, G., Krämer, N. C., Petersen, A., and Ruiter, J. P. (2001a). Computer animated movement and person perception: methodological advances in nonverbal behavior research. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 25, 151–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bente, G., Krämer, N. C., Trogemann, G., Piesk, J., and Fischer, O. (2001b). Conversing with electronic devices: an integrated approach towards the generation and evaluation of nonverbal behavior in face-to-face like interface agents. In Heuer, A. and Kirste, T. (eds), Intelligent Interactive Assistance and Mobile Multimedia Computing (pp. 67–76). Rostock: Neuer Hochschulschriftenverlag.Google Scholar
Bente, G., Petersen, A., Krämer, N. C., and Ruiter, J. P. (2001c). Transcript-based computer animation of movement: evaluating a new tool for nonverbal behavior research. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 33, 303–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bente, G., Rüggenberg, S., Krämer, N. C., and Eschenburg, F. (2008b). Avatar-assisted net-working. Increasing social presence and interpersonal trust in net-based collaborations. Human Communication Research, 34(2), 287–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentler, P. M. (1969). Semantic space is (approximately) bipolar. Journal of Psychology, 71, 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernieri, F. J. and Rosenthal, R. (1991). Interpersonal coordination: behavioral matching and interactional synchrony. In Feldman, R. S. and Rimé, B. (eds), Fundamentals of Nonverbal Behavior (pp. 401–432). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Biocca, F. (1992). Communication within virtual reality: creating space for research. Journal of Communication, 42, 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biocca, F., Burgoon, J., Harms, C., and Stoner, M. (2001). Criteria and Scope Conditions for a Theory and Measure of Social Presence. East Lansing, MI: Media Interface and Network Design (M.I.N.D.) Lab. www.temple.edu/ispr/prev_conferences/proceedings/2001/Biocca1.pdf.Google Scholar
Birdwhistell, R. L. (1970). Kinesics and Context. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Blascovich, J., Loomis, J., Beall, A. C., Swinth, K. R., Hoyt, C. L., and Bailenson, J. N. (2002). Immersive virtual environment technology as a methodological tool for social psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 13, 146–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollen, L., Hoppe, U., Milrad, M., and Pinkwart, N. (2002). Collaborative modelling in group learning environments. In Davidsen, P. I., Mollona, E., Diker, V. G., Langer, R. S., and Rowe, J. I. (eds), Proceedings of the XX International Conference of the System Dynamics Society (p. 53). Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
Brunner, L. J. (1979). Smiles can be back channels. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 728–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgoon, J. K., Dillman, L., and Stern, L. (1993). Adaptation in dyadic interaction: defining and operationalizing patterns of reciprocity and compensation. Communication Theory, 4, 295–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buxton, W., Sellen, A., and Sheasby, M. (1997). Interfaces for multiparty videoconferencing. In Finn, K., Sellen, A., and Wilber, S. (eds), Video- Mediated Communication (pp. 385–400). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Camras, L. (1982). Ethological approaches to nonverbal communication. In Feldman, R. (ed.), Development of Nonverbal Behavior in Children (pp. 3–28). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappella, J. N. (1991). Mutual adaptation and relativity of measurement. In Montgomery, B. M. and Duck, S. (eds), Studying Interpersonal Interaction (pp. 103–117). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Carli, L. L., LaFleur, S. J., and Loeber, C. C. (1995). Nonverbal behavior, gender, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 1030–1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carli, L. L., Martin, C., Leatham, G., Lyons, K., and Tse, I. (1993). Perceptions of nonverbal behavior. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
Cassell, J., Bickmore, T., Billinghurst, M., Campbell, L., Chang, K., Vilhjálmsson, H., et al. (1999). Embodiment in conversational interfaces: Rea. CHI'99 Conference Proceedings (pp. 520–527). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
