30 on a number of evenings and found that for male-male conversations, 48% was about money or business and 8% about females, while the female-female conversations, 3% were about money or business and 44% about males. Emotional Meaning Words often carry further information in addition to the descriptive meanings as described above. The terms yid, nigger, etc. do more than refer to racial groups. They also indicate that the speaker is hostile to these groups. Efforts are sometimes made to improve the images of social groups by giving them honorific titles, senior citizen, the hard of hearing, for example. Systematic method for measuring the emotional meanings of words was divided by Osgood et al., 1957. In the semantic differential, subjects fill in a series of seven-point scales, such as cold. Warm. This indicates their feelings about a verbalized concept. The results can be expressed as a profile of scores or in terms of three dimensions, evaluation, potency, and activity. Of the evaluation dimension,

[01:03]

is the most familiar and most important, page 70. These dimensions correspond to Wunsch, dimensions of feeling, i.e., pleasantness, strain, and excitement. It has been suggested that the three dimensions are basic responses to the environment, approach avoidance, strength, and rate. The variation between words and their emotional meaning is closely parallel to the effects of the nonverbal signals accompanying speech. For example, the total impact of the word negro can be created by saying negro in a certain tone of voice. Speaker may indicate... his choice of words, attitudes to people, or things discussed. Weiner and Marabian, 1968, found that different words were chosen depending on the amount of positive feeling a communicator has towards the people or objects he is speaking about. They have constructed a scale of non-immediacy and have found that speakers with a negative attitude have a higher score and that readers of such communications could identify the attitudes correctly the full scale is shown in table two two in other studies it has been found that the words i and we indicate the extent to which a person feels themselves to be a member of a cohesive group and the rate of we's and i's has been used as a measure of group cohesiveness

[02:12]

In each of these examples, the main verbal message is communicated equally well by either version, but the secondary message is different. Sentences as well as words can convey secondary meanings. Since the same message can be sent by means of a variety of different sentences, it's possible to listen with the third air for latent messages, which are often unintended by the speaker. Brown 1965 gives the example of a young academic who said during the conversation about Nigeria, that's a place I've now been to, thus producing a rather crude and unacceptably direct piece of print. Oh, self-presentation. See page 384. A skilled speaker carefully controls his utterances for such latent messages and may send them deliberately. A speaker may use a whole vocabulary just as he may put in a particular accent, which modifies the impact of what is said. He might, for example, use a vocabulary of teenage slang, international politics, or psychoanalysis in this way. Table 2-2. Linguistic cover for immediacy on page 71 from my... Robian, 1966.

[03:14]

Type 1, Speaker A, I liked the party. Speaker B, I liked the food at the party. Speaker B, I am concerned about X. Speaker A, I am concerned about X's personality. Speaker A, I hope you are successful. Speaker B, I hope your career is successful. Type 2, Speaker B, X is my neighbor. Speaker A, X and I live in the same neighborhood. Speaker A, X and I live together. Speaker B, X and I live in the same room. Speaker A, X is my teammate. Speaker B, X and I are on the same team. Type 3. Speaker A, I know X. Speaker B, our group knows X. Speaker B, I am looking at X. Speaker A, I am looking at them, including X. Speaker B, I used to meet X. Type 4. Speaker A, I visited X. Speaker B, I visited X's house. Speaker B, I like X. Speaker A, I like X's children.

[04:15]

Speaker A, I saw X. Speaker B, I saw X's car. Type four, excuse me, type five. Speaker B, Negroes have many problems. These people need our help. Speaker A, Negroes have many problems. These people need help. Speaker B, I should help X. Speaker A, someone should help X. Speaker A, do you remember what we decided the other day? Speaker B, B, do you remember what was decided the other day? Back to page 70. The role of nonverbal communication in conversation. Some of the most important findings in the field of social interaction are about the ways that verbal interaction needs the support of nonverbal communications. Human communication by speech depends on specialized use of the audio vocal canal. However, this channel also carries messages in a paralinguistic area, how it is said as opposed to what is said. Page 72. Under most conditions of conversation, the visual gestural channel is simultaneous in use.

[05:16]

Conversation depends on a subtle combination of signals in these two channels. Diebold, 1967. There are a number of ways in which nonverbal signals make verbal exchanges possible. These are discussed below. I am indebted to Ekman and Freist in 1967b, though the presentation account is somewhat different from theirs. A. Mutual attention and responsiveness. For two people to engage in conversation, there must be continuous evidence that each is attending and responding to the other. The conversation is usually initiated by two people taking up positions so that they are sufficiently close together and oriented towards each other. And by making eye contact, there must be continuous evidence during the encounter that the other is attending and responding. This is done by eye movements, head nods, and gestural reciprocity. page one seventy f the encounter is terminated by withdrawal of these cues and changes in position or orientation the origins of this pattern of behaviour probably lie in the experience of early relations with the mother the non-verbal signals are encoded in the sense that they are in themselves acts of attending and responding interactors are highly aware of signals of this kind emitted by others but may not realize what signals are being they themselves are sending b channel control

[06:28]

Interactors have to take it in turns to speak and listen, and speech itself cannot be used to decide who shall speak for or how long. We shall see later that channel control is affected by small, long verbal signals, mainly head, nods, and eye movements. Page 201F. These signals are presumably learned. Ekman and Freissen, 1967B, suggest that there are class and cultural differences in their use, and that... use of unfamiliar methods is regarded as rudeness the coding of these signals appears to be partly arbitrary for example a steady glance at the other indicates the end of an underrance interactors do not appear to be aware of making or receiving these signals see interpersonal attitudes nonhuman primates indicate their attitudes And intentions toward one another by means of facial and postural cues for threat appeasement, sexual desire, etc. is most important for a director of this information. Verbal messages are so polite and so carefully controlled that these attitudes and intentions are concealed. However, the significance of the verbal message may depend on the interpersonal attitude accompanying it. Also in this category can be included self-presentation, indicating how an interactor sees himself and how he would like to be treated.

[07:35]

Page 73. The cues include... Cues used include spatial proximity, posture, hand and leg movements, and tones of voice indicating approach or withdrawal, dominance and submission, sexual advances, and so on. The origins of this behavior may lie in instinct as in primates or may be learned during childhood. Such signals are not really coded. They are fragments of actual, aggressive, sexual, or intimate behavior. There is partial awareness of the cues that are being used. The illustrations. Speech is often accompanied by the floor gesture of movement, mainly the hands which accompany and illustrate what is being said. Ekman and Freyzen, L-O-C-C-I-T, suggest that they can do this in six ways. Batons, movements which, B-A-T-O-N, movements which time out, exit, or emphasize a particular word or phrase, beat the tempo of mental location. Ideographs, movements which sketch a path of direction of thought, tracing the itinerary of a logical journey. deictic movements pointing to a present object, spatial movements depicting a spatial relationship, or kinetographs movements which depict a bodily action.

[08:47]

The last type of illustrator would be pictographs which draw a picture of the referent. These illustrations are probably learned by watching other people. The style of gestural accompaniment is quite different in different cultures and sometimes type for public speaking purposes. Accompanying is mainly iconic. in the sense that the gestures resemble what they symbolize, or some degree of awareness in the gestures being made. E. Feedback. A speaker needs to know how his utterances are received, whether the other person understands, believes, or disbelieves, or surprise degrees or disagrees, or is pleased or annoyed. Without this information, the speaker does not know how to plan the next utterance. The relevant information is mainly obtained by studying the other face. Raised eyebrows signals surprise or disbelief, or the mouth and eyes show pleasure and displeasure. The communication of emotion is partly innate, but is overlaid by cultural habits and rules. Interactors are partly aware of the emotional cues which they emit, and in many cultures control their facial expressions very carefully. Tonal voice is less well controlled. 74F. A sixth type of nonverbal response is the emblem.

[09:49]

F. 1941. Emblems are gestures used in place of words by deaf people, and people who do not speak the same language. Emblems are little used in normal interaction. An example is head-shaking, which, like others... Other emblems is an arbitrary symbol. Language can be placed in a nonverbal signaling system, which speech is impossible, for example, by the deaf, tic-tac-men, and underwater swimmers. Sex signals are also used during ordinary discourse in some cultures, e.g. in Greece and the Arab countries. We shall discuss later what the physical symptoms of psychosomatic patients act as nonverbal signals in a similar way. Language developed so that men could communicate with one another. Since language is symbolic, it may be supposed that they wanted to communicate about things such as food, people, or events, which were not immediately present, otherwise pointing that it would be Pointing would be sufficient. Language is not necessary for showing emotions or for indicating interpersonal attitudes. Primates can do this perfectly well in other ways.

[10:50]

The unique sphere of language, it may be suggested, was communication about absent objects and distant events. Language has, of course, been extended to deal with more immediate events, but it seems to be a relatively ineffective means of doing so. Nonverbal signals are used both by human and nonhuman primates to communicate about the immediate social situation. In the ways listed above, we will consider some of the examples where from this sphere into personal attitudes we describe later experiments by the author and others in which the relative impacts of verbal and nonverbal signals for communicating positive and negative superior and inferior attitudes are compared the nonverbal cues have considerably more impact than the verbal page one forty two f this is a puzzling finding this is a puzzling finding and view of the far greater richness of the verbal code probably the main reason for this is that nonverbal signals create an immediate emotive response based on the innate instinctive structure of the organism language appears to have evolved as a specialized means of communication but it is used to negotiate the matters being discussed not the relation between speakers

[11:53]

As a result, interpersonal relations lie at the background of consciousness and are negotiated by the silent language, the nonverbal code. This code has an advantage over language. It is rather vague and does not commit an interactor to explicit degree of intimacy or inferiority in relation to another. Furthermore, it is usually assumed that nonverbal signals are spontaneous and unmanipulated and so can be trusted more than speech can page seventy five lastly it is confusing to talk and talk about the talk in the same breath as in the remark there's an awkward pause isn't there Emotional reactions. Verbal and nonverbal signals function in the very similar way here. An interactor would say, I feel happy in a flat, deadpan voice and with an expressionless face, but he would not be believed. The nonverbal signals much match and confirm the verbal ones. However, if he simply sounded and looked happy while talking of something else, the message would be received as experiments to be reviewed later so. Page 136f. Therefore, the verbal statement, I am happy, is a totally ineffective communication and is unnecessary.

[12:57]

Self-presentation. As we show later, self-presentation is normally carried out by the nonverbal cues of dress and manner, though very indirect. Verbal techniques can also be used, page 384F in Britain and many other cultures, as a strong cultural taboo on verbal self-presentation. Some of the differences between verbal and nonverbal communications may be summarized. A language is most useful for discussing objects and other people. Nonverbal signals are... Better for communicating motions, interpersonal attitudes, and about other aspects of the immediate interaction. B language is carefully managed. Nonverbal signals are more spontaneous, though this varies between different kinds. Study and training in the field of social interactions makes them less spontaneous and more under conscious control. C language is produced by the specialized parts of the central nervous system. Most nonverbal communication is governed by lower autonomic and instinctive levels of the organism. D language is arbitrarily coded. Nonverbal signals are most iconic. ICONRC, fragments of the real things, are encoded, i.e. themselves, the emotions or acts indicated. We may conclude this section by observing that the most human communication consists of combinations of verbal and nonverbal signals.

[14:05]

The form of this integration is discussed further below, page 119F. Coding and Interaction For two people to communicate by means of language, it is necessary for them to use words in the same way. They also need to be able to refer to objects quickly. Zipf, 1935, has shown for civil languages that the more frequently a word is used, the shorter it is. 1965 argues that the direction of causation here is from frequency to shortness in the view of the changes in the terms used for a number of new inventions, which have become household objects. Page 76, ending up as TV, car, bus, etc. much time would be wasted during interaction of the longer originals were used. Within particular social groups, there are private codes which refer to the common objects, events, and people that have to be discussed. Nicknames are one example of this. Zazo, 1960, found in a large sample of twins of private languages developed for 48% of identicals and for a lower percentage of fraternals, often preceding normal speech.

[15:06]

Everston and Crossman, 1966, found the two objects who could only send... Each other H symbols could devise a code to communicate simple messages about objects. It's easier to refer to some objects or events than others. First, it depends on whether or not the cultural or social group has developed a specific word for it. The large number of words for snow used by Eskimos are first scones in Scotland. Make it easy for those people to specify particular kinds of snow or scone. Secondly, it depends on how many similar objects a thing in question has to be distinguished from. It's easier to refer to a zebra in a herd of elephants than a herd than in a herd of zebras brown o p c i t third it depends on how good the speaker is at coding and the listener at decoding It also depends on how well the coder can estimate the needs of the decoder. He may give too much information or not enough. Brown OPCIT gives an example of a visitor from Salon asking the way to Harvard Square and being told, take the drive to Madison Bridge and then turn right and keep going until you see the yard. As we reported above, the speech of children below the age of seven and eight depends to be egocentric, and there is often little attempt to communicate this as an example of the need to take the role of the other in social behavior, which will be discussed further below, page 188FF.

[16:18]

The pattern of visual perception during interaction can now be described. In our experiments on this, we have always found more looking at the other's face during the early stages of an encounter. This is probably because A needs predictive information about B, his personality, his emotional state, etc., probably if there is more attention to B's clothes and general appearance also. If A knows B well, this period of perceptual activity can be cut fairly short, though A will notice any deviations from past performance, Kendon, 1967, has made detailed studies of the pattern of perceptual activity during conversations. Page 149. He finds that A looks away when he starts to speak, probably because he is planning and organizing the utterance and does not want distracting input. He looks at B in the face at grammatical breaks, probably to make sure that B is still listening and following, and that he is willing to let A continue talking. B is... B will probably nod his head and say, uh-huh, or something similar. At a hesitating passage or speech errors, A will look away, presumably so they can reorganize the utterance just before the ending of the utterance.

[17:29]

A looks up in order to get feedback on how B is reacting to it, whether he agrees, thinks it is funny, etc. By this intermittent scanning, interactors are able to resolve the conflict described by Jones and Tybot, 1958, between studying the reactions of the other and planning the next response. We also know something about where people look during interaction. They look either at the other's face in the region of the eyes or they look right away at the surrounding furniture or scenery. They may observe hand movements but foot movements and bodily posture are probably noticed much less. Compared with vision and hearing, the other senses of smell, touch, taste, and awareness of warmth are unimportant for most kinds of social interaction. In Western culture, it is unusual to smell people, and it is only when scent, perspiration, or the smell of breath are unusually strong, that smell operates at all. Perspiration may be useful cue, since it indicates a high degree of arousal, for example, in an interviewee. In addition to the sensory activity described above, they can add to his information about B-Bias.

[18:48]

conceal it. Interpersonal relations and person perception. The effect of interpersonal attitudes. If A knows B well, he will have already formed a detailed impression of B and knows which styles of behavior to use with him. He will notice any deviation from B's normal behavior and interpret it as a temporary state or mood. Similarly, A will be able to interpret B's behavior better. He will know when A is anxious or cross better than could someone who has not met B before. Generally speaking, the better A knows B, the more accurate his judgments of B's personality are. This is not always so, since A and B become involved in an intricate relationship, and A's judgment can become highly distorted. Page 150. This was found in the disturbed marriages studied by Lange et al. 1967, and can be found with tense emotions. relationships between colleagues at work, each of whom may believe that the others are no good at the job, and a complex and emotional relationship interpersonal perception can be regarded as part of the system.

[20:03]

If A likes or dislikes B, his judgments of B become systematically affected. If he likes B, he will perceive B as liking A more than he actually does. As Tegiuri, 1958 observes, Interestingly enough, although there is actually greater mutuality of choice than there is of rejection, members feel just as reciprocated in their dislikes as in their preferences. This is a case of cognitions tending to organize themselves in consistent systems, as Heider, 1958, has argued. In this case, there is congruence between A's attitudes to B and to himself and B's attitude to A. If all are positive or too negative, the system is balanced. If A likes B, he also tends to see A in a favorable light and bias all judgments in a sociably desirable direction. Pastore, 1960. This may be the result of interaction. If A likes B, he will behave more pleasantly towards B and a less and more favorable behavior from B.

[21:05]

If A likes B, he will see B as more like himself and having more similar attitudes than is really the case. This was clearly shown in a study by Newcomb, 1961, in which students were experimentally assigned to rooms in a hostel. The effect is called assimilation or simple projection. It would be expected that if A and B are really alike, A's judgments will be more accurate, and this is found to be so. However, 1955, this kind of projection is quite different from the Freudian kind, in which people fail to see their shortcomings in themselves and instead believe that other people suffer from them. This was demonstrated by Sears, 1936, in relation to the trait of stinginess, but later workers, including the present author, have consistently failed to find it operating, and we may conclude that it must be a rare mechanism or that one, or one, that operates only under special conditions. When there is an intense emotional relation between A and B, B may be perceived clearly as a physical object regardless of the effects of the surrounding perceptual setting.

