testul pons manual

1

Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity

(PONS Test): MANUAL

R. Rosenthal, J. A. Hall, M. R. DiMatteo,

P. L. Rogers, and D. Archer

Address all inquiries to:

Judith A. Hall, Ph.D.

University Distinguished Professor

Dept. of Psychology, 125 NI

Northeastern University

Boston, MA 02115

(617) 373 3790

[email protected]

Revised October 2013

mailto:[email protected]

2

Table of Contents

Introduction 3 Measuring Interpersonal Sensitivity 3 The PONS Test 4 PONS channels 5 Voice content-masking 6 Portrayal of the scenes in the construction of the PONS 6 Final selection of the scenes 7 Scoring 8 Limitations and Advantages of the Design 8 Channel isolation 9 Absence of verbal information 9 Absence of some nonverbal cues 9 Use of a posed criterion 9 Use of one encoder 10 Use of female encoder 11 Use of context-free scenes 11 Includes only a limited range of content 11 Summary of Main Findings from Rosenthal et al. (1979) 12 Normative data 12 Length of exposure to communication 13 Gender 13 Age 13 Cultural variation 13 Cognitive correlates 14 Psychosocial correlates 15 Mental and physical impairment 16 Roles and relationships: Occupational and personal 17 Practice and training 17 Construct Validity 17 Subsequent findings with the PONS 18 References 18 Appendix Materials Answer sheets, scoring keys, Still PONS photos

3

Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (PONS Test):

MANUAL

Introduction

This is the manual for the PONS test (full-length test and short forms). Included is an overview based on the monograph Sensitivity to nonverbal communication: The PONS test (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979), by R. Rosenthal, J. A. Hall, M. R. DiMatteo, P. L. Rogers, and D. Archer. Relevant information that has accumulated since the test’s original validation is summarized as well. A bibliography of relevant publications and sources is included. This manual also contains blank answer sheets and a scoring key for the full and short forms.

IMPORTANT: The PONS was developed and validated as a research instrument for studies having multiple participants, not as a tool for individual assessment or diagnosis. You are strongly urged NOT to use the test for this purpose because you cannot interpret an individual person’s scores with sufficient confidence.

Measuring Interpersonal Sensitivity

Interpersonal sensitivity (IS) is a broad construct that can include both perceiving others accurately and engaging in interpersonally appropriate behavior (Bernieri, 2001). The PONS test as well as comparable other instruments address only the perception side of this definition. It is difficult to imagine social life without skill in processing the behavior and appearance of others. In the course of a day, a person notices countless details about others’ speech, facial and bodily movements, vocal tone, physiognomy, and dress, among other things, and then draws countless inferences based on this information, even though such information is often fleeting and incomplete. Psychologists have long believed that interpersonal sensitivity matters in daily life (e.g., Kanner, 1931; Vernon, 1933), and it remains a timely topic of study (e.g., Ambady, Bernieri, & Richeson, 2000; Ames & Kammrath, 2004; Elfenbein, Foo, White, Tan, & Aik, 2007; Nowicki & Duke, 1994; Hall & Bernieri, 2001; Hall, Bernieri, & Carney, 2005; Pickett, Gardner, & Knowles, 2004).

Most often, interpersonal sensitivity tests measure accuracy in judging affective states or personality traits, though many other areas of content can be, and/or have been, tested such as truthfulness, intelligence, status, or the intimacy of the relationship between two people. Most of the time, the stimuli are nonverbal cues conveyed by the face, body, and/or voice, but sometimes linguistic cues are included as well. Occasionally, IS has been defined as accuracy in noticing and recalling another’s nonverbal cues, speech content, or physical appearance. Accuracy that is based on making interpretational judgments (in contrast to the more basic process of noticing and/or recalling) has been called “inferential” and accuracy that is based on recall has been called “attentional” (Hall, Carter, & Horgan, 2001; Hall, Murphy, & Schmid Mast, 2006), corresponding to “utilization” and “detection” in Funder’s Realistic Accuracy Model of personality expression and judgment (Funder, 1995). Whatever definition is used, IS is tested by

4

having perceivers make assessments based on the behavior of one or more expressors (targets) and then scoring these assessments for accuracy based on independent scoring criteria.

Authors have generally considered IS to be a valuable skill. IS, in the form of judging others’ emotions from nonverbal cues, has been included as one of the defining elements of the emotional intelligence construct (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios, 2003). However, the IS field is underdeveloped theoretically (Hall, Andrzejewski, & Yopchick, 2009; Zebrowitz, 2001), one reason for which is the lack of a complete picture of the correlates of IS. According to the Realistic Accuracy Model (Funder, 1995), individual differences in perceiver characteristics contribute to interpersonal accuracy, along with various message and target characteristics, but the model does not go deeply into the characteristics of the good judge.

Progress in understanding IS has taken two forms. One path is to develop new instruments and paradigms to measure people’s accuracy in perceiving others. The PONS test is only one of many instruments for accomplishing this. Other tests, as well as discussion of methodological problems involved in measuring IS and their solutions, are described in Hall and Bernieri (2001) and Hall et al. (2005). New tests continue to be made, examples being the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Hill, Raste, & Plumb, I., 2001), the Multimodal Emotion Recognition Test (Bänziger, Grandjean, & Scherer, 2009), and the Test of Accurate Perception of Patients’ Affect (Hall et al., 2013a).

The second path to deeper understanding is to explore variables, both state and trait, that are (or are not) associated with IS, as well as to study the process of judgment itself. The process question is sometimes addressed using lens models aimed at identifying what cues are crucial to accurate perception (e.g., Murphy, Hall, & Colvin, 2003) and sometimes by using experimental manipulations such as cognitive load to shed light on the automaticity of nonverbal cue judgments (e.g., Phillips, Tunstall, & Channon, 2007) or motivational manipulations to find out if trying harder is an aid to accuracy (Hall, Blanch, Horgan, Murphy, Rosip, & Schmid Mast, 2009). There are now a substantial number of meta-analyses of IS in relation to a wide range of psychological constructs, for example psychosocial/personality variables (Davis & Kraus, 1997; Hall, Andrzejewski, & Yopchick, 2009), gender (Hall, 1978, 1984; McClure, 2000; Kirkland, Peterson, Baker, Miller, & Pulos, 2013), age (Ruffman, Henry, Livingstone, & Phillips, 2008), general cognitive ability (Murphy & Hall, 2011), psychopathology (Marsh & Blair, 2008), and dominance/status (Hall, Halberstadt, & O’Brien, 1997; Hall, Schmid Mast, & Latu, 2013).

The PONS Test

The PONS test, because it was created rather early in the history of IS test development, has a very long track record. In our estimation, it is one of three instruments that have seen the most use, the others being the DANVA tests developed by Nowicki and colleagues (e.g., Nowicki & Duke, 1994) and the Pictures of Facial Affect developed by Ekman and colleagues (Ekman, 1976). The full-length PONS is a 47-minute black-and-white video (picture and sound) composed of 220 numbered items. The 220 items are a randomized presentation of 20 short scenes portrayed by a young woman, each scene represented in 11 different modes or channels of nonverbal communication. The test-taker’s task is to view and/or listen to each item and then circle the label that correctly describes the scene enacted in the item. The test-taker makes this choice from two alternative labels printed on an answer sheet containing 220 such pairs of

5

descriptions. Each item is followed by a pause long enough for the decision to be made and recorded.

Three short forms of the test have been developed which are often used, consisting of selected items from the full-length test. One is called the Face and Body PONS, consisting of the 40 face only and body only items, without sound. The second is the Audio PONS, consisting of the 40 voice-only items, with no picture. The third is the MiniPONS, consisting of a selection of 64 items from all of the cue channels (and combinations) (Bänziger, Scherer, Hall, & Rosenthal, 2011). Most of what is presented in this Manual’s summary is based on the full-length test, which has superior internal consistency reliability (see discussion in Rosenthal et al., 1979 and Hall, 2001). There is also a Brief Exposure PONS and a Still Photos PONS that are infrequently used. This Manual includes only a small portion of the research findings that can be found in Rosenthal et al. (1979).

PONS channels. The 11 channels in the PONS are made up of various kinds of auditory and visual information “sent” by the portrayer. These channels can be thought of as falling into two types. The first five channels are “pure”: face alone, body alone (neck to knees), face and body together, electronically filtered voice (called content-filtered), and random-spliced speech. Table 1 displays the 11 channels arranged in a two-way table: 4 kinds of video cues crossed by 3 kinds of audio cues.

Table 1. Design of the PONS

_____________________________________________________________________________

Audio Video

__________________________________________________________________

No cues Face cues Body cues Figure (Face + body) cues Marginals

No cues --a 20 20 20 Video 60

RS cuesb 20 20 20 20 RS 80

CF cuesc 20 20 20 20 CF 80

Marginals Tone 40 Face 60 Body 60 Figure 60 Total 220 a Empty cell in design. b RS = random-spliced voice c CF = electronically content-filtered voice

_____________________________________________________________________________

6

Voice content-masking. In order to present a vocal stimulus that is truly “nonverbal,” it is necessary to control or eliminate linguistic cues. Sometimes this is done by the standard content method whereby expressors vary their intended meaning (e.g., angry vs. sad) while saying the identical thing, which might be numbers, alphabet letters, or a neutral sentence (e.g., Baum & Nowicki, 1998). In the latter case, the listener can understand the words, but the words do not help the listener to identify the expressor’s intended state.

Another approach involves physically changing the voice signal so that the words cannot be understood. This approach, unlike the preceding, is suitable for voice samples gathered under naturalistic circumstances and in any circumstances where it is not possible (or desirable) to control the linguistic content. The PONS test uses two different content-masking techniques of this sort. The random-splicing technique (Scherer, 1971) requires the audiotape or electronic voice signal to be segmented into small pieces, reordered randomly, and reassembled. When the reassembled voice is played back, the voice sounds natural in many ways, but of course the words cannot be understood because they are chopped up and scrambled. Obviously, this method sacrifices certain voice characteristics, particularly anything related to temporal ordering, such as pitch contour.

The electronic filtering method, also used in the PONS, was modeled on the one reported by Rogers, Scherer, and Rosenthal (1971). With this method, highest bands of frequencies are removed with a band-pass filter so that the voice sounds muffled. By varying the controls on whatever device is used, one can adjust the filtering to just that point at which the words cannot be understood. Rhythm, tempo, and loudness are maintained.

The decision to use two kinds of content masking was based on the findings of Scherer, Koivumaki, and Rosenthal (1972), who found that these two techniques systematically affect the voice in different ways. The random splicing method makes the voice seem more pleasant, more peaceful, and “nicer” than ordinary speech, as rated by listeners. The electronic filter makes the voice sound more easy, calm, and steady than ordinary speech. The two methods involve different kinds of information loss—temporal sequence in random splicing, aspects of the signal itself in electronic filtering.

Portrayal of the scenes in the construction of the PONS. The portrayals in the PONS test were done by a 24-year-old Caucasian woman from the northeastern U.S. She was not a professional actress, a decision deliberately made to reduce the likelihood of exaggerated or stereotyped portrayals. The portrayer was not picked on the basis of any special skills or knowledge about nonverbal communication.

Thirty-five scenes were videotaped, often several times (i.e., different “takes” for the same scene). At no time was a script rigidly adhered to, but rather the exact wording often changed with each repetition of the scene. This flexibility of wording was intended to enhance the genuineness of the feelings and cues expressed; we hoped to reflect the natural style of the portrayer and to avoid artificial, memorized, or self-conscious delivery. Naturalistic expression was the focus, rather than any specific wording.

The 35 videotaped scenes were chosen on the basis of certain broad criteria. The first interest was to represent a wide variety of situations and emotions, both strong and mild, positive and negative. In addition, a special attempt was made to find interactive situations. Since the

7

purpose of the test was to measure ability to understand cues sent by another person, it made sense to concentrate on cues sent in interaction.

Final selection of the scenes. Choosing the “best” scenes for inclusion in the final version of the PONS was done by obtaining ratings from people who knew the portrayer and who as a group viewed the Figure (Face plus Body) “takes” of all scenes, in their full length (averaging 5.5 seconds), and without any kind of content masking of the voice.

For each scene each rater did the following: (1) ordered the several takes according to his or her overall preference, (2) gave the take a score of 0 to 100 on the basis of how well the scene conveyed the intended emotion or situation, (3) rated the sender’s behavior in the take on a scale from 1 to 7 for each of 3 dimensions: positive/negative (happiness, friendliness versus anger, sadness, called here “positivity”); dominance vis-à-vis an unseen interactant; and intensity of feeling.

For the 35 first-choice takes, the correlation of the median positivity rating with the median dominance rating was -.05. Intensity was correlated .35 with dominance (p< .05), and -.50 with positivity (p < .005). Intensity ratings were subsequently ignored for being significantly related to the other two rating dimensions.

The final “best” take for each scene was the one having the lowest sum of the ranks given by the eight raters (a scene with more first choices would have a lower sum of ranks than a scene with more second and third choices). The scenes were then categorized on the positivity and dominance dimensions as high positive, low positive (i.e., negative), high dominant, and low dominant (i.e., submissive). Finally, from each of the quadrants formed by the intersection of the positivity and dominance dimensions, five scenes were selected; in general, these were the five having the highest score on the 0-100 rating of success in conveying the intended emotion or situation (some scenes were also excluded due to technical flaws).

Based on pretesting, the length of exposure was reduced from the original average of 5.5 seconds to a standard 2 seconds per item. This was done to keep the test from being too easy.

