Page 62 - Effective group discussion theory and practice by Adams, Katherine H. Brilhart, John K. Galanes, Gloria J

Human Communication Processes in the Small Group Context 45

talkative members were regarded as rude and selfish, members the group could do
without. Derber refers to excessive talking as conversational narcissism. 93
92
Touch Haptics is the study of touch behavior. It is vital to group maintenance in Haptics
most primary groups and athletic teams, but may be nonexistent in many American The study of the
work groups and committees. Studies of touch in group communication are sparse; perception of and
most information about touch comes from work in interpersonal communication. use of touch.
The kind of touching people expect and enjoy depends on their acculturation and the
type of relationship they share with others.
Touch between individuals may occur to show play, positive feelings, or control,
to get a job done, as part of a greeting or farewell; and, of course, we touch each other
accidentally. Jones and Yarbrough found that control touches occur most often fol-
94
lowed by positive affect touches. Control touches are efforts to gain attention or
request compliance and are most often accompanied by some sort of verbalization
such as “scoot over.” Positive affect touches are most often signs of affection and asso-
ciated with our primary groups but can occur in business settings. They found that
some work teams may engage in spontaneous and brief touches to show support.
Touch among group members can strengthen unity and teamwork. Families join
hands to say grace before a meal; football players pile on hands in a huddle; actors hug
each other after a successful performance. The type of touch and its setting determines the
reaction. Pats are usually perceived as signs of affection and inclusion. Strokes are generally
perceived as sensual, inappropriate in a small group meeting. A firm grip on an arm or
about the shoulders is usually a control gesture, interpreted as a “one-up” maneuver; among
a group of equals, this may be resented. A gentle touch may be a means of getting someone
to hold back and not overstate an issue. Many a group member has been restrained from
saying something hostile by a gentle touch on the arm during a heated argument.
As with other nonverbal behaviors, people vary widely in the extent to which they
accept and give touches. Andersen and Leibowitz found that people range from those
95
who enjoy touch to those who react negatively to being touched. For example, the
handshake, a standard American greeting, is by no means universal. The willingness
to touch hands suggests a belief in the equality of people. This typically Western
96
notion contrasts with the Hindu belief in a hierarchical society. Hindus greet each
other by bringing their own palms together at the chest. Muslims, who according to
the Koran are all brothers, hug each other shoulder to shoulder. The Japanese bow in
greeting, but prefer to avoid physical contact. You can see how a culture’s power dis-
tance (such as a belief in equality versus a belief in hierarchy) influences such things
as the appropriate nonverbal form for a greeting and also how easy it is for misunder-
standings to occur in small groups with members of different cultures.
Often, the unconscious nonverbal behaviors we have discussed determine how
much we like or trust someone. We all have a tendency to like people we perceive as
similar to us, but we are unaware that our feelings are often based on nonverbal simi-
97
larity. It is important for us to recognize this normal tendency and consciously sus-
pend judgments of others in intercultural settings where the same nonverbal behaviors
have different meanings.

gal37018_ch02_021_050.indd 45 3/30/18 11:13 AM