Chartrand, T. L. and Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chameleon effect: the preception–behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chovil, N. (1991). Discourse-oriented facial displays in conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 25, 163–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Condon, W. S. and Ogston, W. D. (1966). Sound-film analysis of normal and pathological behavior patterns. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 143, 338–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DePaulo, B. M. and Friedman, H. S. (1998). Nonverbal communication. In Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T., and Lindzey, G. (eds), The Handbook of Social Psychology (4th edn., vol. II, pp. 3–40). Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Deutsch, F. M., LeBaron, D., and Fryer, M. M. (1987). What is in a smile?Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11, 341–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donaghy, W. C. and Goldberg, J. (1991). Head movement and gender differences following the onset of simultaneous speech. Southern Speech Communication Journal, 56, 114–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dovidio, J. F., Ellyson, S. L., Keating, C. F., Heltman, K., and Brown, C. E. (1988). The relationship of social power to visual displays of dominance between men and women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, S. (1972). Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 283–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, S. and Fiske, D. W. (1979). Dynamic patterning in conversation. American Scientist, 67, 90–98.Google Scholar
Edinger, J. A. and Patterson, M. L. (1983). Nonverbal involvement and social control. Psychological Bulletin, 93(1), 30–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Efron, D. (1941). Gesture and Environment. New York: King's Crown Press.Google Scholar
Ekman, P. and Friesen, W. V. (1969). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: categories, origins, usage and coding. Semiotica, 1, 49–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Exline, R. V. (1972). Visual interaction: the glances of power and preference. In Cole, J. (ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 163–206). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Exline, R. V., Ellyson, S. L., and Long, B. (1975). Visual behavior as an aspect of power role relationships. In Pliner, P., Krames, L., and Alloway, T. (eds), Nonverbal Communication of Aggression (pp. 21–52). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frey, S. (1999). Die Macht des Bildes [The Picture's Power]. Berne, Switzerland: Huber.Google Scholar
Frey, S., Hirsbrunner, H.-P., Florin, A., Daw, W., and Crawford, R. (1983). A unified approach to the investigation of nonverbal and verbal behavior in communication research. In Doise, W. and Moscovici, S. (eds), Current Issues in European Social Psychology (pp. 143–199). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fridlund, A. J. (1997). The new ethology of human facial expressions. In Russell, J. A. and Fernández-Dols, J. M. (eds), The Psychology of Facial Expression: Studies in Emotion and Social Interaction (pp. 103–132). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, H. S. (1979). The interactive effects of facial expressions of emotion and verbal messages on perceptions of affective meaning. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 15, 453–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giles, H., Mulac, A., Bradac, J. J., and Johnson, P. (1987). Speech accommodation theory: the first decade and beyond. In McLaughlin, M. L. (ed.), Communication Yearbook (vol. X, pp. 13–48). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Graham, J. A. and Argyle, M. (1975). The effects of different patterns of gaze combined with different facial expressions on impression formation. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 1, 178–182.Google Scholar
Grammer, K. (1990). Strangers meet: laughter and nonverbal signs of interest in opposite-sex encounters. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 14, 209–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grammer, K., Filova, V., and Fieder, M. (1997). The communication paradox and a possible solution: toward a radical empiricism. In Schmitt, A., Atzwanger, K., Grammer, K., and Schäfer, K. (eds), New Aspects of Human Ethology (pp. 91–120). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grammer, K., Kruck, K. B., and Magnusson, M. S. (1998). The courtship dance: patterns of nonverbal synchronization in opposite-sex encounters. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 22, 2–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haase, R. F. and Tepper, D. T. (1972). Nonverbal components of empathic communication. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 19, 417–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halberstadt, A. G. and Saitta, M. B. (1987). Gender, nonverbal behavior, and dominance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 257–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hehl, F. J., Eisenriegler, E., Jokiel, R., and Channon, S. (1998). The negative function of nonverbal communication in anorexic families: a family experiment. In Saklofske, D. H. and Eysenck, S. B. (eds), Individual differences in children and adolescents (pp. 50–62). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