[22:09]

Idelson and Slack, 1958, studied perception of others using a distorted room. Accuracy of size judgments was greater than when the other person was a marital partner, a superior officer, or an amputee. These results cannot be explained in terms of familiarity. page one fifty one the effect of rural relations if a is senior to b and especially if b is dependent on a then b's behavior becomes highly ambiguous as far as a is concerned if b shows friendly helpful behavior to a is this because he really likes a and wishes him well or is it because he is seeking a's help and support as jones nineteen sixty four is pointed out Ingratiation is ambiguous, though of course hostile behavior is very clear. Jones carried out several experiments with members of university OTC units. Older and younger cadets exchanged written messages, and in some cases younger person was presented as dependent on the older's approval. Observers and senior members of these pairs perceived positive supporting messages from the younger members as more sincere.

[23:15]

when they were not dependent in this way. When subjects were dependent, they were better liked and seen as having more positive characteristics than when they did not too closely agree with the senior partner. This is a further ambiguity about ingratiation. It is very likely that the dependent person really does have strong positive feeling towards his superior at any rate at the time of the ingratiating behavior. It would be highly dissonant for him if he did not. If B of senior to A, A will see his behavior as more autonomous Taibot and Rican, 1955, carried out an experiment in which subjects tried to influence another person who was in fact a confederate and eventually gave way. When the stooge was presented as a faculty member, he was seen by the subjects as having changed his mind voluntarily. If he was presented as of low status, he was seen as changing as a result of social pressure. In other experiments, Pepito, 1950, found that higher-status people are seen as being responsible for their actions, possessing good intentions, and being justified in their actions. If B behaves aggressively towards A, this affects A's perception of B in an interesting way.

[24:17]

The immediate effect is for B to be seen as aggressive and to be judged unfavorably in other ways. However, this effect may be much... mitigated by the causes of B's aggressive behavior can readily be seen. This is an excellent example of the shift from personal to impersonal causation. If A thinks that he has done badly on a task for which B reasonably could blame him, he will feel less negative towards B. Jones and Davis, 1966. The effects of set. A person's previous information. Whether true or not will affect his perception of another. An early demonstration of this effect was produced by Kelly, 1950, page 152. He gave brief character sketches to judges before they met the subjects. Some of the descriptions included the word warm, others included the word cold. The observers were given the warm set perceived subjects as having other favorable traits as well. Such a result is probably due to several distinct processes which we can now disentangle in the light of later research. One, the set can sensitize the observer to certain cues he expects them and looks for them so he can perceive them more readily, or he may misconstrue what he sees or see things that are not there at all.

[25:28]

Two, the set has an effect on the observer's own behavior. The warm set is likely to introduce friendly behavior on his part, which in turn elicits warm behavior from the target person. Such instructions have indeed been used to create group cohesiveness experimentally and are successful in bringing about what has been described as autistic friendship. Three, the set acts as part of the input information and affects judgments as a result of cognitive pressures toward consistency. Ash, 1946, found that warm and cold functioned in this way when subjects were asked to form an impression of a person from a list of words. Four, the set may help to overcome the resistance of judges to making judgments about others. Some people are very reluctant to do this. However, a set may act in a rather different way as well, by giving a frame of reference against which later information may be compared. Berkowitz, 1960, created the impression that a second person was very hostile. When his initial behavior showed that he really liked the subject, the first impression was soon changed, the direction in which another person's behavior changes has similar effects. Aronson and Linder, 1965, performed an experiment in which subjects heard a series of tape-recorded remarks about themselves.

[26:36]

If these became derogatory, subjects liked the speaker less than when they were derogatory all the time. This is reminiscent of the advice sometimes given to teachers, never smile before Christmas. This may give rise to comments of the kind, she's really very nice once you get to know her. The Effects of Motivation and Emotion on Perception Probably the main way in which the state of the observer affects his perception is by simple projection. Liuba and Lucas, 1945, hypnotized subjects and put them into the moods happy, anxious, and aggressive. When shown vague pictures, their interpretations clearly reflected their mood. This has, of course, been the basis for the assessment of achievement, motivation, and other drives by mean of TET-type methods. Atkinson, 1958, page 153. Fesh, Bach, and Singer, 1957, found that subjects who had been put in a state of fear by electric shocks judged photographs as more fearful and more aggressive. Another effect of the perceiver's motivational state is that he may see things in a wish-fulfilling manner.

[27:41]

An illustration of this is provided by an experiment by Pepitone, 1950. School boys were interviewed about their ideas on athletics by three judges who were... to decide whether or not the boys qualified for free tickets to a baseball game. Some boys were made more highly motivated in that they were told that the tickets were for a very desirable game. These boys saw the judges as more approving than did the less highly motivated boys. Another example, perhaps, is the tendency for A to see B as liking A if A likes B, which is usually regarded as a case of consonant cognitions. It is not yet known how general such wishful fulfilling distortion is. It is possible that the reverse may sometimes occur in a defensive manner. More complex distortions take place in psychotic patients. Distortion of perception is a regular feature of psychosis and this includes the perception of persons. Liggett, 1957, constructed a test consisting of a series of photographs which the subject is asked to describe.

[28:45]

Very different and eccentric interpretations are made, the object of the same photograph is described as a killer, a parasite, or sexual. Paranoids, both with photographs and in real-life situations, tend to force people into roles related to their fantasies, courtiers, secretaries, spies, etc. This and other aspects of the social behavior of mental patients will be discussed in Chapter 8. Cognitive Processes and Person Perception Between the perception of physical cues and the interpretations which are made of other people lie various cognitive processes. The search process. A very large amount of perceptual data is potentially available in an interaction situation, but only a small proportion of it is actually used. Perception is highly selective and is focused on certain areas of information which are thought to be most useful. Different observers may observe different things. A doctor might notice a person's pupils, the way he walks with the quality of his skin. A phonetician, a tailor, a barber, or a psychiatrist would probably notice different things.

[29:50]

In the last chapter, it was shown that there are a wide range of nonverbal cues which carry more or less standard meanings. Page 154. It follows that there is considerable scope for training and sensitivity to such cues. It was argued earlier in this chapter that the initial purpose of... person perception is to know how or whether to interact with a person. This may lead to the establishment of a cognitive model of the person, possibly described in verbal terms and probably in terms of some implicit set of personality dimensions or types. The process of person perception can be characterized by a search process directed toward making certain decisions. A clinical or personnel psychologist may be asked to settle certain problems about a patient or candidate if it is suspected that a candidate is an authoritarian personality. For example, the interviewer may ask him about relations with teachers, tutors, clergymen, and police, and about how he has handled positions of authority himself, e.g.

[30:57]

as a school prefect. In less formal situations, it may not be possible to collect data with such dogged persistence, but an ear is kept open for relevant data. For different observers, different dimensions will be salient if perception is for interaction and different interaction styles are needed for different categories of people, when then perception will be directed towards making this categorization. Which dimensions or categories are relevant will depend on the culture, the situation, and the motivations of the perceiver. Soldiers may first perceive another's rank, Members of a primitive society will be more concerned with family relations and whether a woman is sexually taboo, a religious enthusiast wants to know if people are saved or not saved, a political enthusiast, which side they are on, a snob, which social class they are, and so on. Professional role will lead to an interest in certain dimensions. Psychiatrists categorize people in terms of mental abnormalities, educationalists in terms of abilities, doctors in terms of biological and health variables, and so on.

[31:58]

The usual method of discovering which dimensions are salient for a person is to ask him to write descriptions of a number of different people and to see which areas he writes about first in each case. Some of the effects of salience have already been described. When a dimension is salient, the following things will happen. 1. Perception is focused initially on cues relevant to this dimension so that the other person can be categorized. 2. The relevant pattern of interaction or social relationship is adopted. This is clearest in an organizational setting like a hospital where behavior will vary depending on whether the person is a patient, doctor, nurse, visitor, etc. 3. There will be an increased discrimination along salient dimensions. Taj, Fell, and Wilkes, 1964, found that a wider distribution scatter of ratings was made for dimensions previously found to be salient for judges page 155 for it seems

[32:59]

likely that greater expertise in interpretation will be acquired for salient traits. The evidence on whether anti-Semitic people are better at identifying Jews is rather complex. Anti-Semitic subjects do recognize Jews more often, but this is partly because they simply classify more people as Jewish. They make this categorization on the basis of less evidence. Ross et al., 1956, maintains that upper-class people in England use different words for a number of common objects, greatcoat for overcoat, chimney breast for mantelpiece, and so on. If this is true, experts at social class can make use of these cues, which should help them to place people correctly. There are systematic individual differences, and what sort of categories are salient? Men tend to use In task and achievement-oriented categories as occupation and income, women use personality and interpersonal behavior traits. Such individual differences are probably closely related to the personality structure and motivations of the perceiver.

[34:03]

He will make salient those dimensions of people which are most important to him and which result in his treating people differently. Romitvite, 1960, found that ratings of the desirability of others as friends for some judges correlated highly with intelligence. but for others with good looks or honesty. As Tegiuri, 1969, points out, quite different qualities are looked for in friends, parents, or children. The Combination of Data Persons are seen as highly integrated unities, with conscious experiences and intentions that make sense of their observed behavior. The achievement of perception involves cognitive processes whereby the stimulus material is integrated and a concept or schema of the other is constructed. As Bartlett, 1932, said, there is an effort after meaning and perception. Heider, 1958, described the tendency to achieve balanced states of cognition. And we gave an example of this in the perception of others' perception.

[35:05]

Page 150. In the field of person perception, the most familiar example of the process is halo effect, whereby the ratings of judges are found to be more highly correlated than are objective measures of the properties in question when these are socially desirable. For example, Brunswick, 1945, found that judgments of intelligence and energy correlated whereas objective measures of these two variables correlated only .28. The tendencies towards simplicity and consonance are usually regarded as purely cognitive in origin. It is possible that they are also due to the process of planning interactions with people with a definite decision when it must be reached about how to interact with them. Page 156. When two or more items of information about a person are presented, one affect me be for the meaning of one or other item to be altered, i.e.

[36:11]

there is a new interpretation of it. This may be a way of reconciling otherwise puzzling and conflicting information. Jehuda 1962 carried out an experiment in which subjects were asked to write a personality description from a list of attributes. For some subjects, the list includes owns a large country home. Where other lists, instead of Instead, it owns a semi-detached house, lives in a council house, or lives in a crowded tenement. The other attributes were quite differently interpreted according to this indicator of social class, e.g., for enjoys pictures and is keen on sport. When two or more items conflict, for example, when they are of very different degrees of social desirability, or when they do not belong in the same social stereotype, a problem is created for the judge. hare and grunes nineteen fifty created such a situation experimentally by asking subjects to write personality descriptions for molested traits most of the traits described a manual worker with the exception of the word intelligence

[37:14]

Some doubt with this cognitive problem by simply omitting this part of the information. Others modified it to explain why he was only a worker. Others said he was really a foreman, while others recognized the incongruity while reasserting their belief that most workers are not intelligent. In the first of the study of this type, Asch, 1952, found that some items carried more weight than others, warm and cold, in his experiment. It seems very likely that these words would be important for most people from the point of view of planning behavior. However, Wischner, 1960, found that the centrality of an item depends on the other traits which are being inferred or predicted. Wischner argued that it depended on the single correlations between items and traits. He found that warm correlated with judgments of sociable at .70, but was serious at .02, so that warm-cold should have little effect on the latter. Bruno Shapiro and Tagiuri 1958, used the same approach to study the effect of the two conflicting items, intelligent and inconsiderate, on trait inferences.

[38:20]

For example, intelligent suggests honest, while inconsiderate suggests dishonest. However, the latter link is stronger, so that most subjects are influenced more by inconsiderate here. The reservation should be made about studies of this type. In the first place, in most real-life situations, when an interactor is confronted by conflicting data, he can collect further information to resolve the problem. Page 157. As mentioned before, this is a typical procedure in an assessment interview. Little is known about what happens in other kinds of situations. Secondly, the information to be combined is partly mediated by verbal processes and partly not. A judge may categorize a piece of behavior as serious or sociable. However, other elements such as bodily postures and eye movements are not verbally labeled by most people but have been found to affect judgments and must operate at a sub-verbal level data was to be combined when judging emotions too the main data here are the other's facial expression his tone of voice and the nature of the situation usually these all point in the same direction so that the information is redundant

[39:29]

Fernberger, 1928, using photographs, found that if there was conflict between facial expression and situation, judges followed the situation. Ekman and Freisen, 1967b, suggest that there can be leakage of emotion when facial expression is controlled, but bodily behavior is not. In this case, it would be normal to infer emotion from bodily behavior only. Further evidence on how conflicting data is combined comes from studies of interpersonal attitudes. Thayer and Schiff, 1967, presented subjects with schematic faces varying in expression and movement pattern. In some presentation, there was conflict between cues, for example, a smiling face, and withdrawal when a second person approached. There was no averaging of stimuli, and mainly extreme judgments were made. Subjects either discounted one cue or perceived it as in line with the other or reinterpreted one of the cues.

[40:31]

A judge may arrive at some explanation for the dissonance. For example, if A sees B laughing at C's misfortune, A would probably deduce that B didn't like C or that B was sadistic or otherwise emotionally disturbed. The order in which items of information are received is also important. Lutyens, 1957a, found that earlier items were more influential. Subjects first read a paragraph describing a person, Jim, as extroverted, and later a paragraph describing him as introverted. 71% thought he would be friendly, as opposed to 54% for those who read the paragraphs in the reversed order. Subjects reconciled the conflicting information by explaining the second set of data in terms of external events. Moreover, Lutyens, 1957b, found that the primary effect was most completely overcome if subjects were first warned about the danger of first impressions and advised to suspend judgment. If a time interval was given between the two sets of data, the second set became more influential, i.e.

[41:34]

there was a recency effect. Anderson, 1956, excuse me, 1965, also obtained a recency effect by asking subjects to make a fresh judgment after each piece. of information had been given, page 158. However, all these results were obtained under highly artificial conditions, and it is not known how important first impressions are in real interaction. It is quite possible that they create an initial set which affects the subsequent behavior of the judge. Newcomb, 1947, suggested that a circular process of autistic friendship to hostility can recur. If A initially behaves pleasantly, be like him, and behaves in a similar style, eliciting more friendly behavior for me, and vice versa. In case of emotions, the order in which stimuli are received affects the interpretation made. A smiling face following a tense one is seen as relief, while a sudden smile after a period without expression is seen as perhaps pleasant surprise. Tagiuri, 1968.

[42:35]

Individual Differences in Person Perception The Effect of the Perceiver's Cognitive Structure Different perceivers will handle incoming perceptual data in widely differing ways. We have already considered individual differences for which dimensions of saline to these will affect the cognitive research and will also affect the way items are weighted. Another way in which perceivers differ is what is called implicit personality theory. Psychologists have more or less explicit personality theories, which lead them to have expectations about the correlation of traits, which categories or dimensions are useful, which items should be heavily weighed, and so on. A psychoanalyst, for example, would use categories such as anal or oral, and would attach particular importance to sexual adjustment. In fact, everyone has implicit assumptions of a similar sort. Chelsea 1965 asked five girls to rate ten others on a number of traits. All the judges assumed that boldness and extroversion were correlated.

[43:36]

Median R equals 0.88. One thought that boldness and calmness correlated 0.59, another that they correlated negative 0.30. Studies of the correlation between objective measures of these traits showed no... Significant correlation between them showing that the girl's implicit theories were wrong. Smith, 1967. Similarly, if a person was familiar with the statistical study of auditors, it would be surprising for him to encounter a person with prejudice against racial minority groups, but who also had liberal views on the treatment of criminals. We discussed above the stereotyped ideas that individuals may have about national groups and other categories of people. Page 133F. Triundus, 1964, devised a method of finding the effects of race, nationality, religion, and occupation on social distance. Subjects were asked to express their willingness to enter into various kinds of social relationship with persons with different combinations of these variables, page 159. In Illinois, most variance was due to race, 77%, while for Greeks, religion was most important, and for Arabs, nationality.

[44:47]

People also placed one another into further categories such as teenagers, public school types, and numerous other mythical groupings. Language plays an important role here. Once a kind of person has been given a label in this way, people are likely to use it as part of their classification system and person perception. Similarly, elements and styles of behavior may become labeled as when behavior is regarded as aggressive, rude, cooperative, showing presence, and so on. These classifications may be in terms of wider or narrower categories Fiedler, 1958b, developed a measure of how, similarly, leaders perceive the best co-worker and the poorest co-worker using six-point rating scales, which shows how much importance a leader pays to task performance in assessing his subordinates. Cognitive Complexity Various measures have been proposed of cognitive complexity— the number of words or dimensions a person used to categorize events. Crockett, 1965, uses the number of different words used to describe other people.

