Verbal and nonverbal cues that convey interest in dating

One interesting component of the studies examining perceptions of cross-sex interactions has been a focus on nonverbal instead of verbal communication e.


  • dating cat lovers!
  • how often do you see someone you are dating?
  • 4 Body Language Signs of Attraction Backed By Science | Science of People?
  • 4 Body Language Signs of Attraction Backed By Science?
  • waynesville dating?

Research indicates that men and women may differ in how they employ verbal and non-verbal cues in flirtatious interactions with opposite sex targets Whitty, Although both men e. If men and women employ flirting scripts that differ in whether verbal or nonverbal flirting cues are used, the focus of past research on nonverbal cues may lead to a bias favoring higher perceptions of sexuality by men in cross-sex interactions.

By focusing on cues primarily used by women, researchers may be relying on cues men look for in interactions more than women do. If men and women respond differently to different flirting cues, it is possible studies that manipulate only nonverbal cues could trigger male's perceptions of sexual interest but not female's.

If this is the case, sex differences in perceptions of sexual interest may be predicated on cue usage. If males believe there is more sexual interest in cross-sex interactions because they are primed to look for nonverbal cues, one would anticipate females would be primed to look for verbal flirting cues more than men based on the findings of deWeerth and Kalma Thus, the sex difference in perceptions of sexual interest during cross-sex interactions may be reduced or reversed when flirting cues are verbal rather than nonverbal.

The following hypotheses are proposed to test the posited interaction. Men will perceive target women to be more sexually interested than women will when the target woman displays nonverbal flirting cues.

The perception of verbal and nonverbal flirting cues in cross-sex interactions_百度文库

Women will perceive target women to be more sexually interested than men will when the target woman uses verbal flirting cues. Method Participants Ninety-five participants 46 females and 49 males were utilized in this study. Participants received course credit for participating. Participants were randomly assigned to conditions. There is a history of research on flirting cues utilizing transcripts or written stimuli e. The use of transcripts allows greater control of nonverbal cues the participants may choose to focus on. The interactions involved a female character who initiated flirting behaviors in an on-going interaction.

The initiator utilized either neutral nonverbal cues and flirting verbal cues or flirting nonverbal cues and neutral verbal cues during the interaction. The male actor displayed only neutral cues. Participants read one of the possible scenarios nonverbal flirting cues; verbal flirting cues. After reading a scenario, each participant filled out questionnaire items assessing the sexual interest of the male and female targets.

After completing the questionnaire, participants were debriefed and dismissed. Stimulus materials Two different scripted scenarios were utilized. Each scenario began with the following instructions and introductory material: Consider the following scenario. Please read the scenario over carefully and try to understand what the participants in this scenario might be thinking and feeling.

When you have completed reading the scenario and feel comfortable with your understanding of the interaction, please move on to the next page.

There was a problem providing the content you requested

They did not know each other before the class and have never spoken outside of class. However, since the first day of class they have found themselves sitting in desks near one another and have occasionally exchanged small talk about assignments while waiting for class to begin. Today, the instructor, Dr. Zorba, has assigned the students to pair-up with the person next to them for an activity, so Mike and Jenny turned their desks so that they faced each other. The instructor gave the class fifteen minutes for the activity, but Mike and Jenny finish after only five minutes. They have ten minutes left and after a few seconds of silence, the following interaction takes place: The nonverbal flirting cues employed included smiling, making eye contact, forward lean and touch.

Eye contact forward lean and touch also have been identified as flirting cues in various studies e. We utilized three distinct verbal cues: Muehlenhard, Koralewski, Andrews, and Burdick identified compliments and statements of availability as cues that potentially convey interest in another person. Sexual statements such as sexual innuendo also have been identified as verbal flirting strategies used to promote sexual encounters e.

A measure of the perceived use of nonverbal and verbal flirting cues were included as manipulation checks for the flirting cue manipulation. Individuals were asked, on a seven point scale, if the female targets used nonverbal flirting cues i. Higher scores indicate greater use of the respective cues.

