You have probably heard this type of statement: “Effective personal communication is 55% body language, 38% tone of voice and only 7% content of the words you use.” However, these widely quoted figures (181,000 results from a Google search) are just an urban myth and represent a fundamental misinterpretation of limited experimental results. The takeaway: Ignore the big 55%-38%-7% nonverbal communication myth.
When you think about it, the words in personal communication logically should carry much more weight than a mere 7%. But this formula has been twisted and distorted, and has become a common factoid (a false statement asserted as a fact).
These percentages have been used over and over by communication consultants, body language ‘experts,’ media interview trainers, speech delivery coaches and HR instructors. How comforting it must be for them to quote such exact and scientific figures. But they have been taken out of context!
Unfortunately, the 7% 38% 55% statements continue to pop up as fact in published works:
Do a Google search for yourself and you can find variations on the same statement in many locations.
The two original research projects on which this information is based, actually came to decidedly different conclusions. UCLA psychologist, Dr Albert Mehrabian, and fellow researchers came up with quite narrow and limited findings, as many research projects do, in their experiments going back to 1967.
The result only occurred where contradictory messages were being conveyed simultaneously by words and other behaviors of a speaker – we may express something verbally while our facial expressions, postures and positions, tone of voice or gestures indicate the opposite.
As a communicator by profession I was determined to find out what the facts were, and so I went to the trouble of buying Mehrabian’s book, Silent Messages, directly from him.
Sure enough, Mehrabian’s claims were much more modest than the sweeping conclusions others have drawn from his work.
He said, “Is there a systematic and coherent approach to resolving the general meaning or impact of an inconsistent message? Indeed there is. Our experimental results show:
“Obviously implicit expressions are not always more important than words,” stated Dr Mehrabian on page 79. Implicit communication deals mainly with feelings and like/dislike or attitudes.
In many conversations, implicit messages are not even present, eg “I will meet with you at 2 pm next Wednesday.” However, if you say “I’m looking forward to meeting with you again at 2 pm next Wednesday,” with a pained facial expression or if you avoid looking at the person when saying the words, your expression will convey a stronger implicit message than your explicit message (your words).
From all this, when you hear someone self importantly quoting spurious interpretations of Dr Mehrabian’s work, just laugh in their face. I’m sure your facial expression and tone of voice will be consistent with your words.
In addition to the misinterpretation of results, the experimental studies have limited applicability to real life:
The sooner you ignore and delete any references to this big nonverbal communication claim, the better. This applies especially if you are a professional communicator, because your credibility will be questioned as others discover how false this myth is. From my contact with him, I know Dr Mehrabian feels quite regretful that his research has been taken so badly out of context.
Albert Mehrabian. Silent Messages: Implicit Communication of Emotions and Attitudes. Second edition, 1981.
The COVID pandemic has opened up unexpected business opportunities for small PR firms. On one hand, large organizations have laid
Workplace communication has become a real challenge because the COVID-19 pandemic has shifted most workers to their homes in either
Nowadays, many employees feel left out by the changes in their work environment. Around the world, the work environment has