Table 2. Twenty Scenes Arranged by Affect in Four Quadrants

__________________________________________________________________________

Dominance

Positivity Submissive Dominant

__________________________________________________________________________

Positive Helping a customer Talking about one’s wedding Ordering food in a restaurant Leaving on a trip Expressing gratitude Expressing motherly love Expressing deep affection Admiring nature Trying to seduce someone Talking to a lost child

8

Negative Talking about the death of a friend Criticizing someone for being late Talking about one’s divorce Nagging a child Returning faulty item to a store Expressing strong dislike Asking forgiveness Threatening someone Saying a prayer Expressing jealous anger ____________________________________________________________________________ Table 2 shows the final selection of scenes and their positions in the four quadrants formed by the positivity and dominance dimensions. For these 20 scenes, the correlation of positivity ratings with dominance ratings was -.38 (p = .10), and, based on an analysis of variance (ANOVA), the reliability [(MS scenes minus MS scenes X judges)/MS scenes] of ratings of positivity and of dominance were .97 and .92, respectively.

Scoring. Each item is scored as correct or incorrect. Scoring of subscales is possible, by summing correct answers according to cue channels or according to affective quadrant, for example.

Limitations and Advantages of the Design

Although the PONS overcomes at least some problems in previous IS research, the test is not without limitations. In making the PONS test, there were some trade-offs, perhaps inevitably, between experimental control and ecological validity. While trying to make the PONS a reliable measure of decoding nonverbal cues in separate channels, we also tried to make its content representative of real-life behavior. It is probably impossible to achieve both fully. For example, the price we would have paid for filming behavior occurring in natural settings would be uncertainty over the proper label for the emotion and/or intentions of the expressor and perhaps even for the psychological context; uneven control over technical quality; probably giving up the idea of filming and audiotaping all the relevant behavior occurring in different channels simultaneously; and so on.

Because of our choice of method, there are a number of ways in which the nonverbal behavior in the PONS film differs from nonverbal behavior in everyday life, and also ways in which the judging is quite different from the kind of judging that people do every day. These differences are intentional design features of the PONS, not unwitting conceptual oversights. Here we list and briefly describe some of these differences from everyday decoding of nonverbal cues. The PONS:

Presents some channels in isolation

Presents no verbal information

Does not measure all possible nonverbal cues

Employs a posed criterion

Employs only a single encoder

Employs only a female encoder

9

Provides no context for the scenes employed

Includes only a limited range of content

Channel isolation. Everyday life generally presents multiple channels for interpretation at the same time. In interacting with someone, we can try to decode all of their channels of communication simultaneously. There are some circumstances, of course, under which the channels available for interpretation are limited, such as talking on the telephone. In most face-to-face interaction, however, we have available to us all the nonverbal cues which the PONS film isolates into separate channels. In everyday life, it may be the case that we each use a hierarchy of channels, starting with the channel easiest to decode. In trying to judge someone’s emotions, for example, it may be that we tend to prefer the face, and only use other channels when the face is for some reason unavailable or not to be trusted. The PONS film, however, isolates nonverbal behavior into different channels, and therefore restricts the nonverbal cues available to the decoder in a manner unlike everyday life. Some of the PONS channels are closer to everyday life than others (e.g., Face + Body + Voice).

Absence of verbal information. In everyday life, most nonverbal behavior occurs in conjunction with verbal behavior. When we try to decode a person’s emotion in a face-to-face situation, we would typically be using both kinds of information in reaching our interpretation. It could be that nonverbal cues acquire meaning principally in terms of the reinforcement (or contradiction) of what the person is saying, rather than as a completely independent source of information. The nonverbal behavior in the PONS occurs in pure form—that is, the encoder’s verbal (linguistic) behavior has been entirely eliminated. This was of course intentional, since the PONS was designed to be a measure of nonverbal sensitivity alone.

Absence of some nonverbal cues. The PONS presents 11 channels of nonverbal behavior, made up of combinations of face, body, and voice. There are, however, other channels of nonverbal information such as touch, interpersonal distance, and angle of orientation. Furthermore, the PONS channels could easily be subdivided into smaller “channels,” such as mouth alone or eyes alone. We focused on what we considered the major channels, with an aim to maximize ecological validity (for example, mouth-only is not often seen in everyday life, but the full face is).

Use of a posed criterion. The criterion of accuracy for each item in the PONS is in part the situation or feeling that the encoder intended to portray. In everyday life, of course, we are more likely to be decoding spontaneous or unposed emotions. The PONS encoder’s portrayals were also rated and selected for authenticity, as described above. The PONS encoder, moreover, felt that the portrayals were quite faithful to her own manner of expression. These procedures were followed to ensure that her emotional expressions were not ineffectual, melodramatic, or stereotyped.

The problem of a criterion in researching emotion, however, is complex. A number of researchers have discussed the relative merits of different types of criteria in decoding research. These can include intention—what the encoder intended to send; researcher opinion—the way the researcher labels the emotion; ratings (i.e., consensus of observers)—a panel of judges says what they think is being conveyed; self-description—the encoder reports his or her own feelings; experimentally imposed eliciting conditions—for example, the researcher shows the encoder

10

pictures of supposedly disgusting scenes and “disgust” becomes the criterion; and objective or biographical data—an independent measure of what the encoder’s state or trait was, if one exists. Examples of the latter would be a validated personality scale as the criterion in a task of judging personality, or the fact of marital status in a task of judging whether two people are married or not. None of these methods is perfect or always applicable in a particular research circumstance.

In selecting the portrayals for the PONS, we used a total of four of these methods: portrayer’s intention (what she was trying to convey), researcher’s opinion, observers’ ratings, and portrayer’s self-description (whether she thought the portrayal was authentic). These four methods were the only appropriate procedures, given the design of the PONS film. We did not want to use experimental manipulations to induce emotions, since only a very restricted range of real emotions could have been ethically produced in this manner. As a result, the PONS encoder was not spontaneously experiencing the affective states depicted in the film.

On a priori grounds one might prefer spontaneous over posed stimuli because it is ultimately the decoding of everyday, spontaneous nonverbal cues about which we want to make inferences. However, it would be an error of logic, though a common one, to assume that because our ultimate concern is in more spontaneous nonverbal cues, a better index of accuracy could be constructed from the use of such stimuli. Such an error confounds the question of ecological validity with construct and predictive validity. It is true that the stimuli in the PONS do not have perfect ecological validity (because they were posed), but this does not necessarily have implications for the construct validity and predictive validity of the test. The latter kinds of validity rest on the nature of the associations between the test and other variables of theoretical and practical importance. Also relevant is the fact that ability to decode posed expressions is strongly correlated with ability to decode spontaneous expressions (Zuckerman et al., 1976). In fact, the PONS as well as other tests using posed expressions (e.g., the DANVA tests; Nowicki & Duke, 1994, 2001) have produced a voluminous literature of associations with many other variables of interest.

But before leaving the discussion of posed expressions, it is important to add an important fact. Nonverbal behavior in everyday interpersonal interactions is typically not entirely spontaneous. In such interactions, the behavior emitted is a mixture of spontaneous (i.e., authentic feelings expressed in an unpremeditated way) and deliberate enactments. People can choose how to comport themselves through nonverbal cues to some—probably a great—extent. Therefore, it is wrong to equate “real life” with “spontaneous” because nonverbal behavior in real life is not entirely spontaneous.

Use of one encoder. The PONS film contains the nonverbal behavior and expressions of only a single encoder. In everyday life, of course, we are surrounded by large numbers of encoders who vary in many ways, including in how, and how well, they express themselves nonverbally. However, the available literature on nonverbal communication suggests that good decoders are likely to be more accurate than poor decoders not just with a single encoder but with different encoders as well. In addition, as with the discussion of posed encoding above, the test of whether validity was harmed by putting only one encoder into the PONS is whether the test can predict a wide range of outcome variables and whether the test does so in a way that is similar to other decoding tests that include different encoders. The answer to these questions is yes (Hall, Andrzejewski, & Yopchick, 2009). Therefore, the accumulated research with the

11

PONS indicates that its results are not uniquely tied to whatever idiosyncrasies might have been associated with its one encoder.

Use of female encoder. Using an encoder of one gender could produce certain kinds of bias. This would be a possibility whether there was one encoder of one gender, or many encoders of one gender. The problem would be in understanding gender-related results. For example, a ubiquitous finding of the PONS is that females score higher on the test. The question justifiably arises: Would this result occur if the encoder were male? Could it be that females are especially accurate only with other females?

This question was laid to rest after meta-analyses of gender differences on other decoding tests were performed (Hall, 1978, 1984). There was no evidence that the magnitude of the female-decoder advantage varied with the gender of the encoders in the tests. This was true both across studies in the meta-analyses, and within studies that reported their own analyses of this question for their own tests. Thus, the PONS was not compromised by representing only one gender in the expressions shown.

Use of context-free scenes. The scenes in the PONS are presented for only two seconds against a blank wall and therefore, by definition, include no physical or interpersonal context. In real life, of course, our interpretations of others’ states can draw on other behaviors of the person, situational antecedents, the nature of the physical setting, knowledge of the person’s history, as well as other events and people in the environment. On the other hand, in real life one often has to make quick judgments about others based on little information. This is the skill we measured with the PONS test. It is then an empirical question whether this kind of skill predicts to other skills and characteristics of a person.

Includes only a limited range of content. There are many states, traits, and characteristics of persons that could be incorporated as the content of a nonverbal decoding task. Many have been investigated, and many remain to be investigated. The list of possible content includes emotions, attitudes, intentions, wishes/desires, cognitive state, personality, intelligence, age, mental/physical health, sexual orientation, nationality/culture, ethnicity/race, dominance/status, social class, kinship, relationship status, and deception, as well as many others. To date, the most studied content areas for researchers interested in individual differences in accuracy are emotions and personality (Hall, Andrzejewski, Murphy, Schmid Mast, & Feinstein, 2008). Most researchers test only one kind of content area, a notable exception being the IPT test (Costanzo & Archer, 1989), which includes items representing five content domains.

The PONS measures accuracy at decoding affective states as expressed in a variety of different situations. Note, we do not call the PONS a test of judging emotions per se, because although all of the scenes show affect, for many of the items the test-taker is asked to name the situation the encoder is in, as in “ordering food in a restaurant” or “talking about one’s wedding.” Specific emotions are not typically named. The PONS includes 20 different scenes as explained earlier. Though this certainly does not fully represent all of the affective situations a person might be in, the scenes do vary both in positivity and in dominance. Considering our desire to represent each scene in the 11 nonverbal channels, it was not possible to expand the content any further.

12

Summary of Main Findings from Rosenthal et al. (1979)

Only a brief overview is possible. As of this writing (revision of Manual, 2009), the PONS has been used in a large number of studies by a wide range of different investigators, in addition to the already large number of studies reported in the original monograph on the test (Rosenthal et al., 1979). We do not provide a bibliography of studies that have used the PONS, but interested readers can likely locate the relevant literature by searching for the name of the test on a standard electronic database such as PsycINFO.

Most of the results to be summarized below come from the PONS test monograph (Rosenthal, 1979), where more details can be found. The studies reported in that monograph were conducted by us or by many generous collaborators in many places—including 22 colleges and universities in the U.S. and 18 abroad, and 14 primary and secondary schools in the U.S. and abroad. Over 7,000 people were tested in samples that included university students, children and teenagers, teachers and teachers in training, physicians and therapists (in practice and in training), business people, mental patients, actors, and married couples.

Users of the PONS are urged to consult the monograph (Rosenthal et al., 1979). Of special relevance to many researchers, that monograph contains normative data for many tested groups. Sometimes in the summary that follows, we report effect sizes in standard deviation (SD) units, called d (Cohen, 1969). This effect-size index shows the magnitude of effect for any dichotomous independent variable and enables one to answer the question of how big the difference is, as well as making it possible to compare various effects with each other (possible because d is a standardized index). It is defined as the difference between the means of the groups being compared divided by the shared (i.e., pooled) standard deviation of the two groups. Also, we report effects in terms of r, the Pearson correlation.

Normative data. The basic reliability of the full PONS was quite adequate, reaching the level obtained by standardized group-administered tests of intelligence. For our high-school norm group (N = 492), the internal consistency reliability was .86 when computed using the KR-20 method (analogous to Cronbach’s alpha for dichotomously scored items). The same KR-20 value was obtained for a group of 200 fourth, fifth, and sixth graders. In six studies of retest reliability, the median r was .69.

Note, these good levels of reliability were obtained with the full PONS. Shorter forms have much lower reliability, as one would expect based on psychometric theory. In fact, weak reliability in tests of interpersonal sensitivity, not just the PONS, has often been found (Hall, 2001).

We examined the effects on PONS accuracy of adding information from tone of voice, body, and face channels and found that tone, body, and face cues contribute to accuracy in judging the PONS scenes in the approximate ratios of 1:2:4, respectively. Table 3 presents the results of a factor analysis of the 11 channels of the PONS. The four factors are defined by the random-spliced channel alone, the content-filtered channel alone, the three channels showing only the body (with or without voice), and the six channels showing the face (with or without the body and/or voice).

13

Table 3. Factor Analysis of the 11 Channels

__________________________________________________________________

Factor Median loading No. of channels No. of items

__________________________________________________________________

Face present .68 6 120 Random-spliced .95 1 20 Content-filtered .96 1 20 Body without face .59 3 60 __________________________________________________________________

Length of exposure to communication. A 40-item “Brief Exposure” form of the PONS was developed to permit the examination of length of exposure on accuracy in decoding nonverbal cues from the face and body. The 20 face-only and the 20 body-only scenes from the full PONS were each subdivided into four groups of scenes varying in length of exposure. Whereas in the full PONS each clip is 2 seconds long, corresponding to 48 frames of film (in terms of the 16 mm sound film originally made), in this test the four lengths of clip are 1/24, 3/24, and 27/24 seconds long. Thus, even the longest clip on the Brief Exposure PONS is a bit more than half the length of each item on the full PONS test.

The results of nine studies of high school and college students and U.S. adults (N = 506) were quite consistent in showing accuracy very much greater than chance, and large in magnitude, at even the shortest exposure. Accuracy increased dramatically at 3/24 second length, but increased no further at the two longer exposures. The accuracy rates for the four lengths were 56%, 74%, 73%, and 74%. The very dramatic gain in accuracy between the shortest exposure and the others may be due to the introduction of motion in the longer exposures.