[45:52]

Bieri et al., 1966, used the number of independent dimensions which can be extracted from a repertory grid or the reverse of the explanatory power of the first factor. Little, 1968, and others have found that these two measures are uncorrelated and that they relate to other variables in quite different ways. A number of studies have been carried out to study the process of person perception as a function of these variables. It has been found that complex perceivers, in the first sense, use both favorable and unfavorable items in describing their friends and can accommodate unbalanced items, e.g. by integrating them under a higher-level construct, giving a united impression. Little has also devised a questionnaire scale to measure person specialism and thing specialism, interest in persons versus interest in things, He found that people specialists use a lot of words but few dimensions to describe people. They are complex in one sense but are not in the other. He also found that if a person likes someone he feels comfortable with him, he uses many words but few dimensions.

[46:56]

This may be because people feel uncomfortable with those that cannot be easily categorized and who present conflicting cues. Person specialists had parents in person-oriented occupations. Thing specialists had parents who worked with things. There are interesting sex differences in this area. If subjects were asked to write descriptions of other people, women are found to use personality and interpersonal traits, where men make more use of roles, achievement, and physical characteristics. Page 160. The only exception to this is that adolescent girls make a lot of use of physical characteristics, such as hair color and height. Little 1967. Females are found to be person specialists and to use more words, but... use fewer dimensions for people. Males who are person specialists are verbally complex for people and are found to go far beyond the data in impression formation studies and to invent characteristics for which no evidence has been supplied. This may explain some earlier findings to the effect that psychology students make less accurate judgments of personality than other students.

[48:01]

Person specialists were found to make more use of non-verbal than of verbal data in an experiment using the Repertory test triad method, little 1969. Figure 4.4, proportions of psychological constructs as a function of age and sex from little 1967. One axis is 0.09 to 0.19. The other is less, starts at less than 13. Then there's a little line for 13 to 14. Then there's one for greater than 14. Dark line representing males. A dashed line representing females. Females began at approximately 0.12 and less than 13. Males began above this at approximately 0.13 and less than 13. Then males went down. Females stayed approximately level until 13-14. And then although both of them went up,

[49:03]

Females reached approximately 0.19, while males only went up to approximately 0.155 at the point of greater than 14. Back to text. The components of accuracy. by the accuracy of person perception is meant the degree of correspondence between for example ratings of the intelligence of persons seen the objective measures of intelligence alternately subjects are asked to predict how other people would answer a questionnaire Klein and Richards made sound films of interviews and asked subjects to make a number of predictions about how the people would behave in everyday life, would describe themselves, and would complete sentences. The actual behavior of those seen was studied and used as the criterion. Klein, 1964. Kronbach, 1955, pointed that a judge could obtain an accurate score in several different ways, and he suggested that accuracy should be split up in four components which operate in rather different ways. We will use these components here once

[50:06]

1. Constant error or level. A judge who is estimating the IQs of a series of subjects might give an average IQ of 107, whereas the average of their measured IQs is 118. This judge would have a constant error of negative 11, and is using the scale wrongly in relation to level. The phenomenon is usually discussed in respect of such evaluative dimensions, but could operate for others, such as introversion, extroversion. the judgments of a judge who erred only in this respect are shown in figure four point five such variations in level appear to be fairly general for a given judge and can have an important effect on whether he makes accurate ratings high levelers are people who are outgoing warm considerate of others while low levelers are rigid introverted, and do not form strong ties with other people. Smith, 1967. It is possible to eliminate this source of error by asking judges to make paired comparisons or to place subjects in rank order. 2.

[51:08]

Variability or spread. The author recalls an examination in which one examiner gave marks ranging from 45 to 65 out of 100, while another marks ranged from 0 to 105. Their averages were much the same. Figure 4.5 shows some hypothetical judgments made by a judge with a high spread, i.e., high in relation to the true distribution of the quality rated. As shown above, spread is greater for dimensions that are salient for the judge. Spread is greater for more confident and experienced judges but also for people who are cognitively simple and make rapid closure on cognitive problems. The lower the correlation between judgments and criterion, the lower the spread that should be used to achieve the smallest errors. If a judge knows nothing at all about the subjects, he should give them all the same score, as the spread of ratings should normally be smaller than the spread of actual behavior. 3. Stereotype accuracy. A judge may achieve accurate results, not because he has perceived carefully the individuals before him, but because he is well informed about the population to which they belong.

[52:21]

Page 162. Stone, Lovett, and Gage, 1957, asked judges to predict the questionnaire responses of subjects who were described as simply students. Later, the judges actually met the students and made a second scent of predictions. The second set proved to be less accurate than the first. The judges had an accurate stereotype about students and failed to make any good use of the perceptions of these particular students. As Brown, 1956, points out, in real-life stereotype accuracy may be more useful than the differential perception of individuals, see four below, unless one is interested in how a person will behave in ways which are not part of his role, such as a bank clerk doing a favor. Stereotype accuracy is not, however, perceptual except in so far as correct identification of another's cultural role is concerned. The knowledge concerned may be based on experience, but it also may be derived from the study of social survey data or other literary sources. At one time it was common to warn judges and interviewers against the use of stereotypes.

[53:23]

Perhaps this could be restated. They should make sure that their stereotypes are correct and that they are prepared to meet expectations exceptions who do not fit the stereotype. Figure 4.5, errors of judgment. One axis, denoted from 90 to 115, the other S1 to S5. Lines denoted are Judge A, errors of level, Judge C, errors of differential accuracy, test scores, and Judge B, errors of spread. There are five points on each line, one for S1, S2, S3, S4, and S5. Judge A, errors of level, beginning at about 107, 113, 110, 115, returning and going down to 106. Judge C, errors of differential accuracy, 105, 102,

[54:32]

102, 101, 104. Test scores, 100, 105, 103, 107, down to approximately 98. Judge B, errors of spread, 97.5, 108, 103, 113, and all the way down to approximately 94. Back to text. Page 163. Number four, differential accuracy. In figure 4.5 are shown the ratings made by a judge whose level and spread are correct, but who has assessed the individuals wrongly in relation to each other. He would be described as low in differential accuracy. When there is a high correlation between judgments and criterion, there may be accuracy of this kind, though the level and spread may still be wrong, so that absolute errors can be considerable.

[55:41]

Grossman, 1963, devised a means of measuring differential accuracy. Judges were asked to match verbal statements to subjects seen in films. This eliminates level and spread, as all subjects were male. There was little scope for the operation of stereotypes. Judges' high in differential accuracy were tough-minded, empirical, and non-conforming. This component of accuracy is probably the one most closely related to our postulated personality dimension of perceptual sensitivity, page 328f. This dimension is primarily concerned with sensitivity to ongoing cues, especially nonverbal cues during interaction, but some of these will be relevant to the perception of personality traits. Bronfenbrenner, Harding and Galway, 1958, obtained measures of differential accuracy for 72 students, and correlated these in turn with ratings of the judges, the ratings varied with sex of judge and sex of person observed. A chart here on the left says male, on the right it says females, sensitive to males, sensitive to females for males, and then for females, sensitive to males, sensitive to females.

[56:53]

So males, males, resourceful, dominant, outgoing. Males, females, tact, tolerance, timidity. Females sensitive to males, submissive, reasonable, accepting. Females, females, submissive, insecure, inhibited. For all subjects and judgments combined, differential accuracy was associated with being hesitant and passive toward others and lacking in creative expression and leadership. Thus high differential accuracy in this age group is not consistently related to social competence. In a number of early studies, correlations were found between the ratings of judges or interviewers and more objective indices of the personality or performance of those judged. such a measure does not eliminate the other sources of judgmental error but probably comes closest to differential accuracy with this procedure the most accurate judgments are made of those who are similar to the judge in cultural background age and personality and who are introverted and detached well adjusted and intelligent

[58:02]

Page 164. Females do slightly better than males. From studies cited above, it follows that a judge should be cognitively complex for people, should not have incorrect implicit personality theories, and should be salient for the dimensions being assessed. He should be sensitive to minor verbal and nonverbal cues. There is evidence that training in interviewing skills and insensitivity can improve accuracy. Appropriate training methods are discussed in Chapter 10. Chapter 4. Page 165, Chapter 5, Two-Person Interaction. Introduction and Methods, Concepts and Models. We now know the elements of social interaction which need to be studied, but we also need conceptual models to integrate findings and direct research. In fact, research in this area has been very much held up for this reason.

[59:07]

Models of human behavior devised for other fields of psychology simply fail to apply in this field. It is almost a classic case of the phenomena seeming incomprehensible until the right conceptual tools were devised to deal with them. We have already introduced the main background to dyadic interaction. Each person comes to the encounter as a result of motivations, which can be satisfied by happenings in the encounter. Motivation can be looked at here in terms of the goals an individual is trying to attain, which consist either of behavior on the part of the other, e.g. admiration, buying something, or of a pattern of dyadic interaction, e.g. intimacy, excitement. Each interactor emits verbal and nonverbal signals of the kinds described previously. Nonverbal communication plays several essential roles, such as controlling timing of speech and expressing interpersonal attitudes.

[60:08]

Interactors perceive the behavior of the other, mainly through the two channels of hearing and vision, each of which operates intermittently. Eye movements play several closely related functions. The other person cannot be observed without looking at him, but to look is also to send a signal. The two interactors meet in one of a limited class of situations, defined by the culture such as an interview or a friendly chat, which has definite roles and prescribes role relationships between the interactors. Their behavior is partly programmed in advance. We are concerned in this chapter with the detailed sequences of interaction occurring in dyads. spelled D-Y-A-D-S. One early approach to the subject can be called the SR model, page 166. Interaction is seen as a series of alternating responses on the part of those involved and can be looked at as a stochastic process. This approach has been extended by considering both verbal and nonverbal responses and the links between them.

[61:15]

Two sequences are of particular interest the effect of reinforcement and the phenomena of imitation and reciprocity. The second approach is to consider as a whole the pattern of behavior emitted by one interactor. We shall develop the social skill model which interprets social interaction as a serial motor skill. This will be supplemented by an account of certain cognitive processes which may be involved such as taking the role of the other. As well as trying to manipulate the other, interactors take the role of the other both cognitively and by sharing the other's emotional state. However, it is not possible to provide a complete account of dyadic interaction by considering only one person at a time. We have to study how two personalities may be compatible or incompatible, and what happens when they meet. The conceptual model which we shall use is that of a system in equilibrium. For interaction to occur, there must be a certain degree of coordination and meshing between the two interactors.

[62:19]

This may develop into a stable pattern of interaction. The character of this pattern constitutes the relationship between them. Taken together, these models throw a great deal of light on the process of interaction in a dyad. The theoretical task is not complete by any means. There is still no conceptual scheme that can handle and predict the detailed development of a long sequence of interaction, for example. Research methods. General problems of research methods are discussed earlier. Page 20F. Here we shall be concerned with the particular problem of research with dyads. A. Statistical analysis of normal interaction sequences. Pittenger, Hockett, and Donahy. 1960. carried out an exhaustive analysis of the verbal and paralinguistic contents of the first five minutes of a psychotherapy interview.

[63:21]

Later workers have used interaction recording, Lennard and Bernstein, 1960, or films, Condon and Augston, 1966, for longer sequences of behavior in the same situation and have carried out statistical analysis of the data. There is an advantage in using one-way screens and concealed cameras for this kind of work, otherwise the dyadic situation is likely to become transformed into a triadic one. Page 167b, experimental techniques using real interaction in which one interactor is a confederate. Numerous experiments have used this design. For example, a subject may be interviewed by an experimenter who systematically rewards or punishes certain kinds of behavior, as in operant verbal conditioning. Or an interviewer may follow a set pattern of timing for his responses, as in the standard interview, devised by Chappell, 1956, C.F. page 110.

[64:21]

In other experiments, a Confederate pretending to be a subject may stare continuously at the subject or follow some other pattern of visual behavior. It is possible to use this strategy in a highly realistic field experiment. Blake, 1958, for example, studied imitation by planting a stooge next to an intended subject in the library. A second stooge approached the first for a contribution to charity, then going on to the subject whose behavior was found to be influenced by that of the first stooge. The limitation of such procedures is that they do not allow for the occurrences of genuine interaction. They can show how the subject's behavior is affected by the Confederate, but they cannot show the emergence of interaction in which each person has to react and accommodate to the other. C. experimental techniques using real interaction and two subjects. Many experiments have been conducted in which both interactors were real subjects. In such experiments, the experimental variable may be the task, motivations aroused by the instructions, the degree of visibility or audibility of the subjects, and so on.

[65:31]

A rather different version of this design is where experimentally controlled combinations of people are brought together in order to test predictions about compatibility relative dominance, and so on. In many ways, this approach is the best in that there is a genuine two-way interaction. On the other hand, it must be recognized that as an experimenter quickly gets outside the experimenter's control, so that his dependent variable is really the entire situation and relationship that develops rather than any particular responses. D. Techniques which eliminate interaction were criticized earlier. An interesting and extreme version of this approach, which has been used for dyads, is the minimal social situation, in which subjects sit in cubicles and are not aware of the existence of other subjects, although in fact they control one another's rewards. Experiments with this situation are discussed later. E, projective methods, have been used with some success in this area, but are open to the limitations mentioned earlier.

[66:40]

Page 168, Response Sequences, SR Models. One early way of conceiving interaction was a chain of responses, each interactor reacting to the other's most recent social act. Alright, there's a figure here. At the top is the letter A, at the bottom is the letter B, one above the other, to the right of these two letters, starting with To the right of A, there's a capital R, sub A minus 1. Diagonal and to the right of B from RA sub minus 1 is RB minus 1, and an arrow pointing from RA1 to RB1. Then there's a line with no arrow from RB1 to RB1. A minus 2.

[67:44]

Okay. And that's also on the letter A level. And then there's an arrow from RA2 pointing to RB2 on the letter B level, and it says, etc. This model assumes that each social act is determined by the last act of the other. It leads to the study of simple empirical sequences of social acts. An example of such research is the analysis by Bales. 1953, a sequence of responses is observed in 16 meetings of five-man groups. Similar information on diads is not available. In table 5.1 below, we are given only the main types of response for each of the 12 Bales categories. This is table 5.1, response probabilities for the Bales categories from Bales 1950. On the left, you have 1 through 12. And on the top, you have 1 through 12. 1 on the left shows solidarity.

[68:50]

2 shows tension release. 3 agrees. 4 gives suggestions. 5 gives opinion. 6 gives orientation. 7 asks for orientation. 8 asks for opinion. 9 asks for suggestions. Ten disagrees. Eleven shows tension. Twelve shows antagonism. Okay, there's nothing under one or two. Number one under number three is twenty-eight percent, i.e., category one is followed by category three at this rate. Okay, in other words, shows solidarity is followed by agrees twenty-eight percent of the time. Number two, under number four, shows tension release, gives suggestions 68% of the time. Number three, agrees, is asks for orientation 41% of the time, asks for opinion 21% of the time.

[70:02]

Number four, gives suggestions, gives opinion 46%, percent of the time number five gives opinion gives opinion in return forty nine percent of the time and ask for orientation nineteen percent of the time number six gives orientation gives opinion thirty five percent of the time and ask for opinion twenty four percent of the time Number seven asks for orientation is asked for opinion 74% of the time. Number eight asks for opinion is asked for orientation 46% of the time. Number nine asks for suggestion is gives orientation 36% of the time and asks for orientation 28% of the time.

[71:05]

Number ten is disagrees and that is asked for orientation 25% of the time and disagrees right back 24% of the time. Number 11, shows tension, is asked for orientation 39% of the time, and shows antagonism is shows antagonism right back 36% of the time. These findings show that the model has a considerable degree of fit with what actually happens and that quite a high degree of prediction can be made by the next act if the last one is known in theory it should be possible to program a computer to simulate social interaction or to interact with a real person The main practical difficulty is on the person perception side. A device is needed to decide how to categorize a particular act in terms of categories used. In the M.A.D. doctor computer program at MIT, something like this has been done.

[72:10]

Weizenbaum, 1967. The patient types at a console, and the computer's reply is typed underneath. Here is an example of what happens. How do you do? I am the doctor. Please sit down at the typewriter and tell me your problem. I am unhappy. I am sorry to hear you are unhappy. What shall I do about it? Why, do you ask? I don't like being unhappy. You say you don't like being unhappy. Yes, I don't like it. You seem quite positive. Of course I am. Is it because you are that you came to me? Because I am what? As can be seen, the computer has been programmed along the lines of non-directive therapy and uses a technique of reflecting the emotion expressed by the patient and encouraging the patient to say more about it. This is an extremely ingenious program in that it is able to respond to and to produce grammatical speech as well as produce socially appropriate responses.

[73:20]

During the course of this chapter, we shall list a number of other sequential principles that need to be added to simple SR processes if real-life social interaction is to be reproduced successfully. Within the total content of utterances, a number of regular sequences are found. Topic. If A makes a remark about a particular topic, B will probably reply by speaking on the same topic. If he does not and fails to explain why not to change the subject, dot, dot, dot, there will be a discontinuity of interaction, and indeed social interaction will have broken down. Type of utterance. If A asks a question, B will probably answer it, CF Table 5.1. If A gives orders or instructions, B will probably carry them out or explain why not. If A asks open-ended questions on a specific topic, B will give longer replies, and this is one way of getting another person to talk more.