Henley, N. (1977). Body Politics: Power, Sex, and Nonverbal Communication. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Kappas, A., Hess, U., Barr, C. L., and Kleck, R. E. (1994). Angle of regard: the effect of vertical viewing angle on the perception of facial expression. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 18, 263–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, C. F., Mazur, A., and Segall, M. H. (1977). Facial gestures which influence the perception of status. Social Psychology Quarterly, 40, 374–378.Google Scholar
Keeley, M. P. and Hart, A. J. (1994). Nonverbal behavior in dyadic interactions. In Duck, S. (ed.), Dynamics of Relationships. Vol. IV: Understanding Relationship Processes (pp. 135–162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (1967). Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction: some examples described. Acta Psychologica, 26, 22–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kepplinger, H. M. and Donsbach, W. (1983). Der Einfluß von Kameraperspektiven auf Anhänger und Gegner eines Politikers [The influence of camera perspectives on supporters and opponents of a politician]. In Schulz, W. and Schönbach, K. (eds), Massenmedien und Wahlen[The Mass Media and Elections] (pp. 406–423). Munich: Ölschläger.Google Scholar
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., and McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123–1134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krämer, N. C. (2001). Bewegende Bewegung: Sozio-emotionale Wirkungen nonverbalen Verhaltens und deren experimentelle Untersuchung mittels Computeranimation [Moving Movement: Socioemotional Effects of Nonverbal Behavior and Their Experimental Investigation with Computer Animation]. Lengerich, Germany: Pabst.Google Scholar
Krämer, N. C. (2008). Nonverbal communication. In Blascovich, J. and Hartel, C. (eds), Human Behavior in Military Contexts (pp. 150–188). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Krämer, N. C. and Bente, G. (2002). Virtuelle Helfer: embodied conversational agents in der Mensch-Computer-Interaktion [Virtual helpers: embodied conversational agents in human–computer interaction]. In Bente, G., Krämer, N. C., and Petersen, A. (eds), Virtuelle Realitäten [Virtual Reality] (pp. 203–225). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Krämer, N. C., Tietz, B., and Bente, G. (2003). Effects of embodied interface agents and their gestural activity. In Aylett, R., Ballin, D., Rist, T., and Rickel, J. (eds), 4th International Working Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents (pp. 292–300). Hamburg: Springer.Google Scholar
Krauss, R. M. and Chiu, C. Y. (1998). Language and social behavior. In Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T., and Lindzey, G. (eds), The Handbook of Social Psychology (4th edn., vol. II, pp. 41–81). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Krumhuber, E. and Kappas, A. (2005). Moving smiles: the role of dynamic components for the perception of the genuineness of smiles. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 29, 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaCrosse, M. B. (1975). Nonverbal behavior and perceived counselor attractiveness and persuasiveness. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22, 563–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanzetta, J. T., Sullivan, D. G., Masters, R. D., and McHugo, G. J. (1986). Emotional and cognitive responses to televised images of political leaders. In Kraus, S. and Perloff, R. M. (eds), Mass Media and Political Thought: An Information Processing Approach (pp. 85–116). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Larnier, J. (2001). Virtually there: three-dimensional tele-immersion may eventually bring the world to your desk. Scientific American, 284(4), 66–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipps, T. (1907). Das Wissen von fremden Ichen [The knowledge of foreign egos]. In Lipps, T. (ed.), Psychologische Untersuchungen [Psychological Research] (pp. 694–722). Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar
McGrath, J. E. and Hollingshead, A. B. (1993). Putting the “group” back in group support systems: some theoretical issues about dynamic processes in groups with technological enhancements. In Jessup, L. M. and Valacich, J. S. (eds), Group Support Systems: New Perspectives (pp. 78–96). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal About Thought. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Mehrabian, A. (1969). Significance of posture and position in the communication of attitude and status relationships. Psychological Bulletin, 71, 359–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehrabian, A. and Williams, M. (1969). Nonverbal concomitants of perceived and intended persuasiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 37–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millar, F., Rogers, L. E., and Bavelas, J. (1984). Identifying patterns of verbal conflict in interpersonal dynamics. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 48, 231–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montagner, H., Henry, J. C., Lombardot, M., Benedini, M., Restoin, A., Bolzoni, D., et al. (1977). Études étho-physiologiques de groupes d'enfants de 14 mois à l'école maternelle [Physiological studies on a group of 14-month-old children in a nursery]. Psychologie Médicale, 9, 2075–2112.Google Scholar
Müller, K., Kempf, F., and Leukert, S. (2002). Besser Kollaborieren durch VR? Evaluation einer VR-Umgebung für kollaboratives Lernen [Better collaboration through VR? Evaluation of a VR environment for collaborative learning]. In Beck, U. and Sommer, W. (eds), Learntec 2002 (vol. II, pp. 475–482). Karlsruhe, Germany: Karlsruher Messe- und Kongress-GmbH.Google ScholarPubMed
Müller, K., Troitzsch, H., and Renkl, A. (2003). Der Einfluss nonverbaler Signale auf den Kommunikationsprozess in einer kollaborativen virtuellen Umgebung [The influence of nonverbal signals on the communication process in a collaborative-virtual environment]. Zeitschrift für Medienpsychologie, 15, 24–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naimark, M. (1990). Realness and interactivity. In Laurel, B. (ed.), The Art of Human–Computer Interface Design (pp. 455–459). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Palmer, M. T. and Simmons, K. B. (1995). Communicating intentions through nonverbal behaviors: conscious and nonconscious encoding of liking. Human Communication Research, 22, 128–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, M. L. (1982). A sequential functional model of nonverbal exchange. Psychological Review, 89, 231–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, M. L. (1994). Strategic functions of nonverbal exchange. In Daly, J. A. and Wiemann, J. M. (eds), Strategic Interpersonal Communication (pp. 273–293). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Petersen, A. (2002). Interpersonale Kommunikation im Medienvergleich [Interpersonal Communication in Media Comparisons]. Münster, Germany: Waxmann.Google Scholar
Petersen, A. and Bente, G. (2001). Situative und technologische Determinanten des Erlebens Virtueller Realität [Situational and technological determinants of experiencing virtual reality]. Zeitschrift für Medienpsychologie, 3, 138–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, A., Bente, G., and Krämer, N. C. (2002). Virtuelle Stellvertreter: Analyse avatar-vermittelter Kommunikationsprozesse [Virtual representatives: analysis of avatar-mediated communication processes]. In Bente, G., Krämer, N. C., and Petersen, A. (eds), Virtuelle Realitäten (pp. 227–253). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Pimental, K. and Teixiera, K. (1993). Virtual Reality: Through the New Looking Glass. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Rawlins, C. (1989). The impact of teleconferencing on the leadership of small decision-making groups. Journal of Organisational Behavior Management, 10, 37–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Remland, M. (1982). The implicit ad hominem fallacy: nonverbal displays of status in argumentative discourse. Journal of the American Forensics Association, 19, 79–86.Google Scholar
Richards, L., Rollerson, B., and Phillips, J. (1991). Perceptions of submissiveness: implications for victimization. Journal of Psychology, 125, 407–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rickenberg, R. and Reeves, B. (2000). The effects of animated characters on anxiety, task performance, and evaluations of user interfaces. Letters of CHI 2000, April, 49–56.Google Scholar
Riggio, R. E. and Friedman, H. S. (1986). Impression formation: the role of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 421–427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rimé, B. (1983). Nonverbal communication or nonverbal behavior? Towards a cognitive-motor theory of nonverbal behavior. In Doise, W. and Moscovici, S. (eds), Current Issues in European Social Psychology (pp. 85–141). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, H. M. (1966). Approval-seeking and approval-avoiding functions of verbal and nonverbal responses in the dyad. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 597–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruiter, J. P. (1998). Gesture and Speech Production. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Ponson & Looijen.Google Scholar