Decreasing exposure to 9/24 of a second or shorter actually increased accuracy for body cues but greatly decreased accuracy for face cues. Perhaps body cues are rapidly processed in high-speed exposures in a global, nonanalytic manner whereas the face requires more analysis and therefore more exposure, at least on this particular test. Accuracy on face cues can be extremely high even at very short exposures if the stimuli are prototypical displays of basic emotions (Matsumoto et al., 2000).

Gender. Effects of the test-taker’s gender were examined in 133 samples that took the PONS (N = 2,615) at several age levels. Females were more accurate in 80% of the samples we tested. Effect sizes (d) were .62 for grade-school, .49 for junior high, .57 for high school, and .44 for college. These effects are of moderate and fairly consistent magnitude across all four age levels and for the entire pool of 133 samples (median d = .42). This effect corresponds to a correlation of r = .21 between gender (male/female) and PONS score. Consistent with these results, several analyses of variance revealed only small interactions of age and gender, indicating that the gender effect is relatively stable cross-sectionally.

14

Subsequent meta-analyses that included many other tests and very few PONS samples (Hall, 1978, 1984) also found superior performance by females, with the magnitude being nearly identical to that found with the PONS.

Age. The full-length (i.e., 220 items) was administered to a grade-school norm group of 200 children in grades 3-6. The children used an answer sheet that had large type and simplified vocabulary. Accuracy improved linearly with grade level in this sample. This kind of trend is well documented with other nonverbal decoding tests as well (e.g., DANVA; Nowicki & Duke, 1994).

In an analysis of variance of the performance of four age levels (grade school, junior high, high school, and adults), a large linear trend was found. The simple correlation between PONS total score and mean age in 125 nonpsychiatric samples was .34.

Cultural variation. Extensive cross-cultural testing was undertaken with the PONS; over 2,000 participants, constituting nearly 60 samples from 20 nations other than the U.S., took the PONS. Those cultures best able to decode the PONS were those cultures that were rated as most similar to American culture (r for 30 samples = .70), although every tested culture performed very substantially better than chance.

Those cultures best able to decode the PONS were also most similar linguistically to the American language (r = .62), suggesting the possibility that linguistic similarity may be paralleled by paralinguistic similarity.

Cultures that were more modernized—as defined by per capita steel consumption, automobiles in use, and physician availability—showed greater accuracy on the PONS (median r = .52) and cultures that were more developed in the communications area in particular (as defined by per capita energy consumption, newsprint consumption, telephones in use, television sets, and radios) were especially likely to be better decoders on the PONS (median r = .79). Cultures more developed in the communications area may have greater experience with, and practice in, decoding nonverbal cues in the variety of channels tested by the PONS and they may have more exposure to nonverbal cues from U.S. culture. The latter interpretation is consistent with the in-group advantage in decoding documented by Elfenbein and Ambady (2002).

Cognitive correlates. Two kinds of cognitive correlates were examined: performance measures and cognitive style measures. Within the performance category, we can further distinguish general intellectual abilities, for which we would predict a low relationship with the PONS (because we theorized that ability to judge nonverbal cues is a distinct cognitive skill that is not synonymous with general intellectual skill), and specific judging abilities in person perception, for which we would predict more substantial correlations with the PONS.

In an analysis of 15 samples, the relationships between PONS and general intellectual abilities (IQ, SAT, school achievement, and vocabulary) were small, on average, indicating the PONS test does not measure merely general intellectual ability (median r = .14). This is consistent with the findings of a meta-analysis based on many tests other than the PONS (Murphy & Hall, 2009). Thus, though not synonymous, the skill tested with the PONS does have some overlap with more general cognitive abilities.

15

The Group Embedded Figures Test, a test of perceptual disembedding (field independence), was given to three samples. The median correlation with PONS total was .08 for males and .28 for females, indicating that for females, at least, field independence (good disembedding) was associated with higher PONS scores.

We also computed correlations between five measures of person perception skill and PONS total. The Programmed Cases task, measuring ability to postdict personality from verbal information, was correlated .26 with PONS total. We also employed four nonverbal decoding tasks (involving judging emotions from visual or auditory cues, postdicting the pleasantness of the sender’s mood, or postdicting personality or other personal factors from minimal verbal-plus-nonverbal cues) and found that the median correlation with PONS total was .28. Subsequent studies using the PONS and other conceptually similar tests of interpersonal sensitivity often find that the correlations among different decoding tasks are small, perhaps due to reliability issues or perhaps because there are distinct domains of decoding expertise (Hall, 2001).

In two studies, cognitive complexity also showed a positive relationship with the PONS (median r = .28).

Psychosocial correlates. Many studies have been conducted in which PONS performance was correlated with standard tests of personality, ratings by self, and ratings by others. Table 4 summarizes the results of these studies (as reported in the PONS monograph; Rosenthal et al., 1979; many other studies have been done since then, of course) and shows that PONS performance is somewhat better predicted by standard tests of personality and by judges’ ratings than by measures involving self-report.

Participants scoring higher on PONS Total scored as better adjusted, more interpersonally democratic and encouraging, less dogmatic, more extraverted, more likely to volunteer for and appear for behavioral research, more popular, and more interpersonally sensitive as judged by acquaintances, clients, spouses, or supervisors. This last result, based on 24 studies of which 21 showed positive correlations, and yielding a median correlation of .22, provides especially consistent evidence for the validity of the PONS as a measure of interpersonal sensitivity.

Table 4. Median Correlations of PONS Performance with Psychosocial Measures

________________________________________________________________________

Variable Number of studies Median r

________________________________________________________________________

Interpersonal adequacy (median of 6 California 5 .25 Psychological Inventory [CPI] scales) Maturity (median of 6 CPI scales) 5 .22 Achievement potential (median of 3 CPI scales) 5 .31 Intellectual and interest modes (median of 3 CPI scales) 5 .23 Task orientation (Least Preferred Co-Worker Scale) 1 .21 Democratic orientation (Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory) 2 .24

16

Encouragingness towards pupils (observation) 2 .76 Masculine therapeutic style (A-B scale) 3 .03 Nondogmatic (Dogmatism Scale) 2 .20 Low in need for approval (Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability 9 .07 Scale, CPI, Personality Research Form) Low in Machiavellianism (Machiavelli Scale) 4 .08 Social-Religious Values (Allport-Vernon Study of Values) 1 .28 Extraversion (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, self-ratings) 3 .19 Low in self-monitoring (Self-Monitoring Scale) 6 .08 Self-reported interpersonal success 10 .06 Opposite-sex relationships and gains in PONS on retesting 2 .62 (self-ratings and others’ ratings) Self-reported nonverbal sensitivity 28 .08 Spouse’s report of nonverbal sensitivity 2 .20 Others’ ratings of interpersonal sensitivity 22 .22 Popularity (others’ ratings) 1 .15 Volunteering and appearing for research (behavioral) 2 .40 Low in psychoticism (psychiatric patients) (2 scales) 1 .30 Median .22 _____________________________________________________________________

Mental and physical impairment. Several samples of psychiatric patients and alcoholic patients were tested with the PONS. These patients consistently scored below the level of the norm group participants and by a substantial amount—a full standard deviation. This result is consistent with subsequent studies using both the PONS and other tests which show that psychological dysfunction of many kinds is associated with lower ability to decode nonverbal cues.

Nevertheless, the performance of the patient groups was very dramatically better than chance, and patients were able to profit from the addition of audio cues, body cues, and face cues. Just as for the typically functioning test-takers, face cues aided accuracy much more than did body cues, and body cues aided accuracy much more than did audio cues. However, the addition of audio, body, and face cues improved the accuracy of the patient groups less than it improved the accuracy of the typical participants.

A group of blind students took the 40-item female sender audio test (i.e., voice-only items from the full PONS), and there was no clear evidence of any overall difference in the performance of the blind and sighted comparison groups. However, the blind students aged 17 or younger performed better than the sighted students aged 17 or younger. Among students older than 17, the performance of the sighted was better than that of the blind unless mental age was partialed out.

A group of deaf students (age 10-15) took the video-only portion (60 face-only, body-only, and face+body only items) of the PONS. Among these students, those whose hearing was more impaired performed substantially less well than did the students whose hearing was less impaired. PONS performance was not related appreciably to skill at reading (r = -.13), skill at lip

17

reading (r = .02), or IQ (r = -.16). The performance of the deaf students as a group was substantially lower than the performance of the comparison groups of students at all age levels. A sample of deaf college students, however, showed no significant difference in PONS performance from hearing comparison groups.

Roles and relationships: Occupational and personal. When various U.S. occupational groups were ranked on PONS Total, the top three ranks were held by actors (2 samples), students of nonverbal communication (3 samples), and students of visual arts (3 samples). These three groups did not differ significantly among themselves, but together they scored significantly higher (d = .45) than the fourth-ranking group, 8 samples of clinicians whose scores were comparable to those of U.S. college students. The 8 groups of clinicians did not differ from each other significantly, but together they scored better than the fifth-ranking and sixth-ranking groups, teachers (10 samples) and business executives (3 samples) (d = .42). These two groups scored similarly to U.S. high school students.

For teachers, and for clinicians, supervisors’ ratings of professional skill were obtained. For teachers, the median correlation between PONS Total and rated teaching skill in 3 samples was .38. For clinicians, the median correlation between PONS Total and rated clinical skill in 13 samples was .20. Hence, rated excellence in these two occupations requiring interpersonal skills was related to PONS decoding accuracy, even though on the average these two groups did not perform outstandingly on the PONS.

It was hypothesized that experience with preverbal children might enhance one’s sensitivity to nonverbal cues. When 2 samples of parents of toddlers were compared with 2 matched samples of nonparents, the parents were found to be more accurate on the PONS (d = .50). This difference was due mainly to differences between the women who were mothers and those who were not.

Practice and training. There is considerable evidence that prior experience in taking the PONS serves to improve subsequent performance. For 8 samples who were tested twice, the average increase in performance from first to second testing was very large (d = 1.79). The gains in performance due to retesting were especially large in the 60 scenes in which only the body was shown (with or without voice). An experiment in which participants were randomly assigned to a pretest or a no-pretest condition yielded essentially the same result.

A training program was developed to see whether PONS performance could be improved in a single training session lasting about 90 minutes. The program was administered to a group of mental health professionals, half of whom were randomly assigned to receive the training; the remaining professionals served as controls. Those receiving the training performed better on the PONS than did the controls (d = .58).

Construct Validity

The defining feature of construct validation is that there is no single criterion that will validate the instrument. This makes construct validation a long and difficult process. The general problem of construct validation is especially acute when the construct has not been extensively researched or measured in the past. That was the situation for the PONS test.

18

All of the relationships reported in this manual between PONS scores and other variables help define the construct validity of the PONS. In evaluating these relationships, one should keep in mind that the magnitudes to be expected are not very large, based on the size of validity coefficients generally in the social-personality area. Furthermore it should be kept in mind that the PONS, being a performance measure rather than a self-report measure, has little overlap methodologically with many of the variables we tested. Therefore, there is little or no inflation of the correlations due to shared method variance. The overall pattern of non-zero correlations we obtained with variables that we would intuitively predict to be correlated with the PONS supports convergent and predictive validity.

Subsequent findings with the PONS. Since the original monograph on the PONS was published (Rosenthal et al., 1979), many other studies using the test have been published, which further support construct validity of the test. We do not offer a comprehensive listing here, but merely some illustrative findings: higher PONS scores predict lower non-clinical depression (Ambady & Gray, 2002); more favorable ratings on numerous dimensions made by acquaintances (Funder & Harris, 1986); among physicians, higher satisfaction in one’s patients (DiMatteo, Taranta, Friedman, & Prince, 1980); better learning in a dyadic teaching situation (Bernieri, 1991); less severe symptomatology in schizophrenia (Toomey, Schuldberg, Corrigan, & Green, 2002); better knowledge of the meanings of nonverbal cues as measured with a paper-and-pencil test (Rosip & Hall, 2004); being a better music teacher (Kurkul, 2007); and, among medical students interacting with several actor-patients in a simulated medical interview, higher ratings of interpersonal skills as made by those actor-patients (Hall et al., 2013b).

Also relevant to construct validity of the test is a meta-analysis of psychosocial correlates of interpersonal sensitivity which included many tests, not just the PONS (Hall, Andrzejewski, & Yopchick, 2009). Those authors reported little difference in the average size of effects between studies that used the PONS and studies that used other tests. Therefore, in a general sense the PONS test is associated with other variables similarly to other interpersonal sensitivity tests.

References

Ambady, N., Bernieri, F. J., & Richeson, J. A. (2000). Toward a histology of social behavior: Judgmental accuracy from thin slices of the behavioral stream. Advances in experimental social psychology, 32, 201-271.

Ambady, N., & Gray, H. M. (2002). On being sad and mistaken: Mood effects on the accuracy of thin-slice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 947-961.

Ames, D. R., & Kammrath, L. K. (2004). Mind-reading and metacognition: Narcissism, not actual competence, predicts self-estimated ability. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28, 187-209.

Bänziger, T., Grandjean, D., & Scherer, K. R. (2009). Emotion recognition from expressions in face, voice, and body: The Multimodal Emotion Recognition Test (MERT). Emotion, 9, 691-704.

Bänziger, T., Scherer, K. R., Hall, J. A., & Rosenthal, R. (2011). Introducing the MiniPONS: A short multichannel version of the Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (PONS). Journal of Nonverbal

Behavior, 35,189-204.

19

Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Hill, J., Raste, Y., & Plumb, I. (2001). The “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test revised version: A study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42, 241-251.

Baum, K. M., & Nowicki, S. Jr. (1998). Perception of emotion: Measuring decoding accuracy of adult prosodic cues varying in intensity. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 22, 89-107.

Bernieri, F. J. (1991). Interpersonal sensitivity in teaching interactions. Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 17, 98-103.