[74:22]

Timing of speech covers such things as lengths of utterances and pauses, tendency to interrupt, response to interruption, and rate of speech. People have characteristic styles of speech in all these respects, but also adjust to one another. Page 170. For example, an interaction virtually forces a person to stop speaking. There are also strong elements of imitation involved. For example, if A interrupts B, B will interrupt A. SR sequences can also be studied between nonverbal elements. A number of investigators have suggested that there is commonly a gestural dance between interactions and that they continuously respond to each other's bodily movements. Condon and Augston, 1966-1967, have made very detailed analysis of films of psychotherapy and produced evidence for interactional synchrony between speaker and listener in terms of small movements of hands, head, eyes, etc., over periods of time responding to sentences and even words.

[75:28]

Condon, 1968, has confirmed this finding from the analysis of a short film of a discussion in a London hotel situated stimulated by a bird whistle. The film was taken at 24 frames per second, and portions of it were subjected to frame-by-frame analysis. Kenden distinguishes the following sequences. One, movement mirroring, which can be detected by the naked eye, consists of the copying of another movements, and was particularly found in listeners and as interaction between two people began. Two, listening behavior. The listener gives a continuous kinesthetic commentary on the speaker's performance consisting of head nods and changes of facial expression. Three, speech analogous movement. The listener acts out features of the speaker's utterances, sometimes giving an exaggerated version of the speaker's movements. It was found the people present but not immediately involved in the dyadic conversation showed a gross change of position when there were changes in who was speaking and that these changes triggered off similar movements by others.

[76:43]

It is suggested that these changes were more tightly synchronized in an attentive group. We can also consider SR sequences where one R is verbal, the other not. We discuss later the nonverbal signaling whereby channel control is negotiated. For example, a head nod results in more speech, a frown in less. The problem is made more difficult by the fact that verbal and nonverbal signals occur together in more or less integrated units. Further complication that has emerged from the study of sequences of social responses is that there may be more than one series taking place at once, but at different speeds. In the following section, we discussed the twin phenomena of reciprocity and imitation, two ways in which A may respond to B with a similar or equivalent response. We shall conclude that the two depend on quite different psychological processes and that they proceed at different speeds.

[77:48]

The faster one, imitation, depends on more automatic, habitual processes. The slower one, reciprocity, on more reflective, cognitive processes. Page 171. Let us go on now to consider some of the ways in which the SR model needs to be supplemented. We've already extended it by thinking of a stochastic series containing both verbal and non-verbal elements. The main addition is the motivation of each interactor, which leads to his not simply responding to the other, but initiating an integrated series of social acts himself. Secondly, we need to add the pre-programmed roles of the situation and the role relations between the participants. However, unless our analysis still gives little understanding of the psychological processes involved, we turn now to theories about what these processes may be. Response matching, imitation, and reciprocity.

[78:54]

During social interaction, it is very common for an act by A to be followed by a similar act from B. This we will call response matching, and we will not, for the moment, be concerned with the psychological process involved. Here are some of the main ways in which response matching has been found to occur. Length of utterances. In many situations, if A is instructed to make long utterances, B makes long ones too, and similarly for short utterances. Psychotherapists commonly speak one-fifth or one-sixth as much as their patients, but if a psychotherapist doubles or halves the length of its utterances, the patient does likewise. Materazzo, 1965. There are also conditions, however, such as shortage of available time when an inverse relationship is found between utterance lengths. Argyle and Kenton, 1967. interruptions and silences.

[80:00]

In the chapel standard interview, the interviewer, at different parts of the interview, pauses for 15 seconds before replying, or persistently interrupts the interviewee. It is found that the interviewee is likely to respond by also pausing or interrupting. Argyle and Kenden opposite. Kind of utterance. From the results of the Bales study 1950 shown in table 5.1, it can be seen that jokes lead to jokes 16% of the time and that there is response matching for showing solidarity 28% of the time, giving opinions 19% of the time, giving orientation 24% and disagreeing 24%. It is also found that questions once answered lead to more questions. Page 172. words used. In studies of psychotherapy sessions, Jaffe, 1964, found that there was a positive correlation between therapist and patient use of words such as I, you, thee, a, and so on.

[81:13]

Gesture and posture. Rosenfeld, 1967, found that if an interviewer responded to each of a subject's utterances by a smile or a head nod, the subject's rate of smiling and nodding was much greater than when this was not done. Schefflin, 1965, has analyzed films of psychotherapy sessions and found that the peers involved often adopted congruent pastures. It's been observed that this is more common when two people have a favorable attitude to one another. Information about self. In a number of studies, E.G. Taylor 1965, it's been found that if one interactor is programmed to reveal more about himself, the other person will do the same. Other areas. It is very likely that similar response matching takes place with regard to emotional state, emotional contagion, bodily contact, and other elements of social behavior.

[82:19]

Response matching evidently occurs in diodes for a number of different kinds of response. Two different processes could be responsible for it. Imitation and reciprocity. We will give a fairly brief account of imitation as it has been dealt with extensively elsewhere. Bandura, 1962. Imitation is usually taken to refer to the situation in which A copies some response of Bs to the same or similar situation. It has not been used to include the case where the response by B is towards A as in the examples listed above. A good example is the study by Blake, 1958, of people crossing a road when a wait sign was showing. An experimental confederate crossed at this point and was found to be followed by a number of those waiting. if the confederate was smartly dressed more people followed than when he was badly dressed numerous studies of imitation have shown that it occurs under the following main conditions a when the follower is rewarded for his behaviour especially b if he is rewarded by the model c if the model

[83:32]

is of high power status, D, if the model is seen to be rewarded for the behavior in question, E, if the follower is similar to the model, and F, if there are no clear guides to the follower's behavior. A number of theories have been put forward about the psychological processes that may be involved, but it's not very clear how any of them apply to the interaction situation. Page 173. In any case, Imitation during interaction might be something of a special case governed by different processes in that the following behavior is both visible to and directed towards the model. Imitation is a learned process, and it is more complex than responses produced by simple conditioning. On the other hand, other fairly... Elementary learning mechanisms, such as secondary reinforcement by the model, may be all that is involved. If simple imitation experiments are set up for humans, they may fail to produce the expected behavior, because subjects regard this as cheating, i.e., a more complex cognitive process may interfere with the relatively elementary imitation response.

[84:40]

Wheeler and... Arrowwood, 1966, showed that these restraints against imitation could be experimentally reduced. Out of four subjects in an ESP experiment, if S4 always imitated S3, then S2 was more likely to imitate S1. Reciprocity was first observed by anthropologists as a feature of life in primitive society. If A does something for B, B usually responds by the performance of some equivalent act for A. The sequence, difference from imitation, is conceptualized above in a number of ways. One, the reciprocity act is not necessarily similar to the original, but is equivalent in reward value. Two, reciprocity is not an immediate unthinking response, but is carefully calculated and follows after an appropriate interval of time. Three, conscious awareness of what is happening inhibits imitation but makes reciprocity more probable.

[85:45]

Four, reciprocation is less likely when the other is of higher status, not more likely as with imitation. There is widespread evidence for the occurrence of reciprocity in primitive societies, and it's been reviewed by Solon's 1965 that this... Solon's 1965, this writer makes a useful distinction between three degrees of reciprocity. One, generalized, altruistic reciprocity, where A gives to B without thought of future rewards from B. Two, balanced or economic reciprocity, where A and B give one another exactly equivalent rewards. Three, negative reciprocity, where each person tries to get more than it gives. Sullins further suggests that the degree of reciprocity that takes place depends on the degree of intimacy between the two people concerned. Here, a kind of chart.

[86:47]

Two topics. Type of relationship. Type of reciprocity. Close kinship, common residence. Generalized, altruistic. Non-kin, but in same tribe. Balanced. Inter-tribal. Negative. In other words, the closer the relationship, the more altruistic the former reciprocity observed. Within the family or between intimates, help is freely given and resources freely shared outside. Such close relationships, balanced reciprocity, is found which is of a more formal and less personal character. Berkowitz, 1968, and his colleagues carried out a series of laboratory experiments on reciprocity. A subject is or is not helped by a second, unseen subject and later has the opportunity to help the other. In general, it was found that if A had helped B,

[87:50]

then B was more likely to help A. However, the phenomenon carried considerably between different cultural and social class groups. One, altruistic reciprocity was strongest among middle-class subjects in Wisconsin and Oxford who had fathers in bureaucratic occupations. Two, economic reciprocity was shown by middle-class Wisconsin subjects from entrepreneurial backgrounds and by Oxford working-class subjects. 3. Very little reciprocity was shown by Wisconsin working-class subjects. It seems likely that altruistic reciprocity, what Bergowitz calls social responsibility, is stronger in developed societies, as is the concept of professional duty, which should be carried out without assistance from bribes or other releasers of reciprocity. To demonstrate that reciprocity can take place independently of imitation, we can cite a study in which the response was quite different from the original, and so could not be classified as imitation.

[88:56]

Schapler, 1968, interviewed female students, and tried to persuade them to wash a blouse a number of times as part of a product testing exercise. In half the cases, he gave them a flower at the beginning of the interview. In this condition, the girl has agreed to wash the blouse on average a larger number of times than when no flower was given. However, the effect only worked when relations between the two were established on an informal basis, i.e., with no defined power or status relations between them. Although somewhat fantastic, this experiment does demonstrate the occurrence of reciprocity in the absence of imitation. Having established that reciprocity... does take place, we shall now list the conditions under which it is most likely to occur. Intimacy of relationship was postulated by Sullins as a major determinant, and it seems very likely that altruistic reciprocity will occur most in an intimate relationship. Berkowitz, 1968, found that English working-class boys were less likely to reciprocate if their partner came from a different social class.

[90:04]

Relative Status. It has been observed that there is less reciprocation by the person of lower status. This may be because he simply lacks the resources to do so. If a rich man gives a beggar some money, how can the beggar reciprocate? Page 175. One answers that he responds by deference, and this is part of the analysis given by Holman's 1961. He postulates that if A gives B... more than B gives A, then B will give A social approval. Voluntariness of Each Act. Granson and Berkowitz, 1966, found that there was more reciprocation of help when the original helping act had been voluntary than when it had been part of their instructions. Chaplin, 1966, found reciprocacy only when the relationship was informal. What is the explanation of reciprocity?

[91:09]

We have seen that it is different from imitation. Goldner, 1960, argued that there is simply a social norm which demands reciprocity. This is supported by the observation that when the events are made, salient reciprocation is made more likely and imitation less likely. The culture differences mentioned above can then be looked at as variations in the strength of the norm. If such a norm becomes internalized, there should be reciprocity, regardless of any possible subsequent gains by the agent. Evidence for this was found in an experiment by Tognoli, 1968. In this experiment, subjects were instructed to make as much money as possible. They were told that by giving the other a small sum, he would receive several times as much as this. subjects played against confederates who were either consistently generous or consistently mean it was found that if the stooge was generous the subject became more generous this was true also of the last trial which could not in turn be reciprocated by the stooge the second line of explanation is in terms of the future rewards each participant hopes to receive from the other in the exchange theory formulation above

[92:28]

Tybott and Kelly, 1959, and Hommens, 1961, for a relationship to be sustained, each party must get sufficient out of it, and will produce acts which are calculated to benefit him in the future. Clearly, this theory cannot account for the kind of behavior observed in Tognoli's experiment or for Sullen's altruistic reciprocity. It could, however, explain what Sullen's called balanced reciprocity. How can altruistic reciprocity be explained? It could be due to a norm of reciprocacy, but it involves a further degree of generosity and spontaneity. Perhaps it is more appropriately regarded simply as part of an intimate social relationship in which it is natural for each person to do things for the other without counting the cost, because he wants to do so. Indeed, if he reciprocates too soon, or with behavior that is too similar to the original, or to equal in value, this will make it seem less spontaneous and possibly end the relationship by paying off the original debt.

[93:34]

The causes of altruistic behavior are discussed later, page 192f, page 176. what part does reciprocity play in social interaction we have suggested that it operates at a relatively slow and reflective level as contrasted with the faster and more automatic process of imitation referring back to the various kinds of response matching which were listed earlier page one seventy one f and how many of these would be affected by reciprocity self-disclosure is perhaps the most likely candidate though lengths of utterances and use of interpretations certainly may operate at a slow and reflective level on the other hand matching of bodily posture and use of particular kinds of words are clearly responses of an automatic and unreflective behaviour may be suggested that general patterns of behavior related to major dimensions of relationships, such as intimacy and dominance, are most likely to be governed by reciprocity. We shall see later, however, that intimacy is also governed by another principle, equilibrium maintenance, which may oppose and outweigh reciprocity.

[94:42]

The Effects of Reinforcement One of the most extensively studied sequences of events during interaction is the effect of, A, consistently rewarding or punishing some aspect of B's behavior. The effect was first studied by Greenspoon, 1955, in an experiment in which subjects were reinforced while producing a series of individual words and was later demonstrated by Verplank. 1955, in real conversations where subjects were not aware that an experiment was in process. In this experiment, 24 subjects had conversations with experimenters. In the first three ten-minute periods, there was normal conversation. In the second period, expressions of opinion by the subject were reinforced by agreeing or paraphrasing. In the third period, they were followed by disagreement or no response. Frequencies of opinion giving were unobtrusively recorded by doodling. and percentages of utterances expressing opinion were 32%, 56%, and 33% in the three periods.

[95:50]

Much of the later work has supposed that the phenomenon was one of operant conditioning, and use has been made of experimental procedures that are rather far removed from social interaction. Subjects are asked to produce lists of words, to complete sentences, to tell stories, to talk about themselves, or to answer tests or questionnaires. The responses reinforced are such things as plural nouns. The word I, or other classes of words, the reinforcers used are good, or a flashing light. We shall distinguish here between such laboratory studies... and reinforcement in true social situations, such as the Verplank experiment. Later experiments of this kind have reinforced various categories of social response and have often made use of nonverbal reinforcers, such as smiling, nodding the head, and leaning forwards. Page 177. Indifferent experiments, the following kinds of behavior have been influenced in this way.

[96:55]

One amount of speech, two opinions, information, etc., 3, speech on selected topics, 4, non-delusional speech, 5, favorable self-references, and 6, leader activity. C. Crossner, 1958, Greenspoon, 1962, Williams, 1964. However, some doubt has been thrown on what is actually happening in these experiments. Are subjects being influenced without awareness, or are they simply finding out what pleases the experimenter? Is it a case of operant conditioning, or of cognitive learning assisted by the verbalization of hypothesis? It has been assumed that the crucial issue is whether or not learning takes place without awareness. For cognitive theory, there should be no learning without awareness, if awareness can be regarded as a valid index of the presence of central cognitive processes. In the early experiments, about three percent of subjects were aware what was being done to them, as ascertained in subsequent interviews or questionnaires. However, if questioned at greater length, a rather larger number come to be classified as aware.

[98:00]

Several studies have shown that reinforcement has a greater effect for aware subjects. The question is, does reinforcement have any effect at all on the non-aware subjects? Here the evidence is conflicting, but it suggests that if there is any effect for these subjects, it is relatively slight. Another approach to the problem is to manipulate awareness experimentally by the nature of the instructions, by previous instruction about the phenomenon, or by simply asking subjects to get the interviewer to say, good. Normally subjects who have been made aware in these ways are more affected by reinforcement. Spielberger, 1965. These results have been obtained in the laboratory type of experiment in which subjects were asked to produce lists of words. It's been observed by Greenspoon 1962 and Delaney 1961 that subjects in these experiments formulate a series of verbalized hypotheses about what they should say.

[99:04]

The behavior in question looks exactly like concept formation as assisted by verbalized mediation processes. And the other hand... The experimenters... Experiments conducted under natural conditions, usually with nonverbal reinforcers, may become cases of operant conditioning. Subjects in the Verplink experiment, and in the similar study by centers, 1963, did not know it was an experiment. Hilden and Brown, 1956, carried out an attitude survey by telephone, and were able to influence the opinions expressed by good, though not by uh-huh subjects. claim not to have been influenced and were not aware of what was happening. Subjects do not become aware of the reinforcement pattern in these studies, either because they are not aware that they are taking part in an experiment, or because the reinforcements used are the less obvious nonverbal ones. Page 178. It is reported that the students of one of the early workers in this field succeeded in moving him to the extreme left-hand end of his lecture platform by means of smiles and nods versus frowns and head shakes delivered by an attractive female student sitting in the front row.

