Non-Verbal Behavior and the American Voter

I was surprised to read that little research has been done in the study of the effect of non-verbal behavior on the American voter. Additionally, the most significant information or concept I garnered from the Kopacz (2006) article is the idea that studies lack current and factual information on these effects. In a time when lawyers hire consultants to learn how to be more persuasive to juries, I would expect any political candidate with an ounce of sense to be extremely aware of how his or her body language and non-verbal cues affect their appeal to voters. If Kopacz (2006) is correct, the communications field is almost two decades behind on studying this issue and has missed out on some major non-verbal behavior! (Including nearly 8 years of the Bush presidency!) However if researchers are now paying attention, the current presidential election cycle should provide enough material to make up for lost time.

I would define persuasion as using specific ideas or concepts to encourage someone to take a specific action. If information-integration is the persuasion theory political campaigns use, it is important to realize that the way people accumulate and organize information about their candidate can result in attitude change (Hamilton, 2008). Therefore, teaching candidates to use positive non-verbal communication helps in persuading voters to take an action of voting for a particular candidate. Non-verbal communication can be anything unspoken such as facial gestures, sounds, body motions, or even lack thereof.

Kopacz (2006) makes an incredibly insightful point in her article. She suggests that the personal character, appearance, and non-verbal behaviors of political candidates tend to be particularly persuasive factors among voters who are uninformed and unfamiliar with the issues, or the candidates’ stances on the issues. An embarrassing example of a non-verbal, persuasive behavior took place a few months ago when Senator Barack Obama received applause when he paused during a speech to blow his nose. Whether or not it was considered non-verbal behavior is subjective, but it shows how caught- up voters are in Obama's persona. His fans/groupies seem to be more concerned with Obama’s race, looks, and charm than his stance on issues; they seem less concerned about the type of job he will do than how he will look doing it.

I am a supporter of Obama and have been pursuaded by his message of change in our country. The manner in which he delivers his speeches, including non-verbal behavior, plays a large part in the development of my opinion. While it’s a concern to consider that our next president may be elected based on such shallow scrutiny by some, the deeper concern is that the scrutiny may not change anytime soon.

References

Hamilton, Cheryl (2008). Communicating for results: A guide for business and professions.
(8th). Belmont: CA: Wadsworth.

Kopacz, M. (2006). Nonverbal communication as a persuasion tool: Current status and future directions. Rocky Mountain Communication Review, 3(1),

Motivation Anyone?

Shah and Shah’s (n.d.) article on motivation discusses the definition, process, types, and theories of motivation in a very clear and understanding way. If all academic articles and journals were written in this fashion, students would better understand concepts, ideas, and theories overall. Specifically Shah and Shah list 15 different theories. Some of the theories adopt another, but include additional ideas to an original theory already studied. Simply stated, from a personal perspective, motivation is that which drives us to do the things we do, or what makes us determined to do what we either want or need to do.

Most of what the author presented are theories which I do not disagree with, but rather agree that there are many various factors motivating humans based on different wants and needs. The most significant concept I gained from this article is the idea that everyone is motivated in different ways, and no one factor, money for example, can motivate 100% of people 100% of the time.

The types of motivation I subscribe to are achievement, affiliation, and competence. When it comes to my efforts in graduate school, I am motivated by achievement. “Here accomplishment is important for its own sake and not for the rewards that accompany it” (Shah and Shah, n.d., p. 4). As my blog is titled, although not terribly creative I admit, “To Attain a Grad Degree,” sums up my scholarly motivation. The pay-off for me at the end is the feeling that I accomplished something new and significant.

Affiliation motivation and competence motivation are the approaches to my career. “Competence motivated people seek job mastery, take pride in developing and using their problem-solving skills and strive to be creative when confronted with obstacles. They learn from their experience” (Shah and Shah, n.d., p. 4). If ever there were an idea that defined my current job, this would be it. For example, I often receive backward compliments from Harvard and Yale scholars who can be frustrated that I perform as well as I do for them without having their high-end degrees. From this example, I am constantly reminded that I have honed my craft based on many years of experience in a field chosen at the young age of 19. Combined with the competence motivation that drives me is another type of motivation known as affiliation motivation. Believe it or not, these legal scholars I work with can give proper compliments and, given their social status, a compliment from these individuals can and does motivate me in a different way. I often feel proud that I have worked to the potential of the lawyers that I work for and that feeling drives me to continue doing the best I can.

If I fully understand each of the 15 theories of motivation listed in this article, I believe the theory that most applies to my current work setting is Vroom’s Valence x Expectancy theory which is commonly known as expectancy theory. Vroom’s theory focuses on three things: “Efforts and performance relationship, performance and reward relationship, and rewards and personal goal relationship” (Shah and Shah, n.d., p. 11). What is the outcome of an action? How attractive is that outcome to me? These questions are a few thoughts considered in Vroom’s theory. In my case, the outcome is client satisfaction with the law firm. Furthermore, as a contributor, I know that when the client is happy I am more likely to be praised which, in turn, motivates me to perform better. Performing well leads to better performance evaluations and commonly leads to a salary increase. In the firm I work for, better performance evaluations also lead to better work assignments, bigger cases, higher profile clients, and different lawyers to work for.

If I were an unmotivated worker, firm managers would do well to employ Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory and examine the degree to which hygiene factors and motivator factors are being addressed within the firm (tutor2u, 2007). If hygiene factors such as policies, wages, supervision and working conditions are not being met, employees are not likely to find satisfaction in their work place. If motivator factors such as opportunity for advancement, recognition, and challenging work are not provided by the employer, employees are not going to invest anything above average interest in their jobs (tutor2u).

Salary increases are a big motivation professionally, but the additional considerations that come with good evaluations add to my personal goals of being trusted with additional responsibility. Excellent performance fulfills my competence motivation which, in turn, drives me to do what I do at work and keeps me fulfilled personally.

References

Shah, K. & Shah, P. (n.d.) Motivation. Retrieved July 10, 2007, from
http://www.laynetworks.com/Motivation.html

tutor2u. (2007). Motivation in theory - Herzberg two factor theory. Retrieved June 4, 2007 from
http://www.tutor2u.net/business/people/motivation_theory_herzberg.asp