Bernieri, F. J. (2001). Toward a taxonomy of interpersonal sensitivity. In J. A. Hall & F. J. Bernieri (Eds.), Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement (pp. 3-20). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.

Costanzo, M., & Archer, D. (1989). Interpreting the expressive behavior of others: The Interpersonal Perception Task. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 13, 225-245. Davis, M. H., & Kraus, L. A. (1997). Personality and empathic accuracy. In W. Ickes (Ed.), Empathic

accuracy (pp. 144-168). New York: Guilford. DiMatteo, M. R., Taranta, A., Friedman, H. S., & Prince, L. M. (1980). Predicting patient satisfaction

from physicians’ nonverbal communication skill. Medical Care, 18, 376-387.

Ekman, P. (1976). Pictures of Facial Affect. San Francisco: University of California Medical Center.

Elfenbein, H. A., & Ambady, N. (2002). On the universality and cultural specificity of emotion recognition: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 203-235.

Elfenbein, H. A., Foo, M. D., White, J., Tan, H. H., & Aik, V. C. (2007). Reading your counterpart: The benefit of emotion recognition accuracy for effectiveness in negotiation. Journal of Nonverbal

Behavior, 31, 205-223.

Funder, D. C. (1995). On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach. Psychological

Review, 102, 652-670.

Funder, D. C., & Harris, M. J. (1986). On the several facets of personality assessment: The case of social acuity. Journal of Personality, 54, 528-549.

Hall, J. A. (1978). Gender differences in decoding nonverbal cues. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 845-857.

Hall, J. A. (1984). Nonverbal sex differences: Communication accuracy and expressive style. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hall, J. A. (2001). The PONS test and the psychometric approach to measuring interpersonal sensitivity. In J. A. Hall and F. J. Bernieri (Eds.), Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement (pp. 143-160). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Hall, J. A., Andrzejewski, S. A., & Yopchick, J. E. (2009). Psychosocial correlates of interpersonal

sensitivity: A meta-analysis. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 33, 149-180.

20

Hall, J. A., Andrzejewski, S. A., Murphy, N. A., Schmid Mast, M., & Feinstein, B. A. (2008). Accuracy of judging others’ traits and states: Comparing mean levels across tests. Journal of Research in

Personality, 42, 1476-1489.

Hall, J. A., & Bernieri, F. J., Eds. (2001). Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Hall, J. A., Bernieri, F. J., & Carney, D. R. (2005). Nonverbal behavior and interpersonal sensitivity. In J. A. Harrigan, R. Rosenthal, & K. R. Scherer (Eds.), The new handbook of methods in nonverbal

behavior research (pp. 237-281). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hall, J. A., Blanch, D. C., Horgan, T. G., Murphy, N. A., Rosip, J. C., & Schmid Mast, M. (2009). Motivation and interpersonal sensitivity: Does it matter how hard you try? Motivation and

Emotion, 33, 291-302.

Hall, J. A., Carter, J. D., & Horgan, T. G. (2001). Status roles and recall of nonverbal cues. Journal of

Nonverbal Behavior, 25, 79-100. Hall, J. A., Halberstadt, A. G., & O’Brien, C. E. (1997). “Subordination” and nonverbal sensitivity: A study and synthesis of findings based on trait measures. Sex Roles, 37, 295- 317. Hall, J. A., Murphy, N. A., & Schmid Mast, M. (2006). Nonverbal self-accuracy in interpersonal interaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1675-1685. Hall, J. A., Schmid Mast, M., & Latu, I. (2013). The vertical dimension of social relations and accurate

interpersonal perception: A meta-analysis. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Hall, J. A., Ship, A. N., Ruben, M. A., Curtin, E. M., Roter, D. L., Clever, S. N., Smith, C. C., & Pounds, K. (2013a). The Test of Accurate Perception of Patients’ Affect (TAPPA): An ecologically valid tool for assessing interpersonal perception accuracy in clinicians. Patient Education and

Counseling.

Hall, J. A., Ship, A. N., Ruben, M. A., Curtin, E. M., Roter, D. L., Clever, S. N., Smith, C. C., & Pounds, K. (2013b). Clinically relevant correlates of accurate perception of patients’ thoughts and feelings. Manuscript submitted for publication. Kanner, L. (1931). Judging emotions from facial expression. Psychological Monographs, 3 (Whole No.

186). Kirkland, R. A., Peterson, E., Baker, C. A., Miller, S., & Pulos, S. (2013). Meta-analysis reveals adult

female superiority in "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" Test. North American Journal of

Psychology, 15, 121-146. Kurkul, W. W. (2007). Nonverbal communication in one-to-one music performance instruction.

Psychology of Music, 35, 327-362. Marsh, A. A., & Blair, R. J. R. (2008). Deficits in facial affect recognition among antisocial populations:

A meta-analysis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 32, 454-465. Matsumoto, D., LeRoux, J., Wilson-Cohn, C., Raroque, J., Kooken, K., Ekman, P, Yrizarry, N.,

Loewinger, S., Uchida, H., Yee, A., Amo, L., & Goh, A. (2000) A new test to measure emotion

http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=search.displayRecord&id=C3F736C2-EEF7-863C-B600-7778A425DC84&resultID=2&page=1&dbTab=all&search=true

http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=search.displayRecord&id=C3F736C2-EEF7-863C-B600-7778A425DC84&resultID=2&page=1&dbTab=all&search=true

21

recognition ability: Matsumoto and Ekman’s Japanese and Caucasian Brief Affect Recognition Test (JACBART). Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 24, 179-209.

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., & Sitarenios, G. (2003). Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT V2.0. Emotion, 3, 97-105.

McClure, E. B. (2000). A meta-analytic review of sex differences in facial expression processing and their development in infants, children, and adolescents. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 424-453.

Murphy, N. A., & Hall, J. A. (2011). Intelligence and interpersonal sensitivity: A meta-analysis. Intelligence, 39, 54-63.

Murphy, N. A., Hall, J. A., & Colvin, C. R. (2003). Accurate intelligence assessments in social interaction: Mediators and gender effects. Journal of Personality, 71, 465-493. Nowicki, S., & Duke, M. P. (1994). Individual differences in the nonverbal communication of affect: The Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy Scale. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 18, 9-34. Nowicki, S. Jr., & Duke, M. P. (2001). Nonverbal receptivity: The Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy (DANVA). In J. A. Hall & F. J. Bernieri(Eds.), Interpersonal sensitivity: theory and

measurement (pp. 183-198). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Phillips, L. H., Tunstall, M., & Channon, S. (2007). Exploring the role of working memory in dynamic

social cue decoding using dual task methodology. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 31, 137-152. Pickett, C. L., Gardner, W. L., & Knowles, M. (2004). Getting a cue: The need to belong and enhanced

sensitivity to social cues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1095-1107.

Rogers, P. L., Scherer, K. R., & Rosenthal, R. (1971). Content-filtering human speech. Behavioral

Research Methods and Instrumentation, 3, 16-18. Rosenthal, R., Hall, J. A., DiMatteo, M. R., Rogers, P. L., & Archer, D. (1979). Sensitivity to nonverbal

communication: The PONS test. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Rosip, J. C., & Hall, J. A. (2004). Knowledge of nonverbal cues, gender, and nonverbal decoding accuracy. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28, 267-286. Ruffman, T., Henry, J. D., Livingstone, V., & Phillips, L. H. (2008). A meta-analytic review of emotion

recognition and aging: Implications for neuropsychological models of aging. Neuroscience and

Biobehavioral Reviews, 32, 863-881. Scherer, K. R. (1971). Randomized-splicing: A note on a simple technique for masking speech content.

Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 5, 155-159.

Scherer, K. R., Koivumaki, J., & Rosenthal, R. (1972). Minimal cues in the vocal communication of affect: Judging emotions from content-masked speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1, 269-285.

Toomey, R., Schuldberg, D., Corrigan, P., & Green, M. F. (2002). Nonverbal social perception and symptomatology in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 53, 83-91.

22

Vernon, P. E. (1933). Some characteristics of the good judge of personality. Journal of Social

Psychology, 4, 42-58.

Zebrowitz, L. A. (2001). Groping for the elephant of interpersonal sensitivity. In J. A. Hall & F. J. Bernieri (Eds.), Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement (pp. 333-350). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Zuckerman, M., Hall, J. A., DeFrank, R. S., & Rosenthal, R. (1976). Encoding and decoding of spontaneous and posed facial expressions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 966-977.

Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (PONS Test)

Scoring Information

The information on the following pages is reproduced from R. Rosenthal, J. A. Hall, M. R. DiMatteo, P. L. Rogers, and D. Archer (1979). Sensitivity to Nonverbal Communication: The PONS Test (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press).

Note that the scoring key on p. 149 of that book, for the 40-item Audio PONS, contains a typographical error. This error and its correction are shown on the attached scoring key for that test.

The PONS Test Manual contains sample scoring sheets for the full-length test and for the short forms.

_ ... -· ·.·_ ... ....... 1. ·: .··· .

- - .. · · · ··-· ·· ·· ·· ··· ·-· ··· .. i . I

I "(

~,

Sensitivity to Nonverbal Communication THE PONS TEST

ROBERT ROSENTHAL JUDITH A. HALL tvl. ROBIN DIMAITEO

PETER L. ROGERS DANE ARCHER

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY PRESS Baltimore and London

1'777

.... --,· 50 SENSITIVITY TO NONVERDAL COMMUNICATION

was started. (This signal was not fed to the recording Ampex, c was monitored by the technician through earphones.) ImmediatelY. allowing this signal, another control was operated, switching out the cond video camera and connecting the video output from the playbac mpex directly to the recording Ampex. This latter control could operated in two differen~ modes, depending on the auditory info arion required for a given segment. In the first mode, the audio sig s from the master video tape, after being fed through the electronic fi er and audio console, ·were routed through an audio gate to the recordi , Ampex. ln the second mode, the Sony audio tape deck was · started the same instant as the playback Ampex, and the audio signals from randomized spliced audio tape were gated to the recording Ampex nf passing through the audio console.

d. The visual and/or auditory info ation was then recorded in full (about 5.5 seconds) and was faded ou uring a one-second interval.

e. All recorders were stoppc; and operational steps 1 lhrough 4 were repented for the next segment.

For those segments represen · g the "pure" channels, i.e., requiring audio only or video only, selected playbac controls and other interconnections were changed prior to step 4, above, to meet e necessary conditions.

The technically orie d reader might question the advisability of using the audio track recorded on th master video tapes as source for electronically filtered audio, because of the so what inferior quality of the signal when compared with that on the original audio t as recorded by the Sony audio tape deck. Although the randomized spliced audi track could not, by its very nature, be synchronized with the video informatio when combined in a given segment. the electronically filtered audio did require nchronization with the video, particularly when it was pair~d with face. Due to th extreme difficulty of synchronizing the video and audio tracks from two indi-

. ~ al machines when making a composite recording, the audio tracks from the origi~al master, video tape.c; had to be used whenever electronically filtered audio was called

for.

Appendix 2E

SCORING KEY FOR FULL PONS TEST

TABLE. 2.6. Scoring Key for Full PONS Test

Test Segment Chnnnel

CF

2 FA+ RS

Alternutive & Quadrant

A. expressing jealous anger NO

.f1 tnlking to a lost child PO

A. talking to n Jost child PD

fL. admiring nature PO

Test Segment Channel

3 RS

4 CF

Alternative &. Quadrant

A. talking about the death of a friend NS

!!:. taking to a lost child PD

A. leaving on a trip B. saying a prayer

PO NS

I

i .j

Table 2.6. Contln11etl.

Test Segment Channel Altemntive & Quadrant

s FA A. criticizing someone for being Jnte NO

!L expres.'ling gratitude PS

6 RG + RS 4. helping n customer PS

B. expressing gratitude PS

7 RS A. criticizing someone for being hue NO

!1 leaving on 11 trip PD

8 BO A. tnlking Dbout one's wedding PD

11- expressing gratitude PS

9 FA+ CF .d: helping n customer PS

D. talking abour one's divorce NS

10 BO + CP A. talking about the death of n friend NS

1!: trying to seduce some-one PS

II CF A. talking to a lost child PO

!!, helping a customer PS

12 BO + CF £L admiring nature PO B. expressing motherly

love PO 13 RG A. expressing deep affec-

tion PS !!..:. nagging a child

NO

14 BO A. expressing motherly love PO

11 asking forgiveness NS

I.S FA .!L admiring nature PD D. helping a customer

PS 16 80 A. admiring nature PD

f1 snying o prayer NS

17 FIG+ RS .d.,. nagging a child NO B. admiring nnture PO

18 FA A. nagging a child NO !1 criticizing someone for

being late NO

Test Segment Channel Alternative & Quadrant

19 . FA+ CF d. asking forgiveness NS

8. Jenving on n trip PO 20 FIG A. expressing gratitude

PS !1 lcuving on n trip PO

21 FIG+ CF A. lenving on u trip PO !1 returning faulty item to

u store NS 22 FA + RS A. returning fuuhy item to

11 store NS !!..:. tulldng ubour one's

divorce NS 23 RS .1: expressing jealous

anger NO D. tnlking about one's

divorce NS 24 FA-t· CF A. tnlking nbout the c.Jcath

of n friend NS 11- threutcning someone

NO

2S no+ cr d.: expn:s.'ling deep affcc-tion PS

D. saying a prayer NS 26 FIG A. expressing deep uffcc·

tion PS fl..: lrying to seduce some·

one PS 27 DO+ cp· d: nagging a child NO

D. expressing motherly love PO

28 no+ CF d: leaving on a lrip PO D. ordering food in a

rcscourant PS 29 FIG 1L helping a customer

PS D. CXJ>rcs.c;ing jealous

ungcr NO 30 DO .d: criticizing someone for

being lute ND B. e~~:pressing grariludc

PS 31 RS d: threatening someone

NO D. tnlking about one's

wedding PO

32 FA+ CF A. nc.lmiring nature PO !1 expressing strong dis-

like NO

Table 2.6. Contlnuetl.