[100:18]

Asrin et al., 1961, however, found some difficulties in repeating for Planck's experiment. They found experimenters unable to perform the interview without giving additional nonverbal reinforcements, such as nodding and smiling. They also found that if interviewers were led to expect that agreement would have a cathartic effect and lead to a reduced rate of interaction, this is what happened. Otherwise, agreement led to an increased rate of interaction. This looked like another example of Rosenthal's finding, 1966, that experimenters can unwittingly elicit the desired behavior from their subjects, but how do they do it? Presumably, the cathartic interviewers agreed in different style to the others saying perhaps yes with a downward tone rather than yes yes as if to say tell me more it suggests that what is happening may not be simply reinforcement perhaps a second process is operating in that the relevant feature of the reinforcing response is the extent to which it encourages further speech

[101:22]

As Bandura pointed out, if the experimenter simply asks subject politely to omit personal pronouns, it is a safe prediction that these responses would reach asymptotic level almost instantaneously, Bandura in 1962. The conditions under which this form of influence is greatest have been studied in a number of experiments, most of them unfortunately of the laboratory type. The reinforcer used... As far as can be seen, non-verbal reinforcements, such as smiling, nodding, leaning forward, and looking interested, are more effective than verbal reinforcers such as, good, right, mm-hmm, used by themselves. It is doubtful in most experiments whether the latter are used by themselves. Status and sex of interviewer. Many studies show that a high-status male or a young and attractive female interviewer produce the best results, at any rate for male college students. personality of subjects there are considerable individual differences in the response to reinforcement in these situations the greatest effects have been found in subjects who are anxious have a high need for approval who are easily hypnotizable and who are now in

[102:41]

Low independence, page 179. Several studies have failed to find any relationship with extroversion. Schizophrenics, especially chronics, and those with a poor prognosis do not respond to reinforcement, partly because they have such a low verbal output anyhow. The effect of reinforcement is greater in subjects who have been isolated or have been aroused in other ways. It may be concluded that operant conditioning of verbal behavior, and probably of other behavior too, is an important process of influence and dyadic encounters. The effect is rapid and can occur without the awareness of the person influenced. It may also occur without the knowledge of the influencer, so that both parties are constantly influencing one another in the direction of producing the desired behavior. We shall show later in this chapter that social interaction can usefully be looked at as the operation of a serial motor skill in which each interactor is trying to manipulate the others in order to elicit certain desired responses.

[103:42]

Suppose that A wants B to produce responses of type R, whether this is connected with his professional goals or private motivation. when b emits such a response a probably responds with approval whether or not he is consciously aware of the value of such reinforcers one of b's goals is almost certainly to get a to produce responses of approval liking or social acceptance so he is reinforced in the rate of production of response r goes up it is possible for interactors to become aware of this form of influence and to use it to control the behaviour of others Interviewers, for example, can control the amount of talk of those who initially talk too much or too little. It has also been observed that patients undergoing psychotherapy are influenced in this way, and it has been suggested that reinforcements could produce changes in verbal behavior, which in turn would operate to direct and control other behavior. Analysis of the Behavior of an Interactor The Social Skill Model

[104:46]

At the end of the section on SR models, we concluded that the SR approach was inadequate because it is necessary to take account of the related and purposive sequence of social responses emitted by each interactor. If it is recognized that an interactor is pursuing certain goals and that he takes corrective action dependent on the effects of his actions on the other, then we... are saying that his behavior has some of the features of a motor skill. Page 180. A model of interaction as a kind of motor skill was developed by Argyle and Kenden, 1967, and Argyle, 1967, from which the following account is taken. A skill may be defined as an organized, coordinated activity in relation to an object or situation which involves a whole chain of sensory... central and motor mechanisms. One of its main characteristics is that the performance or stream of action is continuously under the control of the sensory input.

[105:54]

This input derives in part from the object or situation at which the performance may be said to be directed, and it controls the performance in the sense that the outcomes of actions are continuously matched against some criterion of achievement or degree of approach to a goal, and the performance is nicely adapted to its occasion. Bartlett, 1943. Welford, 1958. Here we suggest that an individual engaged in interaction is engaged in a performance that is more or less skilled. His behavior here is when he is driving a car as directed, adaptive, and far from automatic, though it may be seen to be built up of elements that are automatized. And here too we have an individual carrying out a series of actions which are related to consequences that he has in mind to bring about. In order to do this, he has to match his output with the input available to him and to correct his output in the light of his matching process. Thus, he may be discussing current affairs with an acquaintance and be concerned perhaps merely to sustain a pleasant flow of talk.

[107:00]

He must be on the watch then for signs of emotional disturbance in his acquaintance, which might signal that he had said something which might provoke an argument. At another level, he must be on the lookout for signals that his acquaintance is ready for him to talk. or for him to listen he must make sure his tone of voice and choice of words his gestures and the level of involvement in what he is saying are appropriate for the kind of occasion of the encounter in the treatment of human performance as developed by such workers as welford nineteen fifty eight and craftsman nineteen sixty four distinction is drawn between the perceptual input the central translation processes and the motor output or performance We will discuss the various elements of the model in more detail. One, the goals of skilled performance. The motor skill operator has quite definite immediate goals. To screw a nut onto a bolt. To guide a car along the road by turning the steering wheel and so on.

[108:02]

He also has further goals under which the immediate ones are subsumed. To make a bridge or to drive to Aberdeen. Page 181. He knows when each goal is attained by the appearance of certain physical stimuli. These goals, in turn, are linked to basic motivations. For example, he may be paid for each unit of work completed. In much the same way, a social skill operator may have quite definite goals. For example, conveying knowledge, information, or understanding. Teaching. Obtaining information. Interviewing. changing attitudes, behavior or beliefs, salesmanship, canvassing, disciplinary action, changing the emotional state of another, telling jokes, dealing with hostile person, changing another's personality, psychotherapy, child rearing, working at a cooperative task, most industrial work, supervising the activities of another,

[109:09]

Nursing. Supervision and coordination of a group. Chairmanship, firmanship, arbitration. Figure 5.1, motor skill model from Argyle, 1967. You have a box over on the left that says, Motivation, Goal. And it points to a big rectangle here. At the top, it says in the box, Perception. arrow from perception going to translation in the middle of the box, and from translation to motor responses. Okay, now the arrow points from the bottom of this rectangle, and it goes to a box that says changes in the outside world. Then there's a feedback loop from changes in the outside world that goes right back to perception, translation, motor responses. Back to text. These aims are linked in turn to more basic motivations in the performer connected with his work.

[110:12]

In everyday non-professional social situations, the actors are motivated too, but this time simply by basic social motivations of the kind discussed in Chapter 2. Each person wants the other person to respond in an affiliative, submissive, or dominant manner according to his own motivational structure. In professional situations, the social skill operator will in fact be motivated by a combination of professional and social motivations. You may, for example, want the client both to learn and to be impressed by his knowledge. Like the motor skill performer, he will also pursue a series of sub-goals in turn. The interviewer first establishes rapport, collects personal data, obtains the answers to a series of questions, and then closes the interview. Page 182. Number 2. The Selective Perception of Cues. is an essential element in serial motor skills. The performer learns which cues to attend to and becomes highly sensitive to them.

[111:13]

Vision is the most important channel. The performer makes a rapid series of fixations, each lasting perhaps 0.25, 0.35 of a second, as, for instance, in reading. the pattern of fixation is itself part of the skill ideally information should be collected just before it is needed the performer also learns where to look at each point in order to obtain the necessary information perception is highly selective the incoming data are actively organized into larger units which are recognized as objects signals or cues these in turn are interpreted i e to use to predict future events as with dial readings or road signs A number of other perceptual channels are used by the motor skill performer, hearing, touch, and signals from the muscles, kinesthesis, about the position of the limbs and body. It is common for more use to be made of touch and kinesthesis when the skill is well learned. Vision is reserved for the cues which cannot be dealt with by the other senses and for cues at a distance.

[112:15]

It is found that... As learning proceeds, less use is made of external cues. An experienced motorist concentrates his attention on certain stimuli. Outside the car, he attends to the movement of other traffic in the position on the edge of the road, rather than the architectural houses, while inside he is aware of the speedometer rather than the upholstery of the seats. He knows where to look for the cues and what they mean. He can interpret road signs and can anticipate what is going to happen next. Part of the training for some industrial skills consists in teaching performers to make finer discriminations, to learn the significance of cues, concentrating on particular cues, and suppressing irrelevant ones. During the course of social interaction, each participant receives a stream of visual and auditory information about the other. In Chapter 4, it was shown how people learn to perceive and interpret the relevant cues and how some people are more sensitive than others, especially in areas about which are personally... they are personally concerned.

[113:16]

In Chapter 10, methods of training and social sensitivity will be described. And in Chapter 8, it will be shown that some kinds of mental patients are seriously deficient in it. The motor skill performer gets quite a lot of information from perceiving his own movements, either by sound, vision, or by kinesthetic sensations. Do social interactions receive any direct feedback in a similar way? Page 183. As we shall show in Chapter 9, people are very interested in the image they are projecting. One of the goals of interaction is to present oneself in a certain light to others. The main source of direct feedback is the sound of one's own voice. Some people are said to be very fond of this sound, but the sound they hear is quite different from what other people hear since they hear the sound as transmitted through bones. Many people fail to recognize tape recordings of their voices and are very startled the first time they hear one. people are often quite unaware of the emotive paralinguistic aspects of their speech they also may be unaware of the timing aspects of their speech such as how often they interrupt posture gestures and facial expression cannot be perceived visually by the actor it is very difficult to see ourselves as others see us the only way to do this is to have a lot of mirrors or to study films of oneself

[114:38]

There are, however, kinesthetic muscular cues to bodily movements. People have a fairly definite body image and do have some idea of their posture. 3. Central Translation Processes Information gathered by the receptor systems is transferred to more central regions of the brain and is converted into an appropriate plan of action. If someone is stirring a boat, he must learn which way to turn the rudder to go in the desired direction. There has to be some central store of translation processes in the brain which prescribe what to do about any particular perceptual information. This may be in the form of verbalized information, e.g., pull the rope on the side you want to turn towards, in the case of the rudder. Often the translation processes are completely unverbalized and... lead to automatic sequences of behavior with little conscious awareness, as in riding a bicycle.

[115:41]

Or they may start as conscious rules and deliberate decisions, but become automatic later, as with changing gear in a car. A curious feature of the central system is that it can only handle one piece of information at a time. It has limited capacity. The output from it consists of a plan, i.e. the decision, to make a particular series of modal responses, which has been selected from a range of possible alternatives. This involves some prediction about how external events are likely to develop while the response is being organized, as when a tennis or squash player, while he is shaping his shot, anticipates exactly where the ball will be. We can see how the skill model is able to take account of the differing levels of organization involved in behavior, from the most automatic to the most reflective. It also takes account of the fact that the same pattern of behavior can be more or less automatic at different points in time.

[116:42]

Page 184. Social interaction also depends on the existence of a learned store of central translation processes. In the course of socialization, people learn which social techniques will elicit affiliative or other responses from those they encounter. Research has shown how these can be improved upon in many cases. For example, to get another person to talk more, the best techniques are, one, to talk less, two, to ask open-ended questions, three, to talk about things he's interested in, and four, to reward anything he does say. The effects of limited channel capacity are seen in social interaction as, in motor-scale performance, during periods of hesitating and unfluent speech, speakers do not scan the faces of the others present, presumably to avoid overloading the system. 4.

[117:43]

Motor Responses Commands go from the central translation system to the muscles, producing a pattern of movements. In fact, there's a hierarchy of goals consisting of progressively smaller groups of muscular responses. There is also a series of sub-goals. When one sub-goal has been reached, the sequence leading to the next sub-goal begins, and the main goal is attained. Driving a car from A to B involves the sub-goals of getting the engine started, getting the car moving in top gear, and getting to the intermediate points X, Y, and Z. One of the interesting findings about motor scale is that the series of responses leading to sub-goals become more or less automatic and can be regarded as larger response units. For example, words rather than letters become the units for Morse or typing. C. F. Miller, Galanter, and Prebrim, 1966. while the essence of the central processes is to plan.

[118:45]

The essence of this response system is to initiate and control. The desired responses are set in motion and steered with the help of perceptual guidance. As well as learning the perceptual cues and translation processes, it is necessary to learn to perform these patterns of motor response smoothly and accurately. When a motor skill has been perfected, it is faster, movements are eliminated, conscious awareness is much reduced, tension is reduced or sometimes focused at points of difficulty, and there's less need for feedback and some danger of becoming rather mechanical. There are broader aspects of response, such as the styles of psychotherapy, foremanship, etc., which have been found to be most effective. These entail rather subtle and complex combinations of social responses consisting of integrated patterns of social techniques. Establishing rapport, building up a relation of dominance, and reducing another's anxiety are all examples of such higher units of social behavior and are probably unitary and automatic sequences of behavior for many people.

[119:51]

Another example is establishing and negotiating relationships and identities in an encounter. page 185. These are larger units composed of smaller units, but interactors are consciously aware of the larger units rather than the smaller ones, and the relationships are partly established in terms of the interlocking of these larger units, e.g., relationship between roles. In considering a performance in this way, we note how it may be said to be made up of a combination of elements. though what we refer to as an element will depend upon the level of the hierarchy we are discussing it may be noted that elements can be recombined in a fairly flexible way and it is this that makes a skill so adaptive On the other hand, once a particular combination of elements achieves for the performer an acceptable level of success, and provided the sequence of sensory input is stable upon subsequent occasions when the skill is used, it is found that many sequences of actions in the performance become automatized, that is, freed from the continuous sensory control.

[121:00]

Smaller, lower-level units in the hierarchy are more habitual and automatic than the larger, higher-level units. Feedback operates at each level so that the higher level's corrective action involves bringing whole, lower-level units into play. More conscious attention is given to the performance of the larger units. Their strategy is carefully planned, where the lower levels are run off unthinkingly. it seems likely that a similar phenomena of atomization occurs with social skills. Thus, lecturers and interviewers, for instance, who make use of a fairly standard social technique on repeated occasions may be able to run off long sequences of actions automatically. An experienced interviewer might give considerable thought to the overall strategy of an interview, but much less to particular questions and not at all to particular words. Museum guides, often a notorious example, where automatization has gone too far lecturers have occasionally reported on this process in themselves thus lashley nineteen fifty one mentions a colleague who reported to him that he had reached a stage where he could arise before an audience turn his mouth loose and go to sleep page one eighty four it is found that speech is accompanied by continuous shifts of head hands and body

[122:20]

and that these bodily movements are also arranged hierarchically so that a head position may accompany a sentence, bodily position, paragraph, Shefflin, 1965. However, these shifts do not appear to be under conscious control at all, except for those who have learned about these phenomena. Number five, feedback and corrective action. The motor skill performer uses perceptual cues to take corrective action. He can thus correct a continuous action, like steering a car, when it shows signs of going wrong, or correct later performances in the light of earlier ones, as when firing a rifle at a target. Page 186. It isn't a continuous skill or tracking task that this can be seen most clearly. A beginner motorist tries to steer the car down the road. He sees that he is about to hit the curb, so he corrects the steering to the right. When he is more competent, the same process takes place with greater speed and accuracy.

[123:25]

Feedback provides information for corrective action, which makes allowances for variation in the conditions or materials and for error in the initial plan of response. A social-scale performer corrects in a similar way. A teacher who sees that our pupils have not understood the point will repeat it slowly in another way. A person who realizes that he is annoying someone by his behavior will usually change his style of behavior. The experiments on apparent verbal conditioning can be looked at as demonstrations of the effect of feedback, working at two different levels of psychological functioning. The model is, of course, only a starting point. It provides a language for talking about interactions, and it is suggestive in a number of ways. We still have to elaborate it in two main ways. One, to take account of some of the special cognitive processes taking place during interaction, such as taking the role of the other. And two, to take account of the fact that other interactors are playing the same game, and that there must be a meaningful sequence of responses for social interaction to take place.

[124:33]

The model has expanded so far as... however been useful in showing the various points at which social skill training may be needed, and in providing a classification of the ways in which social competence may fail in mental patients and others. These points will be pursued further later in this book. Several experiments on the effect of feedback have been stimulated by the model. An earlier experiment by Levitt and Mueller, 1951, showed that one subject could verbally communicate a complex design to another more quickly and accurately if he had feedback from the other. Kendon, 1967, analyzed films of bodily movements and diets and found that people look up at the ends of their utterance. It is at this point, presumably, that feedback is required, i.e., on how the utterance has been received by the other. Figure 5.2. The speaker's terminal look...

[125:34]

acts at the same time as a signal to the other that the speaker is about to stop speaking. If he fails to look, the other fails to reply, or there is a long pause. In a later experiment, Argyle, Lowell Gee and Cook 1968 varied the amount that one interactor could see of another by means of masks, dark glasses, and a one-way screen. Dark glasses had little effect on each case of communication, but when the other was masked or behind a one-way screen, subjects found interaction more difficult. Females were affected more than males, and with self-invisible preferred to see the other, which was not the case with the males. Figure 5.3. Now reading on page 188. However, when both were wearing dark glasses, face only, there were more pauses and slightly more interruptions. Figure 5.4. This experiment suggests that an interactor needs feedback from the other's face in order to know his emotional reaction, but needs to see his eyes for purposes of channel control.