Rutter, , , D. R. and Stephenson, , , G. M. (1977). The role of visual communication in synchronizing conversation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 29–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rutter, D. R., Stephenson, G. M., Ayling, K., and White, P. A. (1978). The timing of looks in dyadic conversation. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 17, 17–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., and Jefferson, G. A. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sapir, E. (1949 [1928]). The unconscious patterning of behavior in society. In Mandelbaum, D. G. (ed.), Selected Writings of Edward Sapir (pp. 544–559). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Scheflen, A. E. (1964). The significance of posture in communication systems. Psychiatry, 27, 316–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression Management: The Self-Concept, Social Identity, and Interpersonal Relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
Shapiro, M. A. and McDonald, D. G. (1992). I'm not a real doctor, but I play one in virtual reality: implications of virtual reality for judgments about reality. Journal of Communication, 42, 94–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Short, J., Williams, E., and Christie, B. (1976). The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Sieber, J. E. (1996). Typically unexamined communication processes in research. In Stanley, B. H. and Sieber, J. E. (eds), Research Ethics: A Psychological Approach (pp. 73–104). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. M., Friedlander, M. L., and Heatherington, L. (1992). Nonverbal relational control in family communication. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 16, 117–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slater, M., Howell, J., Steed, A., Pertaub, D.-B., Garau, M., and Springel, S. (2000). Acting in virtual reality. In Proceedings of the Third ACM Conference on Collaborative Virtual Environments, CVE '2000 (pp. 103–110). www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/m.slater/vr/Projects/Acting/Publications/actingpaper.pdf.Google Scholar
Slater, M., Sadagic, A., Usoh, M., and Schroeder, R. (1998). Small group behaviour in a virtual and real environment: a comparative study. Paper presented at the BT Workshop on Presence in Shared Virtual Environments, June. www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/m.slater/BTWorkshop/Inhabit/.Google Scholar
Slater, M. and Steed, A. (2002). Meeting people virtually: experiments in shared virtual environments. In Schroeder, R. (ed.), The Social Life of Avatars: Presence and Interaction in Shared Virtual Environments (pp. 146–171). London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spears, R. and Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or panopticon? The hidden power in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 21, 427–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spears, R., Lea, M., and Lee, S. (1990). De-individuation and group polarisation in computer-mediated communication. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sproull, L. and Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492–1512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steuer, J. (1992). Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42, 73–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suler, J. (1999). The psychology of avatars and graphical space in multimedia chat communities: a study of the palace. In Beiswenger, M. (ed.), Chat Communication (pp. 305–344). Stuttgart: Ibidem.Google Scholar
Wallbott, H. G. (1995). Congruence, contagion, and motor mimicry: mutualities in nonverbal exchange. In Markova, J., Graumann, C. F., and Foppa, K. (eds), Mutalities in Dialogue (pp. 82–98). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: impersonal, interpersonal and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J. H., and Jackson, D. D. (1967). Pragmatics of Human Communication: A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies, and Paradoxes. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Wortberg, S., Bente, G., and Tietz, B. (2003, March). Genderperzeption und Geschlechtskonstruktion in virtuellen Kommunikationsumgebungen [Gender perception and sex construction in virtual communication environments]. Poster presented at the 45. Tagung experimentell arbeitender Psychologen (TeaP), Kiel, Germany.Google Scholar
Yngve, V. H. (1970). On getting a word in edgewise. In Papers from the Sixth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (pp. 567–577). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Young, D. M. and Beier, E. G. (1977). The role of applicant nonverbal communication in the employment interview. Journal of Employment Counseling, 14, 154–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeltzer, D. (1992). Autonomity, interaction, and presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 1, 127–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×