33 RS

34 FA+ CF

35 FIG+ CF

36 FIG+ RS

37 FA

38 FA+ RS

39 DO+ RS

40 BO + CF

41 80 + CF

42 BO

43 BO

44 FIG

45 FA

Alternative & Quadrant

!L ordering food in a restaurant PS

B. criticizing someone for being late NO

A. leaving on a trip PO fL. talking about one's

wedding PO

.d.. talking to a lost child PO

B. expressing strong dis-like NO

.d.: trying to seduce someone PS

B. expressing jealous anger NO

:1.: expressing strong dis-like NO

B. expressing deep affec· tion PS

A. leaving on a trip PO fL. threatening someone

NO

A. expressing deep nffec-- tion PS B. talking about the deuth

nf a friend NS

A. talking to a lo:o;t child PO

!!. criticizing someone for being late NO

d.. ordering food in a restaurant PS

B. expres..'ling gratitude PS

.d.: expressing motherly love PO

D. threatening someone NO

A.: expressing strong dis-like NO

B. ordering food in a restaurant PS

A. expressing motherly love PO

f!.:. talking to a lost child PO

d.: expressing deep nffec· tion PS

B. nagging n child NO


46 FA + CF A. asking forgiveness NS

11. saying a prayer NS

47 RS .d: expressing motherly love PO

B. helping a customer PS

48 FIG + CF d: admiring nature PO B. expressing strong dis·

49 FA+ CF

so BO + RS

51 FA

52 FA

like NO


fL leaving on a trip PO

d.: talking about one's divorce NS


,d.: asking forgiveness NS

8. nagging a child NO

A. admiring nature PO

fL. expressing motherly love PO

53 FA + RS !L returning faulty item to a store NS

B. criticizing someone for being late NO

54 FA + RS d.: talking about one's wedding PO

B. expressing deep affection PS

55 RS ~ expressing strong dis-like NO


56 FIG ~ admiring nature PO 8. ordering food in a

restaurant PS

57 FA £L returning faulty hem to a store NS


58 FIG + RS ~ expressing strong dis-like NO


Table 2.6. Continued.


59 FA + eF d.: expressing deep affcc· tion PS

D. expressing gratitude PS

60 BO A. saying a prayer NS !!:. threatening someone

NO

61 CF A. saying a prayer NS fl.:. . ordering food in n

rcstnurnnt PS

62 CF A. admiring nature PO 8. asking forgiveness - NS

63 FA + RS d.: talking to a lost child PO


64 BO + CF A. talking about one's wedding PD

ft. saying n prnyer NS

65 FIG + CF A. talking to n lose child PO

f!..:. threatening someone NO

66 CF A. expressing motherly love PO

fL. nagging a child NO

67 FA + CF A. expressing motherly love PO

!!: returning faulty item to n store NS

68 FIG + CF A. expressing gralitude PS

!!: expressing strong dis-like NO

69 FIG + CF A. expressing slrong dis-like NO

!!.:. tnlking ubc.lut one's wedding PD

70 BO d: helping n customer PS

B. asking forgiveness NS

1 I FIG + RS d.: threatening someone NO

B. expressing motherly love PD


72 FA+ CF

73 CF

74 FA

15 FIG+ RS

76 BO + CF

77 FIG

78 80 + RS

79 BO + RS

80 FrG

81 RS

82 FIG

83 FA + RS


£1.: nagging a child NO

B. talking to a lost child PO

A. talking to a lost child PO

!!: criticizing s<>meonc for being late NO

A. talking about one's divorce NS

1!:. trying to seduce someone PS

d: expressing jealous nngcr NO

D. helping a customer PS

d.: talking about one's divorce NS

D. expressing deep affec-tion PS

£1.: expressing grutitude PS

D. talking to a lost child PD

A. expressing deep affec-tion PS

J!: asking forgiveness NS

d. threatening someone NO

B. nagging a child ND

.d.: tulking about the death of a friend NS

B. trying to seduce someone PS

A. tnlking about one's wedding PD

!1:. tnl~ing about one's divorce NS

A. trying to seduce someone PS

!L criticizing someone f01 being late NO

LL helping a customer PS

B. admiring nature PI

Table 2.6. Cominued.


84 80 + CF

85 FlO+ CF

86 FJG

87 FIG+ CF

88 RS

89 FIG+ RS

90 BO + CF

91

92 FIG+ CF

93 RS

94 RS

9S CF

96 CF

Allernative & Quadrant

4, returning faulty item to a store NS

B. nagging a child NO

& nagging a child NO

B. leuving on a trip

.d: talking ubout one's w~dding PO

PO

B. admiring nature PO

d. criticizing someone for being lnte NO

B. expressing deep affec-tion PS

A. admiring nature PO JL returning faulty item to

a store NS

4, asking forgiveness NS

B. expressing strong dis-like ND

d. expressing motherly love PO


d. nsking forgiveness NS

8. leaving on a trip PO

A. criticizing someone for being lute ND

!!.,;_ helping n customer PS

!!..: talking about one's wedding PO

B. threatening someone NO


f1 nagging a child ND

d. expressing motherly love PO


~ talking ubout one's divorce NS



97 FIG+ CF

98 FA + CF

99 DO+ CF

100 80 + CF

101 DO+ RS

102 BO + RS

103 FA

104 FA+ RS

105 RS

106 80 + RS

107 FA

108 FIG+ RS

109 BO-t· RS


A. expressing jealous anger NO

fL asking forgiveness NS


f1 criticizing someone for being late NO

.d: talking about one's wedding PD

B. talking about the death of a f~iend NS

.d: exprel!sing strong dis-like NO


A. saying a prayer NS !!.:. helping a customer

PS

d: nagging a child NO

B. leaving on a trip PD

.d: talking about one's divorce NS


A. ordering food in a restaurant PS

!1 expressing jealous anger ND

A. criticizing someone for being late NO

B. talking about the deoth - of a friend NS

A. talking nbout the death of a friend NS

f!: ordering food In a rcstourant PS

A. leaving on a trip PO fl.: nagging a child NO

.d.: saying a prayer NS B. talking obour one's

divorce NS

d: expressing strong dis-like NO


Table 2.6. Continlled.


110 DO+ CF

I II FIG+ RS

112 RS

113 FIG

114 FIG

115 FIG+ RS

116 FA

117 FA+ CF

I 18 FA+ RS

119 PA

120 FIG+ RS

121 PIG+ CP

122 DO

Alternative & Quudmnr

A. ordering food in a restnumnt PS

f!: asking forgiveness NS

A. talking about one's wedding PD

lL leaving on a trip PO


fL. admiring nuture PD

!L expressing jealous anger ND

B. criticizing S<lmeone for being late NO


fl.:. threatening someone ND

A. expressing strong dis-like NO

~ returning faulty irem 10

a store NS

d: ordering food in a restaurant PS

B. threatening someone NO

.1: talking ro n lost child PO

D. criticizing someone for being late NO

A. admiring nature J>() !1.: nagging a child ND


fl.:. helping a customer. PS

d: talking about one's wedding PO

B. ordering food in u re."'lllurnnt PS

.d.: expressing gratitude PS

D. expressing motherly love PD

A. leaving on a trip Pb ft expressing deep affec-

tion PS


123 FA

124 FA+ CF

125 FA+ CF

126 80 + RS

127 FIG+ RS

128 FIG + CF

129 no+ cr:

130 FA+ RS

131 FIG

132 CF

133 FA+ RS

134 FA+ CF

135 FA

136 FIG+ Cl;


A. nagging a child NO It talking to a lost child

PO

A. returning faulty item to a store NS

JL expressing motherly love PD

.d: ralking about one's divorce NS

B. admiring nature PD


'fl.:. talking about the deuth of a friend NS ·


!!..:. admiring nature PO

d:, expres.o;ing d,~ep affec-tion PS

D. admiring nature PO

.£4 tulking tn n lost child J>O

B. admiring nature PD

A. rl!turning fnulty item to a store NS

fb lnlking nbout the death of a friend NS

A. talking about one's wedding PO

.!!..: returning faulty ilean 10 a store NS

!L uthuiring nature PD D. leaving on atri11 PO

d: m;king forgiveness NS

D. helping u customer PS


ll. ordering fond in a - restaurnnt PS

A. returning fnulty item to a store NS

!!..:. tnlking 11hout the death or II friend NS

A. expressing deep arrcc-tion PS

!!..: saying n prayer NS

Table 2.6. Cmrlinul!cl. Table 2.6. Cmrtlmted.

Test Test Test Test Segmenl Chnnnel Alternative & Quadrant Segment Channel Alternative & Quadrant Segment Channel Alternative & Qundrunt Segment Channel Allernative & Quadranl

137 FIG+ RS A. saying a prayer NS 1:'10 FA+ RS A. talking about the death 162 FA+ CF A. expressing deep nffec- 114 BO + RS A. expressing gratitude fl.: criticil.ing someone for of a friend NS tion PS PS

being lntc ND !!..:. expressing molhcrly !!..: talking about the deolh 11.: returning faully item lo 138 FA d: tnllcing about one's love PD of a friend NS U SIOre NS

wedding PD I :'II CF A. expre!!ing gratitude 163 FA+ RS A. returning fnuhy item to 115 DO+ RS A. expressing motherly D. lulking nbnul one's PS u store NS Jove PO

divorce NS It expressing strong dis- ~ leaving on ntrip PD !L criticizing someone for 139 CF d.: expressing gmtitude like ND 164 FA + RS d: expressing gratitude being late ND

PS 152 RS d: expressing deep nffec- PS 176 DO d: ordering food in a D. expres.'ling motherly tion PS B. expressing jealous restaurant PS

love PD B. returning faulty hem to anger ND D. expressing jealous 140 FA ~ expressing jealous a store NS 165 FA+ RS A. talking about one's nnger ND

anger ND 153 CF A. expressing gratitude wedding PD 177 FIG+ RS d: expressing gratilude D. threatening someone PS 11.: trying to seduce PS

ND !!..: threatening someone someone PS D. rclllrning faulty item to 141 FIG+ CF· A. asking fcu·givencss ND 166 FIG+ CF A. Ullking to a lost child u store NS

NS 154 FIG+ CF ~ leaving on a trip PD PD 178 FIG 1: expressing strong dis-

!b expressing motherly !1 expressing jenlous like NO love PO D. talking to a lost child

anger ND D. tnllcing about one's PD 142 FA+ CF d: admiring nature PD 167 CF A. talking to a lost child divorce NS D. ordering food in a ISS BO A. talking about the death PO 179 FIG+ RS d: talking about one's

restaurant PS of a friend NS JL talking about the death divorce NS 143 BO + RS .d: expressing motherly fl.:. expressing jealous or a friend NS D. talking about the death

Jove PD anger ND 168 FIG A. talking about one's or a"friend NS

B. expressing jenlous l!i6 DO+ RS A. helping a customer divorce NS 180 FIG+ CF .d: ordering food in a ongcr NO PS !/.: asking forgiveness restaurant PS

144 CF .d: expressing jcnlous !l.:. expressing gra.titudc NS B. returning faulty item In anger NO PS 169 BO + CF A. trying to seduce a store NS

D. helping a customer 157 FIG A. asking forgiveness someone PS 181 DO A. expressing motherly

PS !l:. threatening someone love PD NS 145 CF A. ordering food in a !L saying a prayer NS ND !L talking to a Jost,child

restaurant PS 170 DO+ CF A. expressing gratitude PO !!:. returning faulty item lo 158 RS !!..: trying to seduce PS 182. FA+ CF 1: trying to seduce a store NS someone PS

!l:. expressing jealous someone PS 146 DO A. talking about one's B. expressing gratitude anger NO D. tulking about one's

divorce NS PS wedding PD 171 CF &: talking about one's fL leaving on a trip PD 159 FA+ CF .d: expressing jealous wedding PO 183 BO + RS A. leaving on a trip PD

147 CF A. nagging a child anger ND B. criricizing someone for D. trying to seduce ND B. saying a prayer NS being lore ND someone PS

!!..: saying a prayer NS 160 RS A. criticizing someone for 172 BO ~ returning faulty item to 184 DO+ CF d: talking about the death 148 BO + RS !!..: trying to seduce being late NO a store NS of a friend NS

someone PS !1 helping a customer D. expressing strong dis- D. asking forgiveness D. criticizing someone for PS like ND NS

being late ND 161 FIG+ RS A. expressing strong dis- 173 FA+ CF d: expressing grutilude 185 BO d.: trying to seduce 149 DO A. expressing deep affec- like ND PS someone PS

lion PS fl.: expressing deep affec- B. talking to a lost child 8. talking to a losr child fL admiring nnture PD lion PS PD PO

~--·__.._-----

=:

Tuble 2.6. Comlnuetl.


186 FIG+ RS

187 BO + RS

188 FIG+ CF

189 FIG+ RS

190 CF

191 AG

192 FA

193 CF

194 DO

195 BO + CF

196 FA+ RS

197 DO

198 80 + RS

Alternative & Qundnmt

d:, expressing motherly love PD

D. ordering food in a restaurant PS

d: saying a prayer NS 8. expressing jealous

anger ND


!!:. tnlking about the denth of a friend NS

d:, ordering food in a restaurant PS

D. tnlking about the dealh of a friend NS

A. helping a cus101ner PS

fL trying to seduce someone PS

d:. expressing motherly love PD

D. criticizing someone for being late ND

A.. saying a prayer NS 8. nagging a child

NO

A. talking to a lost child PO

~ expressing deep affec-tion PS

Lt.: talking ubout one's divorce NS

n. returning faulty item 10 a slore NS

A. threnlening someone NO

JL helping a cuslomer PS

.d.: crilicizing someone for being late NO

n. talking about one's divorce NS

A. expressing jealous anger ND

11.: nagging a child NO

A. talking nbout one's wedding PO

!l:. expressing jealous anger ND


199 FA+ RS

200 FA+ RS

201 no

202 FIG

203 FA

204 BO + RS

205 FIG

206 BO + CF

207 FA+ RS

208 FIG+ RS

209 FlO+ CF

210 FIG+ CF

2ll AG

Altemntive & Quadrant


!!.:. expressing deep affec-tion PS

A. threotcning someone NO

fL expressing strong dis-like ND

A. talking about one's wedding PD

fL talking about the death of a friend NS

A •• talldng about one's - divorce NS B. talking about one's

wedding PO

Lt.: threatening Sllmeone ND

B. expressing strong dis-like NO

d.· admiring nature PO B. criticizing someone for

being late NO

.d: ordering food in a restaurant PS

B. nagging a child NO

~ expressing gratilude PS

B. threutening someone NO

A. talking ubout on.: 's wedding PO

~ saying a prayer NS

A. admiring nature PO fL talking about the death

of a friend NS

.d.: trying to seduce someone PS

B. saying a prayer NS

:1.:. talking about one's divorce NS

B. threatening someone ND

d: expressing deep affec· tion PS


DBSION AND DEVBLOPMI!NT OF 1'HE PONS 1'EST 59

Tuble 2.6. Cmllinuetl.

