Busting the Mehrabian Myth
Uploader Comments (CreativityWorks)
Top Comments
-
Interesting how, despite our not being able to see or hear you, your words succeed in conveying your feelings about our animation...I think you may have helped us make our point!
Video Responses
All Comments (52)
-
@whooflungdung wooooooooooooooooooooo
-
Excellent I always thought NLP was a load of bollox. Sometimes I scratch my node because it's itchy. Non verbal cues are only relevant when the words and the context compete.
-
@CreativityWorks Actually you'll notice that even as you read his comment you account for his tone in your head. And you helped us to read your comment by using commas and a simple "...". That means that you both used 45% of your communicational abilities! And these studies were to show how we can interpret meaning. Seeing as there is only one obvious meaning, our minds don't require that other 55%.
-
Mehrabian does NOT say his model applies to ALL communication. He's specifically talking about how we communicate feelings or emotions - as the video points out at 2:17. When we express 'feelings', body language and tone of voice do indeed play a major part - more than just the words alone. That's why when sending emails, 'emoticons' can be helpful :-)
Unfortunately the video title is rather misleading. People have misunderstood or taken his theory out of context, but it isn't 'busted'.
-
See Martin and Martha in action at the UK Speechwriters' Guild conference on Friday 16 September 2011 in Bournemouth.
-
Certainly some strawman attacks going on here. What is not mentioned *at all* is the role of context. No matter how great your verbal communication, the wrong context can undermine your message 100%, or even cause it to have the opposite effect. (e.g. George W. Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech from 2003). Don't get me wrong, I love artful verbal communication, but context is ultimately more important. (And body language often provides context...)
-
You can say a 1000 words and still not get the message across without the proper delivery.
Not fair to accuse science as the reason why such fallacies are propagated.
spleenblender 2 years ago
Our video is solidly pro-science. Its target is people who misquote scientific findings without first bothering to study and understand them. Professor Mehrabian was interviewed on BBC radio a few weeks after we posted our video, and he was asked, "whether 93% of communication is nonverbal?" He answered, "absolutely not. And whenever I hear that misquote of my findings I cringe because it should be obvious to anybody who would use any amount of common sense that that's not a correct statement!"
CreativityWorks 2 years ago 9