If the flirting cue manipulation was successful, we would anticipate a significant interaction between flirting cue and flirting perceptions. No other significant effects are predicted. No other main effects or interactions were significant. The manipulation of type of flirting cue was effective for perceptions of flirting. Female sexual interest A 2 type of cue: An a priori contrast model reflecting the three hypotheses was tested.

Means, standard deviations and contrast coefficients are presented in table one. Because the residual produced a sizeable effect, and because the means suggested an alternate model, a second contrast model was tested post hoc setting the contrast coefficients for both male and female participants' ratings of verbal flirting cues to 1, setting female participants' ratings of nonverbal flirting cues to -2 and male participants' ratings of nonverbal flirting cues to 0. Hypothesis 1 was supported by the post hoc model.

Men perceived more sexual interest than women did when a woman in an interaction displayed nonverbal flirting cues.

Step One: First Impressions

However, Hypothesis 2 was not supported. It appears men and women do not differ when evaluating women employing verbal flirting cues. Notably, the post hoc model also indicates that verbal flirting cues tend to produce higher sexuality ratings than nonverbal flirting cues. Discussion It was predicted that type of cue would interact with sex of participant to influence the amount of sexual interest individuals perceived from females during flirting interactions.

The interaction that emerged indicates that the type of flirting cue employed does influence whether or not a sex difference will appear in perceptions of sexuality. This finding indicates past research focusing on nonverbal cues e. Interestingly, verbal flirting behaviors seem to produce a stronger perception of sexual intent than nonverbal flirting behaviors.

The more explicit a message, the less freedom a receiver has to infer multiple meanings to that message. In the present study, individuals may have felt more constrained to interpret verbal cues as indicating sexual intent than to interpret non-verbal flirting cues thusly. As Solomon and Williams a; b found, more sexual explicitness in a message does produce higher sexuality ratings for behavior.

It is possible, given our findings, that the consistent sex difference that emerges for perceptions of cross-sex interactions e. This logic is consistent with past research finding sex differences in perceptions of sexual interest for participants in cross-sex interactions. In an experimental setting where participants know they are being observed e.

Thus, the sex difference that emerges in those studies may reflect sex differences in the interpretation of ambiguous cues. Our findings support the ambiguity logic. In the nonverbal cues condition, which was rated as reflecting less sexual interest, a sex difference emerged. It is possible that sex differences emerge in interactions due to misperceptions of the intent of flirting behaviors.

Henningsen found that there are multiple possible motivations individuals pursue while flirting and that men were more likely to interpret flirting behaviors as sexually motivated than were women. It is possible that women and men agree on what behaviors were flirting but disagree on the perceived motivation behind those flirting behaviors. In other words, individuals agreed flirting was going on but differed in interpreting its meaning. Also consistent with the ambiguity explanation for sex differences in perceptions of flirting are findings regarding other settings in which multiple motives, including sexual interest, can be attributed to behaviors.

Like flirting, first dates have the potential to be motivated by a desire for sexual contact but also may be pursued for non-sexual reasons as well. Thus, first dates are also ambiguous in terms of the motivations behind the enacting behaviors. Conclusions Overall, our results are consistent with the predictions that the type of cue employed to examine sex differences in cross-sex interactions can influence findings in important ways.


  • the online dating rituals of the american male cast.
  • The Basics of the Body Language of Attraction:.
  • getting past first base dating;

However, the cue usage hypothesis may provide an adequate explanation for all the results. Specifically, a cue usage explanation implies a sex difference for use of verbal cues as well as non-verbal cues, albeit in the opposite direction. An ambiguity explanation may better account for sex differences that emerge in this and other studies. Of course, future studies would need to employ verbal flirting cues that do not differ in explicitness from the nonverbal cues being employed to provide a clear test. Because the ambiguity explanation was developed post hoc, future research testing how cue explicitness influences perceptions in cross-sex interactions is needed.