Test Test Segment Channel Allemutive & Quadrant Segment Channel Ahernutive &. Quudrnnt

212 BO A. saying a prayer NS 217 FA+ RS A. leaving on a trip PO fL talking about one's . !1. ordering food in a

wedding PO restaurant PS 213 FA :1: leaving on a trip PO

8. trying to seduce 218 no+ Its A. expressing strong dis-someone PS like ND

214 AG + RS A. saying a prnyer NS fl.:. talking lu a lost child

fl.: talking to a losl child PD

PD 219 RS A. expressing jenlous 215 BO + RS A. udmiring nalure PD ungcr ND

!!.: talking about one's fL. saying a prayer NS wedding PO

216 RS A. expressing jealous 220 RS A. asking forgiveness anger ND NS

!L criticizing someone for 11 expressing gratitude being htle NO PS

NOTE: llalic type indicates correct answer. FA = face; DO= body; FIG a figure (face+ body); RS = randomized spliced speech; CF "" content-filtered speech; PS = positive-submissive; PO ""' positive-dominant; NS = negative-submissive; ND "" ncgalive-dominnnl.

ITEMS IN FORTY-ITEM MALE, CHILD, AND ORIGINAL SENDER AUDIO PONS

TABLE 6.18. Items in Pony-Item Male, Child, and Original Sender Audio PONS

Item Number

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Item Number in Full PONS

160 105 62 66 33

139 I

81 J~"" t4f1 151 93

153 193 112 47 1

216 144 88 61

Item Number

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40


94 190 II 3

91 152

4 55

171 96

167 220 219 158 145 23 31

132 73 95

NOTI!: Using this table in conjunction with appendix 2E, an answer sheet and scoring key can be constructed. Instructions read to test takers should be appropriately modified from those in appendix 2F.

ITEMS IN FORTY -ITEM PHOTO BOOKLET PONS

TABLE 6.16. llems in Forty-Item Photo Booklet PONS

Item Number Item Number

Item Number in Full PONS Hem Number in Full PONS

I 5 9 42 2 8 10 43

3 14 II 45

4 15 12 51

5 16 13 52 6 18 14 S7 1 30 15 60 8 37 16 70

Table 6.16. Cmllinlll!d.

Item Number lrem Number Irem Number in Full PONS Item .Number in Full PONS

17 74 29 155 18 103 30 172 19 107 31 176 20 116 32 181 21 119 33 185 22 122 34 192 23 123 35 194 24 135 36 197 25 138 37 201 26 140 38 203 27 146 39 212 28 149 40 213

NOT£: Using this table in conjunction with appendix 2E, an answer sheet and scoring key can be constructed. Instructions read to test takers should be appropriately modified from those in appendix 2F.

ITEMS IN FORTY -ITEM FACE AND BODY PONS

TABLE 6. J 7. Items in Fony-ltem Face and Body PONS

llem Number

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20


16 15

122 185 138 119

18 60

116 213 155 57

197 135 103 181

14 43 52 8

Item Number

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Item Number in f'UII PONS

107 30

212 51

149 70

140 146 74

194 37

176 172 123 42 45

201 5

192 203

N?TE: Using this table in conjunction with appendix 2E, an answer sheet and sconng key can be constructed. Instructions read lo test takers should be appropriately modified from those in appendix 2F.

Personal identifier: -=--------- Sc_a R.t N ,__ '' E Y (your name or a code provided for the study)

------· ---------------------------------------

MiniPONS Test

In the video you will see and/or hear 64 recordings of a woman's face, body and voice. Some recordings show only the

face, or the body, or the voice (without picture), other recordings show combinations of face and voice or body and

voice.

For each recording, you should circle the description on the answer sheet (A or B) that best describes the situation you

think she is in. Some of the clips are extremely short -less than 2 seconds- so it is essential that you look up promptly

after circling your answers.

1. {!) admiring nature B. helping a customer

2. § expressing jealous anger B. threatening someone

3. A. leaving on a trip @ ordering food in a restaurant

4. A. expressing motherly love

@ nagging a child

5. A. expressing strong dislike

® helping a customer

6. ® expressing deep affection B. nagging a child

7. ·A. expressing jealous anger (9 nagging a child

8. A. expressing deep affection ® admiring nature

9. @ talking about one's wedding B. expressing deep affection

10. @ criticizing someone for being late B. talking about one's divorce

11. A. talking about the death of a friend <!) talking to a lost child

12. @ expressing jealous anger B. helping a customer

13. {A.) returning faulty item to a store Y. expressing strong dislike

14. A. expressing motherly love <!:) nagging a child

15. rn. talking about one's divorce Y. asking forgiveness

16. A. admiring nature @ asking forgiveness

17. A. saying a prayer @ talking about one's wedding

18. A. saying a prayer @ threatening someone

19. A. nagging a child @ talking to a lost child

20. {!) ordering food in a restaurant B. threatening someone

21. A. threatening someone @ expressing strong dislike

22. @ leaving on a trip B. trying to seduce someone

23. A. talking to a lost child (!) helping a customer

24. A. returning faulty item to a store @ expressing motherly Jove

25. ® ordering food in a restaurant B. expressing jealous anger

26. A. expressing jealous anger @ criticizing someone for being late

27. A. admiring nature @ saying a prayer

28. A. criticizing someone for being late @ talking about the death of a friend

JV\1 N I s Personal identifier:---------

29. {A) expressing motherly love t( threatening someone

30. (A:) asking forgiveness )(' nagging a child

31. A. expressing motherly love ® ta lking to a lost chi ld

32. ® expressing gratitude B. talking to a lost child

33.@ leaving on a trip B. saying a prayer

34. @ expressing gratitude B. expressing motherly love

35. A. expressing motherly love @ returning faulty item to a store

36. A. expressing strong dislike @ ordering food in a restaurant

37.(!) ta lking about one's divorce B. returning faulty item to a store

38. A. expressing deep affection @ talking about the death of a friend

39. (i::\ criticizing someone for being late Y. expressing gratitude

40. A. trying to seduce someone @) expressing deep affection

41. A. nagging a child ® criticizing s~meone for being late

42. A. talking about the death of a friend @ expressing jealous anger

43. A. returning faulty item to a store @ talking about the death of a friend

44. A. ta lking about one's wedding (!) expressing gratitude

45. A. returning faulty item to a store C) talking about one's divorce

46. A. leaving on a trip

® talking about one's wedding

Sc (your name or a code provided for the study)

47. (ii:. .. J returning fau lty item to a store Y. helping a customer

48. @ ordering food in a restaurant B. criticizing someone for being late

49. A. criticizing someone for being late @ expressing gratitude

SO. @ talking about one's wedding B. talking about one's divorce

51. ® trying to seduce someone B. talking to a lost chi ld

52. A. ta lking about one's wedding @ talking about the death of a friend

53. A. nagging a child @ saying a prayer

54. A. expressing deep affection @ admiring nature

55. ® talking to a lost chi ld B. expressing gratitude

56. t§ nagging a child B. talking to a lost ch ild

57. A. leaving on a trip @) expressing deep affection

58. A. expressing jealous anger @ talking to a lost child

59. A. expressing motherly love @.) criticizing someone for being late

60. ({{)... threatening someone Y. expressing strong dislike

61. A. criticizing someone for being late @) helping a customer

62. A. leaving on a t rip @ nagging a child

63. A. expressing jealous anger ® saying a prayer

64. A. return i n~ faulty item to a store ® talking about the death of a friend

THE FULL PONS

Instructions to Test Takers

The film and sound track you are about to witness was designed so that

we may learn how well people can match facial expressions, body movements,

and tone of voice to the actual situation in which the expressions, movements,

and tones originally occurred.

You will see and hear a series of audio and video segments, and for

each one you are to judge which of two real-life situations is represented

_by the segment you have just seen or heard. After each segment you will

have a short period of time in which to record your judgment.

Some of the visual segments will have no sound track. Some of the

visual segments will have a sound track, but you will not be able to under

stand the words. Instead, you will hear speech that has been changed in

various ways, so that you will be able to judge only the tone of voice in

which something was said. Some of the segments will be made up of only

these speech-altered portions of the sound track, and for these there will

be no film to watch at all. In fact, the very first segment is like this.

Each segment you will see and/or hear has been numbered on the screen,

and this number corresponds to a number on your answer sheet. Your answer

sheet lists ·two brief descriptions of everyday life situations for each

segment. One of these descriptions correctly describes the actual situation

you will see and/or hear, while the other description does ~ describe the

situation accurately. For each numbered segment, please circle the letter

! or ~ next to the situation you believe to correspond to the segment you have just seen and/or hea:rd.

When you see a ~umber appear on the screen, please find the correspond

ing number on your answer sheet and place your finger just in front of the

number, to keep your place. Watch and/or listen to the segment that follows

the number, and as soon as the segment ends, circle the letter ! or ~ corresponding to the situation you believe .the segment to have been based upon.

•••• ,_._ .... _ ·-· ")1 ................. ••

Then look to the screen again promptly to find the next number flashed on

the screen.

Many of the choices will be difficult, but you should choose one of

the descriptions even though you may feel quite uncertain about the correct

answer. Choose the more likely description for each segment even if you

feel you might be guessing. Your guesses may be much more accurate than

you imagine. In fact, we request that you do not change any answers once

you have made a choice. For every segment, then, do the best you can to

judge accurately the situation upon which each segment is based. Your

answer sheet contains a sample answer, which you should look at now.

All ready to start? Now we will begin.

39

Scene 1. A. B.

Scene 2. A. B.

Scene 3. A. B.

Scene 4. A. B.

Scene· 5. A. B.

Scene 6. A. B.

Scene 7. A. B.

Scene a. A. B.

Scene 9. A. B.

Scene 10. A. B.

Scene 11. A. B.

Scene 12. A. B.

Scene 13. A. B.

Scene 14. A. B.

Scene 15. A. B.

Scene 16. A. B.

Scene 17. A. B.

NONVERBAL CQMMUNICATION

Name ------------------------------- Present address -----------------------

Town and country of birth ------------------------ Age---- Sex_

Primary language spoken --------------- Secondary language spoken ---------

Father's occupation ------------------Mother's occupation ----------------

Field of study -------------- Average grade in last year of school ---------

INSTRUCTIONS:

SAMPLE ANSWER:

Please circle the letter (A or B) next to the label which best describes the scene you have just seen and/or beard.

Scene 1. ~ admiring a baby ~ applying for a job

expressing jealous anger Scene 18. A. nagging a child talking to a lost child B. criticizing someone for being late

talking to a lost child Scene 19. A. asking forgiveness admiring nature B. leaving on a trip

talking about the death of a friend Scene 20. A. expressing gratitude talking to a lost child B. leaving on a trip

leaving on a trip Scene 21. A. leaving on a trip saying a prayer B. returning faulty item to a store

criticizing someone for being late Scene 22. A. returning faulty item to a store expressing gratitude B. talking about one's divorce

helping a customer Scene 23. A. expressing jealous anfer expressing gratitude B. talking about one's d vorce

criticizing someone for being late Scene 24. A. talking about the death of a friend leaving on a trip B. threatening someone

talking about one's wedding Scene 25. A. expressing deep affection expressing gratitude B. saying a prayer

helping a customer Scene 26. A. expressing deep affection talking about one's divorce B. trying to seduce someone

talking about the death of a friend Scene 27. A. nagging a child trying to seduce someone B. expressing motherly love talking to a lost child Scene 28. A. leaving on a trip helping a customer B. ordering food in a restaurant admiring nature Scene 29. A. helping a customer expressing motherly love B. expressing jealous anger expressing deep affection Scene 30. A. criticizing someone for being late nagging a child B. expressing gratitude expressing motherly love Scene 31. A. threatening someone asking forgiveness B. talking about one's wedding admiring nature Scene 32. A. admiring nature helping a customer B. expressing strong dislike admiring nature Scene 33. A. ordering food in a restaurant saying a prayer B. criticizing someone for being late nagging a child Scene 34. A. leaving on a trip admiring nature B. talking about one's wedding

2

Scene 35. A. talking to a lost child expressing strong dislike B.

Scene 36. A. trying to seduce someone expressing jealous anger B.

Scene 37. A. expressing strong dislike expressing deep affection B.

Scene 38. A. leaving on a trip threatening someone B.

Scene 39. A. expressing deep affection B. talking about the death of a friend

Scene 40. A. talking to a lost child B. criticizing someone for being late

Scene 41. A. ordering food in a restaurant expressing gratitude B.

Scene 42. A. B.

Scene 43. A. B.

Scene 44. A. B.

Scene 45. A. B.

Scene 46. A. B.

Scene 47. A. B.

Scene 48. A. B.

Scene 49. A. B.

Scene 50. A. B.

Scene 51. A. B.

Scene 52. A. B.

Scene 53. A. B.

Scene 54. A. B.

Scene 55. A. B.

