The language assignment experiment ended up being very awkward and unusual. It was also very hard to do at first, but I did end up getting more comfortable as we went along. For part 1, My partner was the only person who was able to speak, while I could only respond with body gestures. This was probably the easier part of the experiment. My partner just talked about their life and what they were up too. For the majority of the time, I was just nodding my head and giving them a thumbs up. The assignment was obviously difficult to accomplish, but part 1 was mainly easier just because it wasn't that hard to not talk. In the beginning, my partner was uncomfortable taking with me, but they found a way to adjust to where it was easier for me to respond in body gestures. An example of this is that they first started of with questions, but later turned the conversation to a more informal type of conversation.
Because I could not respond with speaking or writing in the first part of the experiment, my partner was the one that was in control of the conversation. My partner was the person in the conversation that both initiated and changed the topics of the conversation. I could not have been able to change the topic of the conversation that we had, because it would be hard to do without being able to speak or write. I feel that if we conducted more than one person in the conversation, it would become easy for me to be excluded from that conversation simply because everyone else would be able to interact with each other by using their voices and their writing, while I would only be able to use body gestures. It would become easy for me to be forgotten from the conversation. A balance of power between two or more individuals in a conversation, would mean that everyone involved in the conversation would have an equal amount of time to speak and argue in that conversation. To ask if me or my partner had more power in a balanced conversation, the logical answer would be that no one in the conversation has more power than the other person, because it is balanced. We would both have the same time to speak.
If you had two types of cultures in a conversation, with one culture that can speak and the other one cannot, the culture with the ability to speak would have the power in the conversation. The culture with the speaking ability would be able to have the advantage of communicating with their cultural group about complex topics. It would be difficult to explain complex ideas with just body gestures. When it comes to the tone and attitude of the conversation, the speaking culture would have an attitude of looking down at the non speaking culture. I feel like the speaking culture would put themselves over the other culture, just because they are able to speak, while the other culture can't. That's where the sense of power would come into the conversation. One modern situation that I could think of that is comparable to this situation, is language difference. If you had two different cultures with two different languages speaking to each other, one group would put themselves over the other group simply because the other group would not be able to understand them.
Part 2 of this assignment was the harder part of the experiment. For 15 minutes, I spoke to my partner without any hand or face gestures, while speaking in the same tone. In my opinion, this was the most difficult part of the experiment. It is very hard to speak without making gestures. Raising your eyebrows and moving you hands are examples of thinks I could not do. I also wasn't aloud to raise my voice, with took away the emphasis of what I had to say. I truly felt as if I were a robot or a programmed A.I. It wasn't difficult for them to understand me, simply because I was still able to speak. It was just very weird and uncomfortable.
I believe that this experiment showed how important non-speech language is when interacting with people and having a conversation. When it comes to receiving information, we as humans can take that information in different ways, depending on the body language that the speakers use. For example, if someone says something to me with an energetic body language, I can then tell that they are compassionate about what they are talking about.
There are ways to adapt in a conversation with someone, depending on that other person's body language. If the other person is speaking with energy, I would want to reply to them with an energetic response to what they are saying. The ability to read someone's body language can be very important for survival. If you can try to keep a positive tone at all times, it will become easier for you to be liked by others. This could lead to an easier time of obtaining resources and reproducing.
The only people that wouldn't be able to understand body language would be blind people, because they do not have the ability to see with their eyes. One way to benefit from a conversation without body language is by using the tone of the other person's voice. It is easy to identify if someone is passionate or sluggish in a conversation from their voice.
Part A: Good opening description.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your conclusion regarding control, but I'm puzzled by how you discussed power. The question of power applied to your experiment here, where you were not allowed to speak and you have already acknowledged that the control here was NOT equal, so how can you suggest that the power was equal?
" To ask if me or my partner had more power in a balanced conversation, the logical answer would be that no one in the conversation has more power than the other person, because it is balanced."
But it WASN'T balanced. Your partner did all the speaking, so how did you have equal power? I'm not sure how you drew this conclusion given the description of your experiment.
I agree with your conclusions regarding the two cultures and attitudes.
Regarding your real-life example:
"If you had two different cultures with two different languages speaking to each other, one group would put themselves over the other group simply because the other group would not be able to understand them."
But wouldn't they equally be at a disadvantage? Does that describe the power differential you experienced here (and this gets to the problem your conclusion on power).
To find a real life example of this experiment, we need to find a situation where you have a speaking population and another group that doesn't speak that language, and this results in a power differential, with the speaking culture having power over the non-speaking. We see that in the interaction between English speakers and non-English speaking immigrant populations. Think about how non-English speaking immigrants are treated in Southern California? Are they treated as equals?
Part B: Can you explain why it was uncomfortable for your partner?
I don't disagree with your conclusions regarding the information we receive from body language, but you are only considering the situation where body language matches and supports the information you receive from spoken language. What does it tell you when the body language doesn't match the spoken language? Humans tend to use body language as a type of lie detector. If spoken words don't match with the body language, we are more inclined to believe the body language and doubt the words. Think about how being able to detect liars might help an individual's ability to survive and reproduce (which applies to the next section).
Okay on the benefits of body language, but what type of benefits do you get by being able to detect liars?
Yes, blind people have difficulty reading body language, though they can hear vocal intonation. You could also have identified those in the autism spectrum.
Missing the final question? Can you think of a situation where you should avoid reading body language? When might body language of others mislead you and it would be better to ignore it? Do all cultures use the same system of body language? They all use different systems of spoken/written language, so why would we assume their body language isn't different? If you travel to another country, can you trust the information you get from their body language?
Hello Nerses!
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I really enjoyed seeing the perspective of someone else, and whom's results varied so drastically. In part A of the experiment, I commented in my post that I felt in control because the conversation was focused on deciphering what was coming from ME. Professor Rodriguez pointed out that it might potentially be because the person I conducted the experiment with is emotionally connected to me, which gave him incentive. I see now that she's probably right, because your results were very different. And it was interesting to see that in this conversation.
And it was interesting to see that you felt like the second half of the experiment was harder than the first part. It was so frustrating for me to not be able to speak, but it was a lot easier to avoid body language. It was interesting to see you felt the opposite.