2 results
2 - Biological and Social Signaling Systems
- from Part I - Conceptual Models of Social Signals
-
- By Kory Floyd, Arizona State University, Valerie Manusov, University of Washington
- Edited by Judee K. Burgoon, University of Arizona, Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann, Université de Genève, Maja Pantic, Imperial College London, Alessandro Vinciarelli, University of Glasgow
-
- Book:
- Social Signal Processing
- Published online:
- 13 July 2017
- Print publication:
- 08 May 2017, pp 11-22
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
As complex beings, humans communicate in complex ways, relying on a range of faculties to encode and decode social messages. Some aptitudes are innate, based on one's biological characteristics, whereas others are acquired, varying according to one's social and cultural experiences. As we explain in this chapter, each of us uses a combination of biological and sociocultural processes to produce and interpret social signals. Our goal is to introduce some of the forms that these processes can take.
We begin this chapter with an overview of social signals and a comparison between the biological and sociocultural processes underlying their production and interpretation. Next, we explore three examples of biologically processed social signals, and then examine sociocultural processing of the same signals. We conclude the chapter by discussing some ways in which biological and sociocultural processes interact.
The Nature of Social Signals
Communicators depend on a wide variety of social signals to make sense of the world around them. Poggi and D'Errico (2011) define a signal as “any perceivable stimulus from which a system can draw some meaning” and a social signal as “a communicative or informative signal which, either directly or indirectly, provides information about ‘social facts,’ that is, about social interactions, social attitudes, social relations and social emotions” (Poggi & D'Errico, 2011: 189). Social interactions are situations in which people perform reciprocal social actions, such as a game, a surgical procedure, an orchestral performance, or a conflict. Social attitudes are people's tendencies to behave in a particular way toward another person or group and include elements such as beliefs, opinions, evaluations, and emotions. Social relations are relationships of interdependent goals between two or more people. Finally, social emotions include those emotions that (1) we feel toward someone else, such as admiration and envy; (2) are easily transmitted from one person to another, such as enthusiasm and panic; and/or (3) are self-conscious, such as pride and shame.
As noted, humans use both biological and sociocultural processes to produce and interpret social signals.
1 - Thought and Action: Connecting Attributions to Behaviors in Married Couples' Interactions
-
- By Valerie Manusov, University of Washington
- Edited by Patricia Noller, University of Queensland, Judith A. Feeney, University of Queensland
-
- Book:
- Understanding Marriage
- Published online:
- 25 July 2009
- Print publication:
- 26 September 2002, pp 14-31
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Causal and responsibility attributions made by married partners are a frequent subject of study by relationship researchers (Fletcher & Fincham, 1991; Holtzworth-Munroe & Jacobson, 1988; Manusov, 1990; Miller & Bradbury, 1995). Few studies have connected couples' attributions to the behaviors they use in response to those thoughts however (see Fincham, 1994). Because overt behaviors are likely to shape the climate for a relationship (Noller, 1992), investigating how thoughts may connect with action is important for understanding the role causal attributions play within marriage.
This paper focuses particularly on nonverbal cues exhibited by married partners. Goffman (1979) refers to nonspoken cues as part of a “glimpsed” world, often unarticulated but rich in social information (Ambady & Rosenthal, 1992). According to Noller (1992), “many messages having neutral words … [are] changed into positive or negative messages by … the nonverbal channels” (p. 50). The valence of messages has been found to differentiate satisfied from unsatisfied couples consistently, and much of the affective tone of messages is relayed via nonverbal means (Gottman & Levenson, 1992; Huston & Vangelisti, 1991). Because more highly valenced (very positive or very negative) behaviors are likely to instigate greater attribution making (Wong & Weiner, 1981), they should also result in behaviors that reflect the attributions given for a spouse's actions.
In the following pages, I discuss the importance of investigating nonverbal behaviors as both triggers of, and reactions to, attributions by married couples.