Scene 56. A. B.

Scene 57. A. B.

Scene 58. A. B.

Scene 59. A. B.

Scene 60. A. B.

Scene 61. A. B.

Scene 62. A. B.

Scene 63. A. B.

Scene 64. A. B.

Scene 65. A. B.

expressing motherly love threatening someone

expressing strong dislike ordering food in a restaurant

expressing motherly love talking to a lost child

expressing deep affection nagging a child

asking forgiveness saying a prayer

expressing motherly love helping a customer

admiring nature expressing strong dislike

expressing motherly love leaving on a trip

talking about one's divorce ordering food in a restaurant

asking forgiveness nagging a child

admiring nature expressing motherly love

returning faulty item to a store criticizing someone for being late

talking about one's wedding expressing deep affection


admiring nature ordering food in a restaurant

returning faulty item to a store helping a customer

expressing strong dislike expressing gratitude

expressing deep affection expressing gratitude

saying a prayer threatening someone

saying a prayer ordering food in a restaurant

admiring nature asking forgiveness

talking to a lost child expressing gratitude

talking about one's wedding saying a prayer

talking to a lost child threatening someone

I Scene 66.

I Scene 67.

1 Scene 68.

Scene 69.

Scene 70.

Scene 71.

Scene 72.

Scene i3.

Scene 74.

Scene 75.

Scene 76.

Scene 77.

Scene 78.

Scene 79.

Scene 80.

Scene 81.

Scene 82.

Scene 83.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

Scene 84. A. B.

Scene 85. A.

Scene 86.

Scene 87.

Scene 88.

Scene 89.

Scene 90.

Scene 91.

Scene 92.

Scene 93.

Scene 94.

Scene 95.

Scene 96.

B.

A. B. A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

expressing motherly love nagging a child

expressing motherly love returning faulty item to a store

expressing gratitude e~pressing strong dislike

expressing strong dislike talk~g about one's wedding

helping a customer asking forgiveness

threatening someone expressing motherly love

nagging a child talking to a lost child

talking to a lost child criticizing someone for being late

talking about one's divorce trying to seduce someone

expressing jealous anger helping a customer

talking about one's divorce expressing deep affection

expressing gratitude talking to a lost child

expressing deep affection asking forgiveness

threatening someone nagging a child

talking about the death of a friend trying to seduce someone

talking about one 1s wedding talking about one's divorce

trying to seduce someone criticizing someone for being late

helping a customer admiring nature

returning faulty item to a store nagging a child

nagging a child leaving on a trip

talking about one's wedding admiring nature criticizing someone for being late expressing deep affection

admiring nature returning faulty item to a store

asking forgiveness expressing strong dislike

expressing motherly love helping a customer

asking forgiveness leaving on a trip

criticizing someone for being late helping a customer

talking about one's wedding threatening someone

expressing motherly love nagging a child

expressing motherly love expressing gratitude

talking about one's divorce trying to seduce someone

Scene 97. A. expressing jealous anger Scene 128. A. B. asking forgiveness B.

Scene 98. A. expressing motherly love scene 129. A. B. criticizing someone for being late B.

expressing deep affection admiring nature

talking to a lost child admiring nature

3

Scene 99. A. talking about one's wedding Scene 130. A. B. talking about the death of a friend B. returning faulty item to a store

talking about the death of a friend

Scene 100. A. expressing strong dislike Scene 131. A. B. asking forgiveness B. talking about one's wedding

returning faulty item to a store

Scene 101. A. saying a prayer scene 132. A. B. helping a customer B. admiring nature

leaving on a trip

Scene 102. A. nagging a child Scene 133. A. B. leaving on a trip B.

asking forgiveness helping a customer

Scene 103. A. talking about one's divorce scene 134. A. B. asking forgiveness B.


Scene 104. A. ordering food in a restaurant Scene 135. A. B. expressing jealous anger B.

returning faulty item to a store talking about the death of a friend

Scene 105. A. criticizing someone for being late Scene 136. A. B. talking about the death of a friend B.

expressing deep affection saying a prayer

Scene 106. A. talking about the death of a friend Scene 137. A. saying a prayer B. ordering food in a restaurant B. criticizing someone for being late

Scene 107. A. leaving on a trip B. nagging a child

Scene 108. A. B.

Scene 109. A. B.

saying a prayer talking about one's divorce

expressing strong dislike trying to seduce someone

Scene 110. A. ordering food in a restaurant B. asking forgiveness

Scene 111. A. talking about one's wedding B. leaving on a trip

Scene 112. A. expressing deep affection B. admiring nature

Scene 113. A. expressing jealous anger B. criticizing someone for being late

Scene 114. A. talking about one's divorce B. threatening someone

Scene 115. A. expressing strong dislike B. returning faulty item to a store

Scene 116. A. ordering food in a restaurant B. threatening someone

Scene 117. A. talking to a lost child B. criticizing someone for being late

Scene 118. A. admiring nature B. nagging a child

Scene 119. A. expressing strong dislik~ B. helping a customer

Scene 120. A. talking about one's wedding B. ordering food in a restaurant

Scene 121. A. expressing gratitude B. expressing motherly love

Scene 122. A. leaving on a trip B. expressing deep affection

Scene 123. A. nagging a child B. talking to a lost child

Scene 124. A. returning faulty item to a store B. expressing motherly love

Scene 125. A. talking about one's divorce B. admiring nature

Scene 126. A. expressing deep affection B. talking about the death of a friend

Scene 127. A. talking about one's divorce B. admiring nature

Scene 138. A. talking about one's wedding B. talking about one's divorce

Scene 139. A. B.

Scene 140. A. B.

Scene 141. A. B.

Scene 142. A. B.

Scene 143. A. B.

Scene 144. A. B.

Scene 145. A. B.

Scene 146. A. B.

Scene 147. A. B.

Scene 148. A. B.

expressing gratitude expressing motherly love

expressing jealous anger threatening someone

asking forgiveness expressing motherly love

admiring nature ordering food in a restaurant

expressing motherly love expressing jealous anger

expressing jealous anger helping a customer

ordering food in a restaurant returning faulty item to a store

talking about one's divorce leaving on a trip

nagging a child saying a prayer

trying to seduce someone criticizing someone for being late


Scene 150. A. talking about the death of a friend B. expressing motherly love

Scene 151. A. expressing gratitude B. expressing strong dislike

Scene 152. A. expressing deep affection B. returning faulty item to a store

Scene 153. A. expressing gratitude B. threatening someone

Scene 154. A. leaving on a trip B. talking to a lost child

Scene 155. A. talking about the death of a friend B. expressing jealous anger

Scene 156. A. helping a customer B. expressing gratitude

Scene 157. A. asking forgiveness B. saying a prayer

Scene 158. A. trying to seduce someone B. expressing gratitude

4

Scene 159.

Scene 160.

Scene 161.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

expressing jealous anger saying a prayer

criticizing someone for being late helping a customer

expressing strong dislike expressing deep affection

Scene 190. A. B.

Scene 191. A. B.

Scene 192. A. B.

helping a ·customer trying to seduce someone

expressing motherly love criticizing someone for being late

saying a prayer nagging a child

Scene 162. A. expressing deep affection Scene 193. A. talking about the death of a friend B.

talking to a lost child expressing deep affection B.

Scene 163. A. returning faulty item to a store B. leaving on a trip

Scene 164. A. expressing gratitude B. expressing jealous anger

Scene 165. A. talking about one's wedding B. trying to seduce someone

Scene 166. A. talking to a lost child B. expressing jealous anger

Scene 167.

Scene 168.

Scene 169.

Scene 170.

Scene 171.

Scene 172.

Scene 173.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

talking to a lost child talking about the death of a friend

talking about one's divorce asking forgiveness

trying to seduce someone threatening someone

expressing gratitude expressing jealous anger

talking about one's wedding criticizing someone for being late

returning faulty item to store expressing strong dislike

expressing gratitude talking to a lost child

Scene 174. A. expressing gratitude B. returning faulty item to store

Scene 175. A. expressing motherly love B. criticizing someone for being late

Scene 176. A. B.

ordering food in a restaurant expressing jealous anger

Scene 194. A. talking about one's divorce B. returning faulty item to a store

Scene 195. A. threatening someone B. helping a customer

Scene 196. A. criticizing someone for being late B. talking about one's divorce

Scene 197. A. expressing jealous anger

Scene 198.

Scene 199.

Scene 200.

Scene 2.01.

Scene 202.

Scene 203.

Scene 204.

B. nagging a child

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

A. B.

talking about one's wedding expressing jealous anger

trying to seduce someone expressing deep affection

threatening someone expressing strong dislike

talking about one's wedding talking about the death of a friend

talking about one's divorce talking about one's wedding

threatening someone expressing strong dislike

admiring nature criticizing someone for being late

Scene 205. A. ordering food in a restaurant B. nagging a child

Scene 2.06. A. expressing gratitude B. threatening someone

Scene 207. A. B.

talking about one's wedding saying a prayer

Scene 177. A. expressing gratitude Scene 208. A. admiring nature talking about the death of a friend B. returning faulty item to a store B.

Scene 178. A. expressing strong dislike Scene 209. A. B. talking about one's divorce B.

trying to seduce someone saying a prayer

Scene 179. A. talking about one's divorce Scene 210. A. B. talking about the death of a friend B.

talking about one's divorce threatening someone

Scene 180. A. ordering food in a restaurant B. returning faulty item to a store

Scene 181. A. expressing motherly love B. talking to a lost child

Scene 182. A. trying to seduce someone B. talking about one's wedding

Scene 183. A. leaving on a trip B. trying to seduce someone

Scene 2.11. A. expressing deep affection B. trying to seduce someone

Scene 212.. A. saying a prayer B. talking about one's wedding

Scene 2.13. A. leaving on a trip B. trying to seduce someone

Scene 214. A. saying a prayer B. talking to a lost child

Scene 184. A. talking about the death of a friend Scene B. asking forgiveness 215. A. admiring nature

Scene 185. A. trying to seduce someone B. talking to a lost child

Scene 186. A. expressing motherly love B. ordering food in a restaurant

Scene 187. A. saying a prayer B. expressing jealous anger

B. talking about one's wedding

Scene 216. A. expressing jealous anger B. criticizing someone for being late

Scene 217. A. leaving on a trip B. ordering food in a restaurant

Scene 218. A. expressing strong dislike B. talking to a lost child

Scene 188. A. B.

trying to seduce someone talking about the death of a friend Scene 219 • A.

B. expressing jealous anger saying a prayer

Scene 189. A. B.

ordering food in a restaurant talking about the death of a friend Scene 220 • A.

B. asking forgiveness expressing gratitude

PONS VIDEO 40 lEST Name: ~----~-----------------Instructions: Please circle the letter (A or B) next to the label which best describes the

scene you have.just seen.

Scene 1. A. admiring nature B. saying a prayer

Scene 2. A. admiring nature B. helping a customer

Scene 3. A. leaving on a trip B. expressing deep affection

Scene 4. A. trying to seduce someone B. talking to a lost child

Scene· 5. A. talking about one's wedding B. talking about one's divorce

Scene 6. . A. expressing strong dislike B. helping a customer

Scene 7. A. nagging a child B. criticizing someone for being late

. Scene 8. A. saying a pr~yer B. threatening someone

Scene 9. A. ordering food in a restaurant B. threatening someone

Scene 1 0. A. leaving on a trip · B. trying to seduce someone

Scene 11. A talking about the death of a friend B. expressing jealous anger

Scene ·12. A. returning a faulty item to a store B. helping a customer

Scene 13. A. expressing jealo\15 anger B. nagging a child

. Scene 14. A. returning a faulty item to a store B. tal~g about the death of a friend

Scene 15. A. talking about one's divorce B. asking forgiveness

Scene 16. A. expressing motherly love B. talking to a lost child

Scene 17. A. expressing motherly love B. asking for forgiveness

Scene 18. A. expressing strong dislike B. ordering food in a restaurant

Scene 19. A. .admiring nature B. expressing motherly love

Scene 20. A. talking about one's. wedding B. expressing gratitude

Scene 21. A. leaving on a trip B. nagging a child

Scene 22. A. criticizing someone for being late B. expressing gratitude

Scene 23. A. saying a prayer · B. talking about one's wedding

Scene 24. A. asking forgiveness · B. nagging a child ·


Scene 26. A. helping a customer B. asking forgiveness

Scene 27. A. expressing jealous anger B. threatening someone

Scene 28. ·A. talldng about one's divorce B. leaving on a trip

Scene 29. A. talking about one's divorce B. trying to seduce someone

Scene 30. A. talking about one's divorce B. returning a faulty item to the store

Scene 31. A. expressing strong dislike · B. expressing deep affection .

Scene 32. A. ordering food in a restaurant B. expressing jealous anger

Scene 33. A. returning a faulty item to the store . B. expressuig s~ong dislike

Scene 34. A. nagging a child B. talking to a lost child .