[126:47]

We now know where a person looks to collect visual feedback and when he looks. In the last chapter, we consider the way he interprets the visual data. Auditory information is collected at the same time, but without the necessity for special bodily movements. Argyle and Kenda, 1967. Argyle, 1967. Turning on page 187 for figure 5.2... Caption reading, Direction of Gaze at the Beginning and End of Long Utterances from Kenden 1965. This is a chart. Axes are percentage of other directed gazes for each half-second interval. And from the bottom of the axis, it starts at 20, goes 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, and 80. The other axis reads half-second. second intervals. You have six, five, four, three, two, one, zero.

[127:50]

That half of the line is A's utterance ending. Starting at zero, going one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, is B's utterance beginning. Dark line denoting A's gaze and dot and dash line B's gaze. During A's utterance ending, starting from about, going from 6 to 0, your percentage of other directed gazes for each half second interval has an average of maybe about 62. It begins someplace about 55 and it goes all the way up to about 76. By the time you get to 0 and you start going 0 to 7 or B's utterance beginning, you slowly start going down until you get maybe to about a 54, and your average in here would be a little lower. It'd be maybe about 59 or 60.

[128:51]

On B's gaze, the percentage of other directed gazes for each half-second interval, you begin at about 62, and during A's utterance ending, you're declining steadily. little jig-jags in it here and again, but on the other hand, you end on about zero, you're about down to 20, 20%. Then when B's utterance begins, you go from all the way from about 22 to all the way back up again to about 52. And it goes up pretty steadily there, too. Figure 5.3. Caption reading effects of visibility of others on ease of interaction from Argyle, Longy and Cook, 1968. N equals normal. M equals mask. NV equals no vision. Your axis starting on the left, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, going up.

[129:59]

Your bottom axis is N, DG, M, and OWS. on the self-visible side of the chart, and on the other side you start on the left side it was OWS negative. Here you have OWS positive and NV. Each of these letters denotes a point. Again you have a dark line for A and a dotted line here for B. That's males and females respectively. Okay, on 4.0 N, reading the male line, 4.25 DG, 4.0 M, and 3.7 OWS negative. On the same chart, the female line is reading...

[131:05]

4.75 N and 4.75 DG come down to about 4.3 M and 4.0 OWS negative. On the other side, this charge on the OWS positive, you have about 3.9 OWS positive. And 4.3 NV on males. And on the females, you have about 5.0 OWS positive. And then you only come down to about 4.5 NV on the females. Chart on page 188, figure 4. excuse me, 5.4, Effects of Visibility on Masking from Argyle, Lal G., and Cook, 1968. You have three things to read here.

[132:13]

You got interruptions, number in minutes, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, reading from the bottom up. You have pauses, seconds in three minutes. This is on the right-hand side of your rectangle here. It's 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 going up. And on the bottom, you have specific points denoted no vision, face only, body only, eyes only. Line with dots denoting pauses. X's is interruptions. Okay, the pause line reads, Interruptions 27 on no vision. approximately 58 pauses. On point face only, you have about 42 in interruptions, almost 90 in pauses. Point of body only, you have about 23 interruptions, and 42.5 pauses.

[133:25]

got about, on eyes only, you've got about 24 interruptions and 43 pauses. On the line denoting interruptions, on the point of no vision, you have 36 in interruptions and 78 in pauses. On the point of face only, you have 25 interruptions and 50 pauses. On the point of body only, you have 24 interruptions and 48 pauses. On the point of eyes only, approximately 22.5 interruptions and about 42 pauses. Back to text. Concern with the other's point of view. According to the social skill model, each person in an encounter is trying to manipulate the other person in order to obtain his own goals.

[134:31]

Model likens dealing with people to the manipulation of a machine, which is probably how psychopaths deal with people, but this doesn't quite fit the social behavior and experience of normal people. Page 189. The model can be extended in two ways to make it less psychopathic. One, an interactor's immediate goals may be for the other to benefit in some way, as in the case of teachers and psychotherapists, for example. Two, during social behavior, we are usually aware of being the object of intentions, perceptions, and attitudes on the part of others' presence. This can be brought within the skill model to some extent by saying that one of the goals of interaction is self-presentation, that is, to create certain impressions for others. However, in order to take account of concern with the other's point of view, this use of an imaginative cognitive model of the other, some addition, seems necessary to the social skill model itself, perhaps is an extra loop at the translation stage.

[135:33]

According to exchange theory, each interactor is trying to maximize his own rewards, regardless of what happens to the other. Experiments in this tradition have shown how cooperation can develop out of pure self-interest. Siddowsky et al., 1956, and page 194. However, an interactor often has to pay some attention to the rewards of the other, or the latter will simply leave the situation or fail to cooperate. Again, the model could be extended by supposing that it can be rewarding to obtain rewards for another under certain conditions. In this section, we are concerned with the additional processes which are missing from both these models and their basic form. One formulation of the missing process is to postulate that interactors in a cognitive sense take the role of the other. G. H. Meade, 1934, was the first person to put forward the idea that interactors in some sense see the encounter from the point of view of the other person. Sarban has developed this in his analysis of social behavior as role enactment and sees social behavior as the playing of parts for an audience.

[136:42]

Sarban and Allen, 1968. Goffman, 1956a, has developed the theme of self-presentation during encounters. The difference between the social skill model and the present one is brought about by Turner, 1956. He contrasts taking the role of the other in the sense of identifying with his standpoint, in the sense of taking account of his role, but keeping it at a distance from it, as salesmen might do. turn it less a third way, taking the point of view of a third party or of the generalized other as when a social norm is salient. There are no ways of assessing whether someone is actually taking the role of the other on a particular occasion, but there are several measures of ability to do it. The earliest method was to see how well A could predict B's and C's responses to a questionnaire. This technique is open to a number of statistical difficulties, which were discussed before page 161f, page 190.

[137:44]

Sarban and Jones, 1956, devised the as-if test, in which subjects are asked to describe how their life would have been if. One, they had been born a member of the opposite sex, and two, if they had been born a Russian. This measures the imaginative aspect of taking the role of the other. Another kind of measure is the stick figure test devised by Cerebin and Hardick, 1955, C.F. page 137F. Subjects are asked to identify the emotions portrayed by the 43 stick figures. This is a measure of empathy in the emotional or postural sense. Do people interact more effectively if they take the role of the other? It seems likely that if A takes the role of B, he should be able to predict B's responses better. Pfeffer suggested that in order to engage in effective social interaction, a person should be able to consider simultaneously his own point of view and that of others. Pfeffer and Gorevich, 1960, devised a rule-taking test of social de-centering.

[138:47]

Subjects are asked to retell their own projection test stories from the points of view of other people in the pictures. Scores of this correlated with several Piaget tests for simultaneous perceptual de-centering, and both scores increased with age between six and thirteen. Pfeffer and Chatofliffe found that people who did well at the role-taking test also did well on a test of skill and social interaction. The test of interaction was a situation in which subjects had to communicate a password by one-word cues, and the findings may not apply to other kinds of social skill. Ability to take the role of another would be expected to depend on who the other person is. If A has ever experienced B's position, it might be more difficult, as when B is of a different sex, race, or class, for example. The other person might see the situation quite differently, in the sense that different motivations and goals, different roles, different group pressures are operating.

[139:51]

There may be a difference of cognitive structure, so that events are categorized differently. Even to speak to another person involves considering what he can understand and is interested in. We discussed earlier experiments showing how people beyond the stage of egocentric speech adapted their utterances to the listener, page 118. Triandis, 1964, found that dyads were more effective if the members had similar cognitive structures. It might be expected that an older person should be able to deal with a younger one as he has experienced this role. though cultural changes may and do alter it, but a younger person would have difficulty in dealing with an older one. Knowledge of another role may be obtained by having experienced it at second hand, for example, through literary sources or other mass media. It may be suggested that one of the causes of difficulty in interaction with members of other classes, races, or national groups is difficulty in taking the role of the other. Some attempts have been made to train people for behavior in other cultures by means of programmed instruction in the cognitive world of the other culture.

[141:00]

Page 418. Reading on page 191. It is well known that interaction at close quarters over a period of time can remove racial prejudice, C.F. Harding et al., 1954. The reason may be that the point of view of the other is learnt under these conditions. However, taking the role of the other does not necessarily lead to a better social performance. Consider the case of a nervous performer in front of an audience from the skill model that follows that he should attend to whether or not the audience can understand him and agrees with him, but not with what the audience thinks about him or whether the audience likes him. The latter will lead to undue self-consciousness and anxiety and thus to deterioration in his performance. It may not be necessary to take all aspects of another's role, and the right balance between attending to the two points of view should be maintained. Fuffer adds that they should be considered simultaneously and integrated. Sir Ben and Allen, 1969, point out that if the interests of the other are opposed, for example, if he is a soldier on the other side, effectiveness may be diminished by taking his point of view too vigorously.

[142:13]

and the most effective solution might be to take his point of view only as a detached outsider. Such phenomena to be discussed later depend on taking the role of the other. A. Self-Presentation Everyone has some concern with what other people think of them, and this affects their behavior. These phenomena are discussed in Chapter 9. B. Observer or Observed In situations such as appearing in front of an audience or being interviewed, individuals become more concerned with how others see them than with their own appraisal of the others. In other words, the extent to which people take the role of the other varies. It has been found to be a function of personality as well as of the situation. c. Taking roles. When a person occupies a position in a social structure, the other members will have certain expectations of how he should behave. His perceptions of these role expectations is one of the determinants of his behavior.

[143:13]

As Turner suggests, 1956, there is a difference between taking the role of another as a detached onlooker and identifying with his standpoint. Page 192. When a person shares the feelings of another, this is called the empathy. When the feelings involved are of distress, it is called sympathy. A may perceive B's behavior and find that he is adopting B's postural state, ensuring what he thinks are B's emotions. He may perceive B's reactions incorrectly, but may still emphasize with what he thinks is B's response. Lips 1907 thought that the copying of the other's postural movements came first. Sarban, Taft and Bailey, 1960, that the cognitive processes are primary and spill over into action. An interesting technique for measuring empathy was used by Statlin and Walsh, 1963. Subjects heard tape recordings of good and bad demonstrators teaching a class, and measures were taken of the perceived anxiety of the demonstrator and of the subjective anxiety and PGR of the subjects.

[144:25]

Landrow, 1965, also played tape recordings to subjects. The tapes describe the situation of an individual in conflict, where to help someone would infringe an impersonal rule, e.g., guards are held hostage by rioting prisoners and threatened with deaths unless warden yields. He doesn't. The measure of sympathy was obtained from analysis of free written responses. Several factors are responsible for empathy. One, the ability to take the role of the other cognitively is no doubt important. Two, the arousal of some form of interpersonal motivation is probably necessary, affiliation, sex, and nurturance in particular. Three, when a person has been in a similar situation himself, he is better able to appreciate and share the state another is in. Lenroe, 1966, found a greater sympathetic response to seven tape-recorded descriptions of individuals in difficulty for subjects who had role-play, the part of a distressed person, and where a partner had responded in a friendly, reassuring way.

[145:29]

Lenroe suggests that sympathy develops in children as a result of experiencing distress themselves and through concern for close friends. Lastly, we shall discuss helping behavior, where concern for another person leads to action. A number of writers have supposed that helping can be accounted for in terms of exchange of rewards. However, it is clear from numerous field studies and laboratory experiments that people commonly help others without expectation of reward, and that some social behavior is not oriented towards expected return from others. There are three psychological processes which may be responsible for altruism. One, we saw previously that a young chimpanzee will give food to another spontaneously or in response to begging, page 34, and that children of three to five will help others in distress, page 60. Ep. 1966 concludes from the animal studies that altruism is a product of evolution and not something that must be beaten into the growing human child because of the needs of society.

[146:33]

Page 248. Reading on page 193. This may be the basis for a cultural norm that a person should help others, especially if they are dependent on him, as Brickowitz and Daniels, 1964, suggests. They found that subjects would give more to help... more help to subjects who were believed to be dependent on them, too. A further factor in helping is probably taking the role of the person who needs help. In an experiment using a projective puppet situation, Lenroe 1966 found that children would help more a. if they had frequently been in a state of distress themselves, and b. if they had been successful themselves in the past in taking the action required. 3. Finally, altruism may be due to more... Familiar social processes, such as reciprocation of help and imitation of altruism in others. Brigawetz, 1968a. Dyads as Social Systems So far, we have considered two-person interaction from the point of view of one person at a time.

[147:43]

However, each person is simultaneously trying to communicate with and influence the other. We now turn to the patterns or systems of interaction developing in a dyad. Game Theory Models of Dyads A number of investigators have constructed theoretical models of the reward-cost exchanges active in dyads, and we have them incorporated into rather stripped-down experiments, often in terms of games. In these experiments, all that is reproduced from real dyadic interaction is the reward of cost exchange, although their elements and processes are omitted. The first experiment in this tradition was by Sadowski, Wyckoff, and Tabury, 1956, who devised the minimal social situation. It was found that something resembling cooperation developed between two subjects who did not know of each other's existence, but who could press two buttons which, in fact, gave rewards or punishments to the other. Cooperation developed faster if strong shocks were used, and it took about five minutes for cooperation to be established.

[148:51]

The experiment has been thought to show that cooperative social behavior is due to each member of a diet seeking his own rewards without concern for the welfare or point of view of the other. Jones and Gerard, 1967, show why cooperation developed in this experiment. If it is assumed that a subject sticks to his previous button to press when rewarded and shifts... When punished, it follows that cooperation will develop through one of three different routes. To figure 5.5, reading on page 194. In a similar experiment, Sadowski, 1967, informed half of the subjects of the nature of the situation. Here, cooperation developed more rapidly, suggesting that knowledge of the role of the other can help cooperation to develop. In another experiment, Calais et al. 1962, found that most of the subjects thought that the other would stick to his response if rewarded. These experiments were open to criticisms made earlier, page 17FF.

[149:52]

The main processes of interaction are prevented from occurring, and subjects are forced into using forms of behavior which may not occur under normal conditions. Figure 5.5, routes leading to mutual rewards in a minimal Social Situation from Jones and Gerard, 1967, page 552. Okay, this is made up of three columns. First line of the first column is an arrow pointing downwards. Beside it is the word time. Columns are one, two, and three Roman numerals. And the figures in each of the three columns are similar. There is an X, and the ends of each X that are pointing downward but going down diagonally, because they are X's, are arrows. Okay, into the first column.

[150:56]

R sub A and R sub B are the names of the arrows, left and right. Arrow R A, starting top left, ends bottom right, or points toward bottom right, with a positive sign at the bottom of it. RB starting top right, ending bottom left, with a positive sign at the end of it. Okay, and the figure under this in column 1, instead of consisting of an X, simply consists of an angle, where the point of the angle is on the top, And it's simply the two arrows that were at the bottom of the X above. And these also are positive signs on them. Column 2 has our A and our B lines. And these point to negative signs. The first angle in this points to positive signs.

[152:04]

The second angle points to positive signs. There was only one angle in column 1. There are two here. Column 3, you have your cross, where RA ends with a negative sign and RB ends with a positive sign. The first angle, both arrows pointing to negatives. Second angle, both to positives. And the third angle, both to positives. Back to text. Tybott and Kelly, 1959, were the first to analyze social situation in terms of payoff matrices. Harman's, 1961, devised a similar scheme and made some further derivations about status. Tybott and Kelly see a social encounter, or each part of an encounter, as a choice for each person between several possible social acts, every combination of which has a payoff for each person. The following method of representation is commonly used.

[153:05]

All right. Picture a square. The square inside is divided into four squares. Each square is divided by a line so that if it was box A, B, top left A, top right B, bottom left C, bottom right D, then A, D there would be a line. Halfway between A and C begins a line and that line ends halfway between C and D. Halfway between A and B a line begins ending halfway between B and D. There would be a line beginning halfway between A and B. ending between C and D, and a line halfway between A and C, ending between B and D. The portions of this box consists, okay, the box inside of the box, that's the upper left-hand corner, top half of it, top angle, is X,

[154:31]

Bottom is y. Above the first box within the box, a sub 1. The second box within the box on the top is b sub 2. Okay. First box, upper left. On the left hand side is denoted by b1. And on the bottom of the box, bottom left-hand corner box is denoted by B2. The upper part of the box has a big A at it. The left-hand side of the box has a big B at it. Back to text on page 195. And the cells are entered, the payoffs for each person for that combination of moves. Thus, X... is A's payoff for A1, B1, while Y is B's payoff.

[155:34]

What these authors have done is to abstract one element of social encounters which they believe to be the most important. They are then enabled to give representations of social situations from which the resultant behavior is predictable. The model of human behavior is a rational or economic one. People act in order to maximize their payoffs. Ty, Bott, and Kelly suppose that a person's behavior will be determined by his subjective payoff matrix. It is not shown how this matrix can be discovered in most of the experiments. It is simply provided by the experimenter. An outcome is compared with a person's comparison level, what a person thinks he deserves or considers normal. If an outcome is less than that it is felt to be unsatisfying and unattractive, Outcomes are also compared with the comparison level for alternatives, the values of the best available alternatives open to him. Thus, a person may stay in a social relationship, although the reward value was low because it was a best option open to him.

