Inflated and deflated statistics about nonverbal communication, voice, and words

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recently I ran across some articles that reported a set of percentages (shown above via a fancy 3-d bar chart) which I had not seen before. For example, an article by Corporate Communication Experts titled 9 Public Speaking Statistics We All Should Know claimed (as #4):

 

“The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) campus found that when people are speaking, approximately 7% of the message comes from the words, 36% of the message comes from your voice, and 57% of the message come from your nonverbal communication.”

 

It was also in another article at B&FT Online on September 12, 2022 titled Insights with Dzigbordi K. Dosoo: Becoming a more effective communicator. And it was in a blog post by Sakshi Shukla at ADP List on June 16, 2022 titled How to overcome the fear of public speaking?, an undated post by Eisha Gul at the Weshare blog titled 41+ Public Speaking Statistics You Should Know (as #8), and another undated post by Kevin Brown at MightyAlly titled The second (overlooked) side of communications: interpersonal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The 57% for nonverbal communication is slightly higher than the well-known 55% (and the 36% slightly lower than the 38%) reported by Albert Mehrabian back in the early 1970s - and shown above via a second bar chart. I blogged about it back in July 25, 2009 in a post titled Bullfighting the Mehrabian Myth, and also on February 18, 2019 in another post titled Is your donut chart sending the wrong signals? Philip Yaffe discussed it in an article at Ubiquity ACM on October 2011 titled The 7% Rule – fact, fiction, or misunderstanding. John Cadley also discussed it briefly in another brief article on page 30 in the October 2020 issue of Toastmaster magazine titled Watch what you’re saying.

 

Where had that slightly inflated version with 57% rather than 55% for nonverbal communication come from? My search at Google Books revealed that it appeared back in 2010 (almost four decades after Mehrabian) as the last paragraph on page 55 of a book by Paul Deslauriers titled The Grassroute Guide where he said:

 

“Studies have shown that words impact interpersonal communication less than one might guess. One study went so far as to conclude that only 7% of what a person takes away from an interaction is attributed to the words used, while 57% of what is communicated is attributed to body language and 36% to voice tone. Body language and voice tone are expressions of the energy behind the words, which can account for 93% of the communication’s impact.”

 

I suspect that Mr. Deslauriers incorrectly recalled the 55% but then wrote it down without going back to check Mehrabian. He didn’t mention either UCLA or Mehrabian, so those who read his book might not have known where to look to check his numbers.

 

Once those incorrect numbers were out, they got repeated by uncritical writers another decade later, who didn’t bother to check back to the original source.

 

A shrill tone

Your tone is a big part of nonverbal communication. It can seriously interfere with your message being accepted by an audience. You may unintentionally sound shrill, whiny, condescending, or dismissive.

Tone may be a problem for people who serve others: teachers, librarians, social workers, nurses, and claims adjusters. When you are overworked, it’s hard to remember to soften your tone when you are not “on duty.”

Sara Marks discussed the importance of tone recently in blog posts on June 26 and July 15. (She is the Instruction Services Librarian at the Fitchburg State College Library). Becoming aware of your tone will lead to changing it, as she mentioned earlier in a post on Sara’s way or the highway.

The classic movie example of shrill tone is the Wicked Witch of the West in The Wizard of Oz: “I'll get you, my pretty, and your little dog too!” There is a very dismissive teacher in the Pink Floyd video nightmare Another Brick in the Wall.

Bullfighting the Mehrabian Myth

If you have been reading about public speaking, or sales, or other topics involving communication, then you probably have seen a bar or pie chart similar to the one shown above. Or, perhaps it just was a table or some text. Typically this startlingly specific information about the primary importance of nonverbal communication will be presented as revealed wisdom (“experts say”).

Sometimes the source will be credited properly to Professor Albert Mehrabian at UCLA. Those three percentages often are discussed as if 42 years ago they were carved magically onto stone tablets, and then carried over the Sepulveda Pass to Westwood. For a recent example, see page 10 of Brian Tracy’s 2008 book Speak to Win which you can view over at Google Books.

On a June 2, 2009 blog post Olivia Mitchell discussed Why The Stickiest Idea in Presenting is Just Plain Wrong. She pointed out that Mehrabian’s results apply to some narrow situations, but have been treated as universal truth. I applaud her stepping up as the matador in this bullfight. Her post links to 19 other recent posts discussing why the popular interpretation is just a myth.

Mehrabian has even said on his web site to:

“Please note that this and other equations regarding relative importance of verbal and nonverbal messages were derived from experiments dealing with communications of feelings and attitudes (i.e., like-dislike). Unless a communicator is talking about their feelings or attitudes, these equations are not applicable. Also see references 286 and 305 in Silent Messages -- these are the original sources of my findings”.

I got curious, followed some of Olivia Mitchell’s links, and found that this topic has been kicking around for a long time. Back in 1994 (or 15 years ago) Dr. C. E. "Buzz" Johnson wrote about the Myth of Nonverbal Dominance. In 1999 (10 years ago) Herb Oestreich discussed Let’s Dump the 55% 38% 7% Rule. In 2004 (5 years ago) Dale H. Emery wrote about Misrepresenting Mehrabian.

The recent flurry of blog posts is unlikely to finish this bullfight. There are plenty of books, newsletters, and blog posts repeating the myth. It will be read again and spread again to a fresh crop of uncritical readers. We probably can look forward to yet another decade of miscommunication about this aspect of communication. Get out your capes and swords, and bring on the bulls!