Study provides useful insights for interview situations
University of Georgia
That's according to new research from the University of Georgia, which reveals
that verbal interviewing techniques have a greater impact than nonverbal
techniques -- and combining the two had a detrimental effect.
The
new study led by Eric Novotny, a postdoctoral research associate at the Grady
College of Journalism and Mass Communication, was published in Communication
Studies. Based on a laboratory experiment that compared the effectiveness
of verbal and nonverbal techniques in building rapport, it provides useful
insight for situations like doctor-patient interviews, job interviews and
police investigative interviews.
"It
was a bit of a surprise to find that using verbal and nonverbal techniques
together backfired," Novotny said. "In hindsight it was probably seen
as forced or too much, making the interviewee feel that any rapport that
resulted was fake. The bottom line is that using one technique or the other is
better than neither or both."
During
the experiment, Novotny performed one-on-one interviews with 80 participants
involving their personal histories. He practiced active listening -- using
simple indicators of agreement (e.g., "uh-huh," "I see"),
that encouraged the subject to continue -- with all participants, but used four
different strategies.
Verbal and nonverbal interview tactics
With
one group, Novotny used verbal commonalities, disclosing information about his
own life (both real and fabricated) to establish common ground. Previous
research indicates that people tend to like and feel similar to those who
disclose information to them.
With
a second group, Novotny used a nonverbal technique called mirroring, the
largely nonconscious imitation of another person's body postures and movements,
a strategy that has long been linked to an increase in rapport among
interactive partners. He attempted to mimic the body postures and arm/leg
placements of the participant (e.g., arms on the table and legs crossed) within
approximately two seconds of witnessing it.
With
a third group, Novotny combined the verbal commonality and mirroring
strategies. With the fourth group, or control group, he did not employ either
strategy.
Prior
to being interviewed, participants completed a document that required them to
rank 10 topics (academics, athletics, family, finances, friends, leisure,
medical history, mental health, pet ownership, romance) in terms of how
personal they were. The interviewer used these responses to choose topics for
the interview. After the interviews, participants rated how willing they were
to continue discussions with the interviewer, as an indicator of rapport.
What
communication techniques were most effective for building rapport?
Results
indicated that participants were more willing to discuss personal topics when
verbal commonalities were used alone, versus in conjunction with nonverbal
mirroring. In the group that experienced mirroring, participants were more
willing to disclose personal information with the interviewer, but not at a
rate that was significantly different from the control group. The combined
condition produced the lower rapport of any group.
"Based
on the literature, we knew that verbal and nonverbal techniques work to help
build rapport during an interview, but we didn't know what happened if you used
both," Novotny said. "This applies to everything from investigative
interviewing to therapists and their clients, so we were interested in knowing
which technique -- or combination of techniques -- was going to be most
effective."
While
verbal commonalities and techniques that employ mirroring body language can be
applied with minimal training and preparation, Novotny notes that interviewers
should be aware of their cognitive load during the interview. Between
formulating questions, writing, listening and attempting to build rapport,
interviewers can easily get overloaded and be less effective -- though that can
be improved with training, he said.
Alternatively,
the combined use of both techniques could seem forced or phony to participants.
Novotny believes that once a person realizes someone is actively seeking
rapport or manipulating them, it backfires, wiping out any gain from the verbal
or nonverbal technique.
Despite
the challenges, Novotny was surprised by the participants' willingness to discuss
sensitive topics.
"It
was interesting how willing random strangers were to tell me their deepest,
darkest secrets," he said. "I think, because I was a stranger and
they'd never see me again, they were more willing to open up to a simple
question like, 'Why is your financial history so private to you?' And then they
would start discussing their money troubles."
Co-authors
on the study include Mark G. Frank, University at Buffalo, SUNY, and Matthew
Grizzard, The Ohio State University.