Scene 35. A. expressing motherly love B. threatening someone

Scene 36. A. expressing deep affection B. nagging a chil~

Scene 37. A. talking about one's wedding B. talking about the death of a friend

Scene 38. A. criticizing someone for being late B. expressing gratitude

Scene 39. A. saying a prayer B. nagging a child

Scene 40. A. threatening someone B. expressing strong dislike

PONS AUDIO 40

INSriWCTIONS; Please clrct.e the letter (A or_ B) next to the label whteh best · describes the.scene yo~ have just heard,

I • ::

t. A. criticizing lomeon• for beint l1to a. hetplng a c~stomer

2. A. criticizing someone for belnt 1ate a. talking •bout the deeth of • friend

J, A. admlrlftJ nat~r• 1. atklnt orglvenes•

~. A. •~presslnt motherly love I. naatlnt a child

5. A. orderlnt fOod In Q restaur•nt 1. crltlclzlnt someone for being

. -· A. expres~lng gratitude · · 1 • .-pressing motherly love

7. A. expressing Jealous anger I. talking to 1 lost child

8. A. t1lklng about one's wedding 1. t•1klng about one's divorce

9. A. naggtng a child I. saying a prayer

10. A.'expresslng gr•tltude . 8. exPressing strong dislike

11. A. talking about on••• wedding 1. threatening someone

I

12. A, o~~ressfng gratitude . I. thrett•nlnt &emeone

1). A. t1lkfng to a lost ch1ld . B. ••pressing deep affection

14. A. expressing deep affection 1. admiring nature

' 15. A. expressing motherly love I. helping • customer

1,, A. criticizing someone for being \ B. 1eavfng on • trip . I

17. A. expres•lng ·Jealous anger' . " I, c:rltlclztng someone for being

14. A •• _,reis1ng jealous ~ngcr I. helping I CUStO!r.er

~

19. A. admiring naturo

late

late

f •• returnrnv faulty Item to a 1tOre

to. A. s•y~ns • prayer ' I. ordering food In a restaurant

21. A. •~P ress. r ng moth«-' r 1 y love ~· neg$1ng 1 child

22. A. he1p1ng a cus~emer . B. trying to seduce &omeone

23. A. talking to a lost child I. helping 1 eustom6r ·.

2~. A. talking about the death ol 1 frlen

a. talking to a lost ch11d

25, A. asking forgiveness B.- 1eav1ng on a trip

26. A. express1ni deep affe~tlcn a. returning faulty Item to a store

27. A. leaving on a. trip B. saying a prayer

28. A. ·expressing strorig dtsllke e. ordering food In • resteuront

29. A. talking about one'• ~ddlng a. erltielzfng someone for being late

I

30. A. talking about one•s divorce B. trying to seduce someone

3J. A. talking to a lost child B. telklng about ·the death of a frlen•

32. A. asking forgiveness B. expressing gratitude

33. A. expressfng Jealous enger a. seyln~ a prayer·

3~. A. try1ng to seduce someone a. expressing gratitude . .

)5. A, ordering food In a rest1urant a. returning faulty Jtem to. store

36. A. express~ng jealous anger 8. talking about one's divorce

37. A • threatening someone 8, talking about one's wedding

38. /A •• a"mirln; nature B. Jeavlng on ~ trip

39. A. talking to a lost child 8. criticizing ~omeone for befng tate

40. A. expressing nh>therly Jove B. expressing gr•tltude

Personal identifier:--------- (your name or a code provided for the study)

MiniPONS Test

In the video you will see and/or hear 64 recordings of a woman's face, body and voice. Some recordings show only the

face, or the body, or the voice (without picture}, other recordings show combinations of face and voice or body and

voice.

For each recording, you should circle the description on the answer sheet (A or B) that best describes the situation you

think she is in. Some of the clips are extremely short -less than 2 seconds- so it is essential that you look up promptly

after circling your answers.

1. A. admiring nature 15. A. talking about one's. divorce B. helping a customer B. asking forgiveness

2. A. expressing jealous anger 16. A. admiring nature B. threatening someone B. asking forgiveness

3. A. leaving on a trip 17. A. saying a prayer B. ordering food in a restaurant B. talking about one's wedding

4. A. expressing motherly love 18. A. saying a prayer B. nagging a child B. threatening someone

5. A. expressing strong dislike 19. A. nagging a child B. helping a customer B. talking to a lost child

6. A. expressing deep affection 20. A. ordering food in a restaurant B. nagging a child B. threatening someone

7. A. expressing jealous anger 21. A. threatening someone B. nagging a child B. expressing strong dislike

8. A. expressing deep affection 22. A. leaving on a trip B. admiring nature B. trying to seduce someone

9. A. talking about one's wedding 23. A. talking to a lost child B. expressing deep affection B. helping a customer

10. A. criticizing someone for being late 24. A. returning faulty item to a store B. talking about one's divorce B. expressing motherly love

11. A. talking about the death of a friend 25. A. ordering food in a restaurant B. talking to a lost child B. expressing jealous anger

12. A. expressing jealous anger 26. A. expressing jealous anger B. helping a customer B. criticizing someone for being late

13. A. returning faulty item to a store 27. A. admiring nature B. expressing strong dislike B. saying a prayer

14. A. expressing motherly love 28. A. criticizing someone for being late B. nagging a child B. talking about the death of a friend

Personal identifier: (your name or a code provided for the study)

-------------------------29. A. expressing motherly love 47. A. returning faulty item to a store

B. threatening someone B. helping a customer

30. A. asking forgiveness 48. A. ordering food in a restaurant B. nagging a child B. criticizing someone for being late

31. A. expressing motherly love 49. A. criticizing someone for being late B. talking to a lost child B. expressing gratitude

32. A. expressing gratitude so. A. talking about one's wedding B. talking to a lost child B. talking about one's divorce

33. A. leaving on a trip 51. A. trying to seduce someone B. saying a prayer B. talking to a lost child

34. A. expressing gratitude 52. A. talking about one's wedding B. expressing motherly love B. talking about the death of a friend

35. A. expressing motherly love 53. A. nagging a child B. returning faulty item to a store B. saying a prayer

36. A. expressing strong dislike 54. A. expressing deep affection B. ordering food in a restaurant B. admiring nature

37. A. talking about one's divorce 55. A. talking to a lost child B. returning faulty item to a store B. expressing gratitude

38. A. expressing deep affection 56. A. nagging a child B. talking about the death of a friend B. talking to a lost child

39. A. criticizing someone for being late 57. A. leaving on a trip B. expressing gratitude B. expressing deep affection

40. A. trying to seduce someone 58. A. expressing jealous anger B. expressing deep affection B. talking to a lost child

41. A. nagging a child 59. A. expressing motherly love B. criticizing someone for being late B. criticizing someone for being late

42. A. talking about the death of a friend 60. A. threatening someone B. expressing jealous anger B. expressing strong dislike

43. A. returning faulty item to a store 61. A. criticizing someone for being late B. talking about the death of a friend B. helping a customer

44. A. talking about one's wedding 62. A. leaving on a trip B. expressing gratitude B. nagging a child

45. A. returning faulty item to a store 63. A. expressing jealous anger B. talking about one's divorce B. saying a prayer

46. A. leaving on a trip 64. A. returning faulty item to a store B. talking about one's wedding B. talking about the death of a friend

PROFILE OF NONVERBAL SENSITIVITY

Still version: 40 items

Copyright 1974 by Robert Rosenthal, Dane Archer, M. Robin DiMatteo, Judith H. I<oivumaki, and Peter L. Rogers .

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10

11 12

13 14

15 16

17 18

19 20

21 22

23 24

25 26

27 28

29 30

31 32

33 34

35 36

37 38

39 40

CHAPrER IV

INTERPRETING PERFORMANCE

After any of the PONS measures has been scored it can be interpreted

in terms of relative performance by comparing the scores to those obtained

by a suitable norm group. In the case of the 220-item full PONS, the

appropriate norm group is comprised of several hundred high school students.

Their average performance·was the basis_for the development of the two

profile sheets that appear below. For each channel score, pooled channel

score, type of scene score, or total, the obtained score is circled on

the profile sheet in the appropriate column. For example, if the obtained

score on the Face channel were 17, that number would be circled in the

first column. Then, reading to the left margin from the circled 17 would

indicate that a score of 17 exceeds 69% of the members of the norm group

on that channel. When the score earned in each column is circled and the

circles are connected 9Y a line, a profile is formed; it describes the per

formance of the person tested. Inspection of the high and low points of

the profile show that person's relative strengths and weaknesses in ability

to decode various channels of nonverbal cues.

An analogous profile sheet developed·for the Nonverbal Piscrepancy·

Test also appears below.

Provisional Norms

The norm groups for the shorter forms of the PONS tend to be smaller

and so only provisional norms have been provided.

Female Sender Audio PONS

~ _!!__

RS 13.0 1.9 CF 1.).8 1.8 Total 26.8 2.6 Sample: 119 high school students

77

· .. ;.:·.

..

~ .,

Male Sender Au:lio PONS

Mean _!!_

RS 12.6 1.8 CF 12.2 2·.o

Total 24.8 2·7 Sample a 119 high school students

' Face and Body PONS

Mean ~ Face 15.6 1.7 Body 15·2 1.9 Total 30.8 2.7 Sample a 92 teachers in training

78

· ......... . . · .. :. :~:· .. . . ~ . :· ... . . . . .... ·::.·· ..

99.9-

99.4-

97.7-

93.3-

84.1-

C/) 69 .2-

w -I

~ z 50.0-w (.) a: w Q,

30.8-

15.9-

6.7-

2.3-

0.6-

0 .1-

PROFILE OF NONVERBAL SENSITIVITY : STA NDA RD SCORING SHEET Channel Scores and Total

Face Body

20-20-

19-

19-

18-

18-

17-

17-

16-

16-15-

15- 14-

14- 13-

12-13-

11 -

12-

10-

11 -

CHANNELS: Face Body ( 1) (2)

• AS= Randomized Spliced Voice

Face &

Body ( ) Fi~ ure

20-

19-

18-

17-

16-

15-

14-

13-

12-

Face &

Body (Figure)

(3)

Rs•

18-

17-

16-

15-

14-

13-

12-

1 1-

10-

9-

8 -

RS• (4)

• •CF=Eiectronically Content-Filtered Voice

CF ..

18-

17-

16-

15-

14-

13-

12-

11-

10-

9-

8-

7 -

CF• • (5)

Face & RS

20-

19-

18-

17-

16-

15-

14-

13-

Face & RS (6)

Face &

CF

20-

19-

Body & s R

20-

19-

18-

18-f---17

16-17-

15-

16-

14-

15-

13-

14-

12-

13-11-

12- 10-

Face Body & &

CF RS (7) (8)

Body & c F

20-

19-

18-

17-

16-

15-

14-

13-

12-

11 -

10-

9-

Body & CF (9)

Figure Figure & & RS c F

20

20 -19-

-·-19

18-

18-

17-17

16- 16-

15-15-

14-

14-

13

13-12-

F1gure F1gure & & RS CF

(10) ( 11)

COPVriQht 1972 bv Robert Rosentha l . Oano Archor . Judith Kn iv umnk l nnrl PAt Ar I RnnAr~ r.:~~rnhrlrln~ MAuArhllcAtt c

TOTAL

200-

195

190-

185-

..

180-

175-

170

165-

160-

155-

150-

145

140-

135-

TOTAL (12)

0 -l I m ::D

z 'TI 0 ::D s: )> -l 0 z

C) ::D 0 c -o

C) ::D 0 c -o ::tt:

z II

r 0 0 )> -l 0 z

z )> s: m

c z -l =!:1::

)> C) m

(/)

m X

0 )> -l m -l m (/)

-l m 0

99.9

99.4-

97.7-

93.3-

84.1

69.2-Cl) w ..J

~ z 50.0 w .... u ih a:

w Q.

30.8-

15.9

,. 6.7-

2.3

0.6-

0.1-

PROFILE OF NONVERBAL SENSITIVITY: STANDARD SCORING SHEET

Pooled Channels and Type of Scene

_Tone Only

33-

32-

31-

30-

29-

28-

27-

26-

25.

24

23

22-

21-

20-

19-

18-

17-

16-

RS CF

77-

74-

75-

72-

73-

70-

71-

68-

69.

66-

67

G4

65· 62

63-60

61--58

59-56-

57-54.

55· 52

53--50--

51-48-

49-46-

47-44-

POOLED 40 80 80

CHANNELS: Tone Rs• CF .. only

• AS .. Randomized Spliced Voice .. CF•Eiectronlcally Content Filtered Voice

FA

60-

58-

56

--- -54

52-

50

48-

4G

44

42--

40-·

38-

60 Face

80 FIG

58-

56-

60-

54-

58

52

56-

50

---·- ,___ -54 -··

48

52 46

50 44.

48 42.

46

Video Only

60-

50-

56

54-

52·

50

48

46

44

40 f----1----·- --· 42·

44 38-

40

36 42

38 ..

34- 40-

36-

32- 38-

34-

60 60 60 Body Figure Video

Only

TYPE OF

SCENE:

Pos &

Sub

51-

49-

47-

45--

43

41

39

37-

35.

33-

31-

29-

i = ~~~'I 1-·;; E 'II .a ta IR

Pos &

Dom

51-

49--

47-

45-

43

41.

39

37

35

33·-

31--

29-

"a c Ill c I ! :E ·e l~ tR

Neg &

Sub

55-

53.

Neg &

Dom

51- ~55-1---

54-

49-

!:;2-47

45· 50-

43 48.

41··

46-

39

44-

37·

42-35-

33- 40-

31- 38--

29- 36-

"a "a c • c II liiJo II .. .I :1 Cl c

.!: I! .. E i ·e !.a zci Cl 0

ZQ

18 IR Copyright 1972 by Robert Rosenthal, Dono Archer, Judith Kolvumakl, and Peter L. Rogers, CombrldQO, Mossochusetts.

0 0 -f )> J: -f m m :0

z , 0 :D 3: )>

::! 0 z

r-0 n )>

::! 0 z

C) :D 0 c "0

C) :0 0 c "0

·1t-

z

z )> :5::: m

c z -f :ft.

I )> C) m

(/) m X

KEY (numbers refer to number of scenes included): 40 Tone only .. 20 RS only + 20 CF only 80 RS .. 20 RS only, 20 FA+ RS, 20 80 + RS,

and 20 FIG+ RS 80 CF .. 20 CF only, 20 FA+ CF, 20 80 + CF,

and 20 FIG + CF 60 FACE .. 20 FA only, 20 FA+ RS, and 20 FA+ CF 60 BODY a 20 80 only, 20 80 + RS, and 20 80 + CF 60 FIGURE a 20 FIG only, 20 FIG+ RS, and 20 FIG+ CF 60 Video only .. 20 FA only, 20 80 only, and 20 FIG only

testul pons manual

Documents

pons test baltimore

pons channels

pons photos

monograph sensitivity

nonverbal communication

manual introduction

use of context

relevant information