Non-verbal interaction: Interpreting emotional signalling styles

In the blog last week, we examined the extent to which contrasting cultural perceptions of time significantly shaped non-verbal interpersonal communication expectations in everyday contexts. This week, we shall explore the influences of culture on the transmission and interpretation of non-verbal emotional signalling.

The critical importance of non-verbal emotional signalling

Nonverbal signalling is the primary medium through which people convey emotional expressions across all cultures. This is achieved through a range of largely subconscious actions transmitted through facial expressions, gestures, posture, and a range of other physical behaviours.

For example, direct eye contact can convey interest, credibility, and confidence, while prolonged staring can be experienced as threatening. Conversely, looking away or down when communicating is often interpreted as a signal indicating submission, distrust, or disinterest. Moreover, the subtle movement of occasionally glancing down can indicate sadness, embarrassment, or even shame. Finally, rapid blinking of the eyes could project either a sense of nervousness or lying, while slow regular blinking is typically associated with calmness, affection, or even romantic attraction.

What these brief examples illustrate is that in our everyday encounters, we are required to speedily interpret and process multiple non-verbal indicators to maintain effective levels of interpersonal communication. However, the challenge of a constantly noting and decoding a range of critical signals significantly increases in a cross-cultural context.

Interpreting emotional signalling across cultures

Variations in cross-cultural emotional signalling are rooted in a range of unique national behavioural expectations, norms, beliefs, and values. While various attempts have been made to explain the origins of varying styles of non-verbal emotional signalling, two models of cultural value orientations provide interesting initial background information for those unfamiliar with this complex topic.

Collectivist vs. Individualistic societies

The first model that investigates the social roots of key emotional signals focuses on the contrast in behavioural expectations between collectivist and individualistic societies.

Collectivist cultures

In collectivist cultures, expressions of public emotions are often modified or even suppressed to ensure the maintenance of harmony while simultaneously avoiding any potential for conflict. Moreover, another primary concern is that sudden emotional outbursts also risk a loss of face that can permanently disrupt interpersonal relationships.

This culturally acquired ability to successfully interpret the meaning of subtle emotional signalling without recourse to verbal language is referred to by the Japanese as reading the air. Indeed, those unable to interpret a range of subtle subconscious signal are regarded as being illiterate in relation to this non-verbal silent language.

Individualistic cultures

In contrast, individualistic cultures promote values such as personal identity and free self-expression even in public spaces. Consequently, members of such societies tend to feel comfortable openly expressing emotions even to an unfamiliar audience or in some more formal contexts. Indeed, such expressions are typically held to be positive reflections of individuality and the highly valued orientation of personal assertiveness.

High vs. Low context communication

Then, the second accessible model that seeks to explain variations in patterns of emotional signalling is based on the contrast between high and low context communication.

High context cultures

Here, members of high context cultures rely heavily on non-verbal signalling clues that convey complex implicit meanings. This is achieved through a range of very subtle gestures, facial expressions, and voice modulation during interpersonal interactions. Examples of high context cultures include the nations of Central and East Asia, the Arab cluster of nations and those of Latin America.

Low context cultures

In contrast, low context cultures that include Northern Europeans and North Americans rely significantly more on explicit verbal communication than on non-verbal signalling to convey emotional meanings. Indeed, members of these cultures typically find attempts to interpret nuanced non-verbal signalling rather baffling to the point where they can unjustly conclude that members of high context cultures are somewhat evasive and lacking in sincerity.

Therefore, in conclusion, contrasting perceptions of what is considered appropriate behaviour in relation to emotional signalling vary considerably across cultures. Such differences, if not understood, can trigger significant interpersonal misunderstandings with the potential for outright culture clash. Therefore, learning how to interpret and modify the expression of emotions is essential when attempting to adjust to a new cultural context. For those wishing to learn more about this topic, please refer to these books.

• Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, by Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov

• Culture Map: Breaking Through the Invisible Boundaries of Global Business, by Erin Meyer

---

Question 1

Would it ever be desirable to emulate unfamiliar cross-cultural emotional signalling styles?

Question 2

How might members of individualistic cultures interpret the restraint of emotional expressions?

Question 3

Could the cultural context influence the use and interpretation of silences during communication?

---

We shall explore Question 3 in the next blog.