[156:35]

Although there is an exchange of rewards, one person may receive more than the other. The Haman's treatment is somewhat similar but includes further predictions about status. If one person receives more rewards than the other, he becomes rewarded by receiving greater deference. It follows that if a low-status person is able to reward a high-status person, the former should be less deferential. One way of pursuing these ideas in the field of social interaction is to classify social acts in terms of the amount and type of reward involved. An interaction recording system in these terms was devised by Lagaba, 1963. The three main types of reward he considers are information, freedom, and support. This approach could be extended by taking account of the motivations of the actors and the extent to which these are satisfied or frustrated by particular acts. People may also be concerned about payoffs of the others involved when they are behaving altruistically, cooperatively, or maliciously.

[157:41]

The approach is quite different from the approach being put forward in this book. It uses abstract variables such as... reward rather than the elements of social behavior involved. It is concerned either with single moves or overall relationships, not with interaction, and it tends to lead to stripped-down experiments in which there is no interaction but subjects playing games with fixed payoff notices. Nevertheless, a lot of research has been generated by the exchange theory approach, and we can learn something about interaction from it. Number one, the development of cooperation and trust. It follows from exchange theory that people say can remain in social situations because of the rewards which they receive. Social situations, therefore, contain a cooperative element. Each person's depends on rewards mediated by the other. This assumption has been built into non-zero-sum games, of which most widely studied has been the prisoner's dilemma game.

[158:45]

This is based on the dilemma of two mythical prisoners, where each is the choice of confessing to the joint crime or of not confessing. If A confesses and B does not, A is let off lightly and B is heavily punished. If B confesses too, they both receive fairly severe sentences. If A does not confess, he is lightly treated on condition that B does not confess either. The payoff matrix can be represented as in figure 5.6. Figure 5.6, two representations of the prisoner's dilemma from Jones and Girard, 1967. Okay, this is a square. There's prisoner A and prisoner B. Prisoner A, not confess, confess. Prisoner B, confess, not confess. B, not confess, not... Prisoner A, not confess. One year each. B, not confess. A, confess. Ten years for B, three months for A. Prisoner B, confess. A, not. Confess.

[159:46]

Three months for B, ten years for A. Prisoner A, confess. Prisoner B, confess. Eight years each. And the bottom, there's a parenthesis, small a in parenthesis, concrete form. Right, the next one is B, abstract form, scaled in three month units. Okay, now this is, again, four boxes. within a bigger box. Each box consisting of two triangles or two halves here. There's A on the top and B on the left side. A's two boxes are A1 and A2. B's boxes B1 and B2. All right. First upper left-hand box is negative 4, negative 4.

[160:48]

Upper right-hand box is negative 40, negative 1. I'm reading from the bottom left-hand triangle of each box to the upper right-hand corner of each box. Third box is bottom left. Right next to B2, under A1, you have negative 1, negative 40. The last box, bottom right, between B2 and A2 is negative 32 and negative 32. Back to text. The particular interest of this kind of game is that the best joint solution is A1, B1. If this involves a risk for each player, A has to trust B not to make move B2. More realistic kind of cooperative game was devised by Deutsch and Krauss, 1916, which two players try to move their trucks to destinations and where the shortest route is a one-lane road.

[161:51]

They have an economic incentive for arriving at the destination as quickly as possible. The best solution is for the players to make turns to use the one-way road first, and this solution developed during the course of the game for some players. In some conditions... One or both players should operate a gate to prevent the other truck from reaching its goal. In these conditions, there was much less cooperation and lower payoffs were received. The situation aroused very real interpersonal feelings and in some cases considerable aggression. Joint should use this game with marital partners who are said to be given insight into their mutual feelings. With your 5.7 playoff matrix for zero sum game with saddle point at small a sub 2, small b sub 1. Okay, we've got our large square with the four squares with the triangles inside of them. And they read as such.

[162:55]

Square b1a1 reads 2, negative 2. B1A2, 1, negative 1. B2A1, 5, negative 5. B2A2 reads negative 3, 3. Number three, exchange of rewards leading to influence. If A wants B to reward him in some way, he should provide equivalent rewards for B. Experiments on reciprocity have shown that if A helps B, then B is more likely to help A. However, we saw that between close friends and relations, altruistic reciprocity develops, which does not require any balancing of rewards. There's a high degree of trust, and the relationship is more important than the rewards. If A wants B to help him, he could offer B quite different rewards. Rosen and Beelfeld, 1967, obtained some evidence that a person who behaved more deferentially received more help.

[164:00]

Schapler and Bates in 1965 found that more help was given if the costs of the helper were small. However, other results show that helping cannot always be explained in terms of exchange theory, and that other concepts, such as a normal social responsibility or a sympathetic taking of the role of the other, must be postulated. Page 188f. Another kind of influence is known as ingratiation, where A influences B by making himself agreeable. in a series of experiments jones 1964 found that if a low-power person a was motivated to influence a high-power person b he would make himself attractive to b avoid disagreeing and flatter b these tactics were only successful however if their motivation was concealed and performed with some degree of subtlety the low-power person a increases his power by ingratiation in two ways one he is in a position to withdraw rewards from b 2. B becomes more concerned with A's welfare and will suffer by not rewarding B. Page 199.

[165:05]

The second part incorporates the effects of taking the role of the other on B's rewards. Exchange theory emphasizes an important feature of social interaction, the role of reinforcements. This is useful in several areas. A. For A to stay in a social situation, B must make it sufficiently rewarding for him. This will also depend on other factors, such as rules, which will have the effect of creating large costs for those who break them. B. The extent that A will like B depends on B's rewardingness. This is the key to popularity, and we propose it later as an important dimension of personality. Page 326F. C. B's power to influence A depends on the rewards and costs which he can provide for A. The ramifications of power are developed later. Page 286FF. It is our view, however, that the conceptual model of exchange theory does not fit the phenomenon of social interaction.

[166:06]

Social interaction consists of a continuous flow of verbal and nonverbal signals by both parties. The verbal signals are not simultaneous but alternate. The effects of moves are not fully known in advance but depend on trial and error. Social behavior is emitted at two levels, the more global, cognitively controlled components consisting of smaller elements, many of them unconscious and nonverbal. The streams of behavior emitted by the interactors have to synchronize. Interactors are cognitively concerned not only with their own gratification, but also with the point of view and condition of others. These features are encompassed by the account given above, but cannot be analyzed in terms of exchange theory. The account of several kinds of interaction given by exchange theory appears to be incomplete and misleading. We mentioned above the cases of reciprocity and helping behavior. Some social behavior is governed by factors in addition to the seeking of rewards from others. Equilibrium processes and dyads.

[167:08]

And some of the expert... experimental games discussed above it was found that dyads would discover a stable pattern of behavior which was satisfactory to both. For example, the saddle point in a zero-sum game and alternation in the trucking game. We now consider the growth of such cooperative relationships when the whole pattern of interaction is taken into account. To begin with, there is an even more basic task to achieve interaction at all. For anything approaching social interaction to occur, there must be a considerable amount of coordination, meshing or synchronizing of the two patterns of behavior. If each person acts quite independently, a small child and some schizophrenics do, there's no real social interaction. Page 200. The author was once interviewing a schizophrenic. While the former was in the middle of a sentence about the hospital football team, the patient suddenly said, they've taken my railings away, thus failing to mesh together with regard to timing or with regard to subject matter and incidentally referring to an event 26 years earlier.

[168:17]

It is like a game in which one person is playing squash and the other is playing chess. In all these cases, two people are together, are trying to communicate with... or to influence one another, but they are not accommodating sufficiently to one another for either to be able to elicit any of the desired responses from the other. Let us list some of the ways in which coordination seems to be necessary for interaction to be possible. 1. The content of interaction. There must be agreement on the game being played, the dance being danced, the topic of conversation, or the nature of the activity in other respects. Garfinkel, 1963 arranged demonstrations to study the effect of breaking this rule. For example, a player moves his opponent's piece or deliberately moves out of turn. The effect is deeply disturbing and disruptive. Number two, dimensions of relationships. One, role relationships.

[169:19]

Two people must agree on role relations between them. If one is a teacher, the other must be a pupil. If one is an interviewer, the other should be an interviewee. Another way of putting this is to say that they must agree on the definition of the situation and be prepared to play socially defined parts in it. American hippies, acid-head, and teenagers have evolved a social style known as a put-on. which consists of refusing to accept normal role relationships by adopting deliberately non-meshing responses, which prevent any proper interaction from taking place and make the other person look like an idiot. The role relationship offered is ridiculed so that no valid communication can take place. Brackman, 1967, cites the following example from an interview in Playboy. Playboy. How do you get your kicks these days? Dylan, I hire people to look into my eyes and then I have them kick me. Playboy, and that's the way you get your kicks. Dylan, no, then I forgive them.

[170:21]

That's where my kicks come in. Playboy, did you ever have the standard boyhood dream of growing up to be president? Page 201. Dylan, no, when I was a boy, Harry Truman was president. Who'd want to be Harry Truman? Playboy, well, let's suppose that you were the president. What would you accomplish during your first thousand days, Dylan? Well, just for laughs, so long as you insist, the first thing I'd do is probably move the White House. Instead of being in Texas, it'd be on the east side of New York. McGeorge Bundy would definitely have to change his name, and General McNamara would be forced to wear a coon skin cap and shades. As Brackman points out, this technique is invoked when the moment of reconciliation is in sight, at the point when dialogue might begin to prevent dialogue to guarantee continued estrangement, dot, dot, dot. Number three, dimensions of relationship, and number two, intimacy. If two people seek different degrees of intimacy, there will be incongruity and awkwardness, and a compromise must be adopted.

[171:30]

If A uses social techniques such as standing nearer, looking more, and smiling to a greater extent than B, B will feel that A is intrusive and over-familiar, while A will feel that B is cold and standoffish. Clearly A is seeking an affiliative response from B. It is not enough for him to be able to look B in the eye. B must look back and with the right kind of facial expression. The Argyle and Dean 1965 model postulates that each person tries to maintain his own equilibrium level of intimacy. In addition, the two members of a dyad would have to compromise on a joint level, more or less agreeable to each. Altman and Haythor, 1967, studied the behavior of dyads who spend ten days in an isolation room together. There was an increase in territorial behavior, each progressively keeping to his own bed, chair, and side of the table. This was accompanied by progressive social withdrawal and was most marked in dyads that were incompatible for dominance or affiliation. Number four, dimensions of relations.

[172:33]

Number three, dominance. Two people may have different ideas about which is most important, entitled to most deference, allowed to talk the most, and take the decisions. The commonest source of conflict is where each wants to dominate. We will discuss later the question of how far the outcome can be predicted. Number five, timing of speech. There must be smooth synchronizing of speech in a conversation so that most of the time is occupied and there are no long silences and there are also no interruptions. The two members of the dyad have to agree on how long each shall speak and the rate at which the conversation proceeds, and they must be able to coordinate their utterances to avoid silences and interruptions. Page 202. in nineteen sixty seven by the detailed analysis of films of conversations has shown the techniques by means of which floor holding and floor apportionment are achieved this is partly done by purely verbal methods a speaker can continue to hold the floor by carrying on talking

[173:46]

and by not pausing between sentences, the other can seize the floor by making noises indicative of the desire to speak or by simply interrupting. There's a certain skill in smoothly and politely but firmly taking the floor as the other comes to a grammatical break. Floor apportionment is also requested by eye movements, which act as signals of speaker's intentions. A speaker always looks away as he starts to speak and looks up when he is about to stop. He also... looks at grammatical breaks to make sure that the other is willing for him to carry on. At these points, a third element appears the listener may or may not give a head nod and say, uh-huh, or words to that effect. By these means, two speakers will work out a joint pattern of floor holding. Short utterances are used in several different ways. Accompaniment signals, indicating that the listener is attending, are accompanied by looking. Agreement signals, laughter, and other signs of effective unity are not.

[174:46]

Attempted interruptions in which there is a struggle for the floor are accompanied by a steady gaze. 6. Sequences of Behavior Each response of A's must be followed by a response of B's, which is appropriate in terms of the various sequential principles described earlier. In a conversation, questions should lead to answer jokes to laughter, for example. Number seven, nonverbal responsiveness. Each interactor should continuously signal his attentiveness to the other by adopting an appropriate distance, orientation, and bodily posture, and by a stream of small movements of head, hands, and face in response to verbal and nonverbal acts of the other. C.F. page 170. Number eight, emotional tone. While interaction can proceed between two people who are in different emotional states, this is not a stable state of affairs. Probably interaction will cease or a change of emotional state will take place. When the above conditions are satisfied, social interaction may be said to take place as opposed to two people acting independently.

[175:53]

The equilibrium can be described at two different levels of analysis. Page 203. Number 1. There are details of timings and synchronizing the speech and the accompanying bodily movements. Number two, there are also higher order units such as dominance, intimacy, and role relationship. A social relationship is usually thought of in terms of the second level, but it is negotiated by moves at the first level. The innovation is broached in such a manner as to elicit from others reactions suggesting their receptivity. Dot, dot, dot. At the same time, the innovation occurs by increments so small, tentative, and ambiguous as to permit the actor to retreat if the signs be unfavorable. Dot, dot, dot, dot. Perhaps all social actions have, in addition to their instrumental, communicative, and expressive functions, this quality of being exploratory gestures. Dot, dot, dot. Cohen, 1955, pages 6061. At the same time, relationships and identities function as high-level cognitive elements and are handled at this level by performers.

[177:02]

It may take some time to establish a steady state, and the ways in which this is done will be described in the next section. When it has been established, it appears to have some of the properties of a system in equilibrium. A system is said to be in equilibrium if it remains in a steady state and if deviations are met with forces to restore conditions to normal. The idea that a stable equilibrium may develop in dyads and larger groups has guided a certain amount of research. 1960 analyzed interaction between psychotherapist patient pairs over a long series of sessions. They found that after the initial sessions, each pair settled down to a particular pattern of interaction, which then remained constant for the rest of the series. For example, the percentage of time taken up by the patient's conversation was very stable and fluctuated very... Little between sessions. If the patient spoke less than usual, the therapist corrected this by making statements containing more specific information, which had the effect of reducing anxiety.

[178:06]

Jaffe, 1964, also studied psychotherapy sessions and analyzed the 40,000 words produced in a series of nine sessions. He found a convergence of vocabulary. Therapist and patient learned to speak each other's language. They showed related fluctuations. fluctuations in sentence length. If one used longer sentences during a session, so did the other. However, these fluctuations diminished, and they settled down with the therapist using sentences .80 as long as the patient's. The same was true of veteran's length, where the corresponding figure was .40. There was differentiation in the use of I and you, the former being the most used by the patient and the latter by the therapist. Page 204. Goffman, 1955, showed how group members act to restore equilibrium after it had been disturbed through someone losing face. For example, the offending person is given a chance to correct things.

[179:10]

His behavior was perhaps unintentional or intended as a joke. He may be helped to reestablish himself in the group in a somewhat modified role. These cases of corrective action contrast with the unstable positive role. excuse me, positive feedback, which may occur in the early phases of group formation. For example, interaction leads to liking, which leads to more interaction, and so on up to some limiting point. The studies of computer simulation of interaction by Lowland, 1965, showed a similar... process operating. Some pairs of computerized personalities never established a stable relationship, but simply withdrew in fear or anger. Others moved towards a final equilibrium state in the course of 20 to 30 interaction sequences during which learning occurred. This vital state was not obtained in a steady manner, but evolved through a series of phases. It was found that such positive relations were difficult to bring about, but that they were very stable once they had been established.

[180:15]

A number of experiments have been carried out in which compatible and incompatible pairs of people have been put together. Two main kinds of incompatibility have been used, combining people who differ in strength of affiliative needs or who are both high in dominance, for example, on the Schutz 1958 scales. There are three results of incompatibility. Meshing is poor. The interactors do not enjoy their inter... action or like each other, and task performance is poor. Sapolsky, 1965, found the patients recovered faster if they were compatible with the therapist in the shut sense. Smelser, 1961, found that dyads were least effective at a laboratory desk if given roles in conflict with their personalities. The more dominant person... was given a submissive role. For an equilibrium to develop from the spontaneous behavior of two or more interactors, someone will usually have to modify his behavior. Seems likely that this will be the person most dependent on the relationship, and also perhaps the person who is most flexible and who has the larger repertoire of social skills.

[181:26]

The more a person gives way, on the other hand, the less he is likely to enjoy the interaction. When two incompatible people meet, they are in effect faced by a problem, how to reconcile their respective personalities and styles of interaction. With sufficient time and effort, they may be able to solve the problem with the equivalent of a creative solution. They may do this by a kind of collective trial and error in which most of the moves are of a subtle nonverbal variety. There is very rarely any discussion of the relationship itself, partly because people are only dimly aware of what's happening, partly because, as we have seen, it is embarrassing to talk about these things. Page 205. How far is it possible to predict the way in which two people will interact? We shall not be concerned here with the prediction of the actual sequence of responses, which is not yet possible, but with the general relationship, the state of equilibrium that develops. Some degree of prediction can be made...

[182:28]

of an individual's behavior on the basis of personality traits or from observation of his behavior in other situations. A person who is anxious tries to dominate or interrupts in one social situation is likely to do the same in other social situations. It is this consistency which makes it possible to use the notion of personality and personality trait. Chapel 1956 devised a method of scoring a number of interpersonal response traits from a person's performance in his standard These scores have been used to predict interaction in other social settings and for the selection of sales personnel for different selling situations. A number of studies have found correlations between aspects of social interaction and scores on personality tests such as extroversion and neuroticism. These findings will be reviewed in Chapter 8. However, people also behave somewhat differently in different situations.

[183:32]

Behavior is a function of both person and environment. Behavior, abbreviated BEH, period, equals F, parenthesis, capital P, period, capital E, period, in parenthesis. There is still consistency. If X is more anxious than Y, he will be more anxious than Y in situation E sub 1, being held up by a gangster, than in situation E sub 2, drinking morning coffee. The both X and Y are far more anxious in E sub 1. For present purposes, the most important part of E to be considered is the other person, so X will behave differently with different Ys depending on their sex age, social class, intelligence, and other aspects of their personality. Block 1953 studied the relationships between nine members of a laboratory, including secretaries and technicians. Each person did a cue sort to describe his relationship with each of the others. It was found that people varied their behavior considerably according to the age and sex of the other person, but that some people varied their behavior more than others.

[184:43]

It is a... Familiar observation that some people vary their behavior very greatly in this way. A young man may be relaxed with men, but terrified with women, or aggressive and competitive with men, but very amorous and at ease with women. Such patterns of behavior are presumably learned over the years in the course of interaction with parents and male and female members of the peer group. Page 206. The prediction issue... can be taken further by considering the personalities of both members of a dyad. The pattern of interaction that two people evolve is a product of the personalities of each of them. Several studies have shown how predictions can be made of the outcome in this way. We've already considered this condition under which two people will be compatible. Other studies have been concerned with the question of which will be dominant. Breyer 1960 calculated an ascendance index for each person based on the assumption that subjects of greater age, higher intelligence, and social class in males as opposed to females would be more dominant.

[185:45]

There also was a questionnaire measure to dominance. X's dominance would be predicted to some extent from his own score, or inversely from Y's, but the best prediction was made by subtracting Y's score from X's. Carment, Miles, and Servin, 1965, paired subjects who differed in intelligence or extroversion, and who were known to disagree on some topic. which found that the more intelligent and extroverted subjects were most likely to persuade the other to change their mind, possibly because the intelligent and extroverted subjects talk sooner and more than the others. A's behavior is a function of fixed aspects of B, like age and sex. It is also a function of variable aspects of B, such as his personality, as manifested by a social behavior. actual behavior towards a each person has a variety of styles of behavior or sub-personalities a one a two etc if for some reason a produces personality a three this may elicit B2, whereas A4 might elicit B1.

[186:50]

Back 1951, introduced pairs of subjects who were to carry out a joint task. Members of some pairs were told that they would find the other person very agreeable and easy to get on with, while other subjects were told the reverse. If A thinks B is friendly, this elicits friendly behavior in B, what has been described as autistic friendship, though it can lead to real friendship later. The opposite information results in cautious and suspicious behavior and mutual withdrawal, autistic hostility. It is therefore possible for two people to relate to one another in more than one way. There is more than one solution to the problem of discovering compatible, synchronizing interaction styles from the sub-personalities available. Under A, we have A1, A2, A3, and AH, and under B, B1, B2, B3, and BH. Page 207. A's behavior is a function of other aspects of the situation besides B's, such as the task, the physical environment, and the social norms operating.

[187:56]

It is largely this which produces further variations in the behavior of each. It is thus possible that there are a number of different equilibria for any dyad, depending on the situation, and that there may be greater compatibility in some situations than others. Forming the relationship. First meeting, the growth of relationships. When two people first meet, they proceed cautiously. They may start by going through one of the standard conversational routines that are commonly used in their culture. Here is an American example. Hi. Hi. Warm enough for you? Sure is. Looks like rain, though. Well, take care of yourself. I'll be seeing you. So long. So long. Bernie, 1966, page 37. Conversation about the weather or similar various... vacuous topics can be kept going for quite a long time no information is exchanged at a verbal level but the opportunity is created for non-verbal signals to be exchanged and some progress is made toward establishing an equilibrium the crucial point is that each person reveals very little about himself and that no attempts are made to transact any business furthermore they are likely to act with formality and constraint and reveal very little about their social personalities

[189:15]

With friends, on the other hand, it is possible to be oneself without fear of recklessness. of rejection by the other. There are cultural conventions about how long these initial moves should last. For old-fashioned Arab chiefs, three days was a prescribed period. An interesting exception is found in certain kinds of social survey interviews. Interviewers who will never be seen again can capitalize on their stranger value and be told things that would never be revealed to the neighbors. Such initial meetings may develop into social relationships of varying degrees of intimacy and of a number of different For this to happen, there must be interaction over a period of time and some kind of fit between the personalities and needs of two people concerned. Page 208. Their proximity in the physical environment and the relationships in the organizational structure are also very important. The dynamic processes involved will be explored in the next section. Here we are concerned with the characteristics of a close social relationship.

[190:18]

1. A smooth pattern of interaction develops. Meshing improves up to a point where the best available equilibrium is discovered. Diebott and Kelly, 1957, interpret the early stages of interaction as a process of exploring the outcomes available in the relationship. The account we gave above placed the emphasis more on joint problem-solving in an effort to find the pattern of interaction most satisfactory to both members of the dyad. The interaction pattern is found to change slowly with time for different conditions. of dyads for example leonard and bernstein 1960 and their study of patient therapist interaction found that therapist instructions on how to behave in the situation decreased his evaluations increased and both talked more about emotional matters rather more is known about stages than the development of small group social systems and these will be discussed in chapter six number two The role relationship between two interactors is clear. They agree on the definition of the situation and its rules, and they accept the self-image presented by the other.

[191:21]

It is rare for all of a person's identities to be involved in a single relationship, and an interpersonal relationship is actually a relationship between two personas, which do not include... the entire selves of the respective individuals, but merely biased samples. McCall and Simmons, 1966, page 189. As the relationship develops, however, the areas included increase. Number three. Each comes to see the other, and the link between the menace... and the link between them in a special way. The relation is felt to have a unique quality. The other is seen as a special person and is part of the individual self-system by virtue of his complementary and interlocking role. 4. As people interact over a period of time, they disclose more and more to each other. Taylor, 1965, studied pairs of students who shared rooms at college. The amount disclosed increased during the first nine weeks and then leveled off

[192:23]

but at rather different levels for different pairs, as shown in figure 5.8. Greater amounts of disclosures are possible as people come to trust each other more. That is, they know that the other will not laugh at or reject the revealer, nor pass it on to others, nor use it to his advantage. Nagel, 1956. A trusting relationship is a cooperative one. In the prisoner's dilemma experiments, the other person may be trusted not to take sudden advantage and to keep the... to the jointly most advantageous strategy. Page 209. Number 5. The pair come to function as a social unit or team when dealing with other people, and others may treat them as such. Figure 5.8 Amount of Disclosure Over Time of High and Low Revealing Dyads from Taylor 1965. Axis are information revealed from 4.0 to 40.0 and time in weeks from 0 to 13.

[193:24]

There are high revealers and low revealers. High revealers are higher than the low revealers at all points. They begin at 12.0 and end at 32.0. By the time they get to 13, where the low revealers at zero begin about 4.9 and end up about 22.0 at 13. Back to text, Determinants of Friendship. The development of friendship can be accounted for in terms of the approach put forward in this chapter. Two people will like one another if interaction with the other is rewarding. The rewards may come from each of two sources, the satisfaction of social drives during interaction and the existence of a cooperative rather than a conflicting relationship in connection with outside events. Helen Jennings, 1950, studied popular and unpopular girls in a reformatory.

[194:26]

Her results show clearly how a person who is socially rewarding comes to be liked. girls helped and protected others encouraged cheered them up made them feel accepted and wanted controlled their own moods so as not to inflict anxiety or depressions on others were able to establish rapport quickly and won the confidence of a wide variety of other personalities and were concerned with the feelings and needs of others. The unpopular girls, on the other hand, were dominating, aggressive, boastful, demanded attention, and tried to get others to do things for them. This pattern has been generally interpreted in terms of the popular girls providing rewards and minimizing costs, while the unpopular girls tried to get rewards for themselves and incurred costs for others. As Harmon's 1961 points out, the girls who were popular with the other girls were not necessarily popular with the house mothers. The kinds of behavior liked by girls but disliked by house mothers were refusing to do what is requested by a person in authority, behavior considered too self-directive and too self-confident, and does not bring personal problems to the house mother.

[195:37]

Even between equals, whether or not A is chosen by B is not simply a function of A's characteristic, but depends on the relation between them and the kind of interaction pattern they are able to establish. However, while it is probably true in general that individuals who are rewarding become popular, there are considerable differences between the actual behavior of popular people in different kinds of a group. In groups of delinquents, for example, dominant and aggressive boys are popular, while in groups of English nurses who the Those high in deference and abasement are most popular, Miller, 1967. The personalities of members and the two groups are very different, and the behavior which is most valued is very different. Friendship between two people usually requires more than an exchange of rewards through interaction. Two people are said to be in a cooperative relationship if they have some common goal, which cannot easily be attained by either alone... and where each will benefit from its attainment.

[196:42]

Catching an elephant, building a house, playing golf, or playing a duet, carrying out research, and rearing a family would all be examples of this. Laboratory experiments have been carried out in which a cooperative relation has been created in the laboratory. Deutsch 1949 set up groups which would share the rewards of success equally, and others where the best performer would receive the reward. In this, another experiment that was found that in the cooperative groups, members came to like one another more than in the competitive groups. Another kind of comp... of cooperation is the coalition, where two or more members of a larger group combine together against the rest of the group, since they find it is in their interest to do so. C.F. page 239. Cooperative relations need not be symmetrical. The goals may be different for the two partners. McAndrew and Egerton, 1966, describes a close friendship between two boys in a colony and

[197:44]

Colony for Mental Defectives. One was blind, the other crippled. The blind boy pushed the cripple about. The cripple prevented others from stealing the blind boy's food. Page 211. Frequency of Interaction. If two people never interact, they cannot become friends. Indeed, they are unlikely to have any attitude at all to one another. Physical proximity, creating greater frequency of interaction, leads to the polarizing of interpersonal attitudes, and they are more likely to become favorable than unfavorable. Fessinger, Schachter, and Back, 1950, found that sociometric choices in a student housing estate were closely linked to spatial proximity. Those living in the next room or house were most likely to be chosen, followed by those next door but one, and so on. Ward, 1965, studied the effect of living in the same hostel on the sociometric choices of students. He found that both choices and rejections increased when students had lived in the same hall, but the effect was much greater for positive choices.

[198:48]

These findings can be accounted for in terms of two hypotheses given earlier. Firstly, if two people are able to interact over a longer period of time, they have more opportunity to establish a mutually satisfactory pattern of interaction. If they do a For their interaction is rewarding, so they come to like each other more. If they don't succeed, interaction is punishing, so that the more they have to interact, the more they will dislike one another. At the same time, people who live or work near to one another are very likely to have certain common interests, so that a cooperative relationship is likely to develop. It is also possible that conflicts may develop, in which case interaction leads to negative relationships. The effect of proximity is greater when a number of people first assemble and in the early history of a group. Loomis and Beagle, 1950, in a study of a new farming community. found that while initial quink formation was largely based on proximity, this was much less true two years later.

[199:51]

As people get to know each other better and as deeper levels of intimacy develop, personal compatibility becomes of greater importance. In the next section, it will be shown that similarity is effective in friendship choice at a later stage in the relationship. Interaction leads to liking, but it is very probable that liking leads to interaction, which gives an unstable positive feedback system it follows that once two people have met they should become inseparable this does happen this does sometimes happen but usually it does not the frequency of interaction and the intensity of liking both stop short at this point the explanation is probably that as frequency of interaction increases the difficulties of synchronizing increase and greater and greater accommodations have to be made to the ways of the other as intimacy and amount of interaction increase there are more things to disagree about if it is possible to agree over them the relationship becomes even more rewarding Page 212. Frequency of interaction is also limited by the fact that people have other things to do.

[200:58]

Similarity. Studies of friends have often found that they are similar in attitudes, personality, and in demographic characteristics. Two studies of similarity of attitudes will be mentioned first illustrating rather different research procedures. Newcomb 1961 arranged for two groups of students to live in a hostel. It was found that friendship choices developed over a 16-week period between people with attitudes that were similar. It took some weeks for this pattern to emerge, presumably because it took the students some time to discover what one another's attitudes were. if more basic attitudes are more important and if these are not readily disclosed it would be expected that friendship formation would be a slow process Byron, 1962, has used a rather different technique. He first measured the attitudes of subjects as expressed on a number of seven-point scales and then asked their feelings toward mythical individuals, said to hold various combinations of same attitudes. He found that liking was closely connected with similarity of attitudes and that this effect was stronger for subjects high in need for affiliation.

[202:08]

Byron and Nelson, 1965, found that attraction was a linear function of the proportion of similar attitudes. The effect of similarity of personality traits and of motivation on sociometric choice is less straightforward. Some recent studies have thrown doubt on the importance of similarity in the sphere. Miller et al., 1966, carried out a careful study of 95 pairs of female friends and 90 pairs of male friends that found a general, though rather weak, tendency for pairs of friends to have similar traits as measured by reputation. The average correlation was .20 for females, .14 for males, over 28 traits. There was, however, no correlation between self-descriptions. 65, studied the development of interpersonal preferences and 96 management trainees who were working in groups of six. He found no evidence of preference for others with similar needs. Hoffman and Meyer, 1966, similarly found no greater interpersonal attraction and homogeneous compared with heterogeneous laboratory groups of four.

[203:14]

The explanation of these negative results may be that it takes some time for attraction to develop along lines of similarity, as the Newcomb study showed, and On the other hand, it may be that similarity is less important in work groups than in settings primarily devoted to sociable purposes such as colleges and hostels. Page 213. Winch 1958 put forward the very different view, that people are attracted to one another if they have complementary needs, such as dominance and submission or nurturance and dependence. He obtained some support for his theory in a study of 25 married couples. Reichelach opposite found limited evidence for complementarity, e.g. those high in nurturance shows others high in succorance. We have already seen that... Two very dominant people are incompatible, whereas one dominant and one submissive person are compatible. Page 204-FF. What are the conditions under which complementarity, rather than similarity, leads to friendship?

[204:16]

A. Complementarity operates particularly for dominant submission and nurturance succorance, while similarity works for demographic variables, interests, values, and other personality traits. B. Complementary. Persons may be preferred for some kinds of role relationships, e.g., to work at a task where a range of abilities or interests are needed. Even friends should not be exactly similar, or the relationship would become rather boring. Jones and Gerard, 1967. Why does similarity lead to friendship? If two people have similar interests in a similar life situation, they are in something of a cooperative relationship, they want to talk about and do the same things, and are in a position to help one another do that. If they have similar beliefs and values, they provide social support for each other's views, new come 1961. There is, however, no particular reason why people with similar personalities should be able to help one another. Whether or not interaction will be easier depends on the personality

[205:17]

. [...] It should be mentioned that friendship is not the only kind of positive social relationship between two people. Marriage is discussed in the next section. Family relationships in general are rather different from friendships in that there is less emphasis on common interests and attitudes, while the relationship is more long-lasting and accompanied by feelings of positive concern and obligation, Adams, 19.6-7. Relationships at work are also different, being based primarily on the cooperative nature of the situation and interlocking world relationships

[206:18]

These matters are discussed further in the following two chapters of these different kinds of two-person relationship. Those between family members are most intense, as shown in the distress commonly created when they are broken. Page 214. The ways in which the personality is maintained by intense social relationships remain to be explored. Love and Marriage So far, we have been dealing mainly with friendships between young people of the same sex. When we consider people of the opposite sex, further interesting things happen. Adolescents become very interested in and excited by the opposite sex, but for some time, they only establish very casual and impermanent relationships. There's very little sexual behavior at first. Erickson 1950 reports that they would rather converse in subtle matters of mutual identification. Perhaps into the ego identity is established, and it is difficult to enter into a intimate relationship outside the home. Alternatively, a young person does not know which kind of a mate to choose until he has made certain basic decisions about himself.

[207:22]

The intense kind of relationship involved in romantic love is a recent and largely Western phenomenon. It does not occur in most primitive societies. It has been...

[207:33]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_97.43