Observing Communication in Public

Hello, again! Today I will be describing the insights I made while people watching at OSU’s union. People watching, a socially acceptable form of being creepy, allowed me to observe how people communicate in a natural setting. My blog post will mostly focus on nonverbal communication, because it was difficult to eavesdrop on conversations that weren’t taking place immediately next to me. I switched locations in the union throughout the exercise to change up the people I was viewing. That being said, let’s dive in to the juicy stuff!

I started in the main floor of the union, and there I was able to observe mostly foot traffic and people studying. The people studying all had a similar set-up. They had a laptop or iPad pulled out and headphones in. The nonverbal communication was very clear that they did not want to be disturbed and were therefore tuning out the rest of the union. However, I did think it was interesting to see who was truly invested in studying and who was searching for an excuse to stop. People who really wanted to study kept their focus on the task the entire time, but those who were seeking something else continually got distracted by other noises, people walking past, and something on their phone. They would then spend a couple seconds looking around the room before returning to their work. The only person who was alone and without an electronic device was an elderly man sitting in a wheel chair people watching as well. It made me consider how the generation gap affects a person’s ability to be alone. He seemed perfectly content to sit and be alone and quiet. Meanwhile, every other person who was alone was connected to a device. This was especially evident when I moved into what I consider to be more social area – the dining tables.

In the union dining area, everyone who was eating alone was looking at their phone. It felt very similar to the union main floor, except there were more groups of people interacting. The first group I decided to analyze was a group of three girls, with two sitting next to each other and one across. The single girl across was dominating the conversation – I don’t think she stopped talking the entire time I was observing them. What was really interesting about the encounter was that the other two girls were on their phones. When I first saw this, I thought “well it doesn’t seem like the phones are inhibiting the conversation” but as I watched longer, I realized it was a nonverbal cue that the two girls were uninterested in what their third friend had to say. The two girls sitting next to each other also angled their bodies toward each other and away from the third friend, and when they spoke, they spoke to each other, often over the third friend’s chatter. I found their dynamic to be the most interesting, because they were giving very solid cues to their friend that they wanted her to stop talking, but her lack of awareness caused her to not pick up on the cues. An instance where use of the phone did halt conversation was taking place nearby. A boy and a girl were standing facing each other, carrying on a long conversation, when he pulled out his phone. As soon as his attention was no longer on his companion, her body language changed. She began to angle her body away from him and started looking around more – less invested in her companion. That being said, the use of a phone in one couple did not seem to hinder the conversation, but the difference was that they were using the phone together.  They were close together with their heads bent down over the screen. So, it appears that the technology does not always hinder communication between people, so long as they are experiencing it together.

I also watched two instances of communication without technology, with similar reactions. A set of girls sat across from each other, and they seemed to be really invested in their conversation. They both made lots of hand gestures and nodded enthusiastically when the other was speaking. They also both leaned closer to the table to be closer to each other. A very different interaction was occurring at the table next to them though. A boy and girl were sitting across from each other and eating, but absolutely no conversation took place. The girl looked down at her food, and the boy looked out toward the window. As they began to finish their meals, some conversation began to take place, but only the boy seemed enthusiastic to be talking to her. He leaned forward with his hands on the table and looked directly at her. However, she leaned back with her hands in her lap and looked down – not directly at him. And, to tie into my theory that people who are alone need technology, even though little conversation took place when they were together, as soon as she got up to leave, he pulled out his phone. Suddenly, when he was alone, he needed to be invested in his phone. While I was watching all of this go down, I saw a tour group out the window, and moved to get a better look at their dynamic.

Let me just say, I love tour groups. I think they are absolutely hilarious and awkward, and every tour group seems to be comprised of the same types of people. I’ve been going on college tours since I was 12, because of my older siblings, so let’s just say I’m well versed in the art of the tour group, and OSU was not an exception. The students are quite the paradox, because they are obviously uncomfortable around a group of strangers, so they stick near their families, but they are also embarrassed to be with their families around their peers and older college students. As a result, there were a lot of hands in pockets and crossed arms, and when they were walking they either walked a little in front of their parents or a little behind. When the tour guides stop to talk, the students who are embarrassed to be there rarely watch the tour guide. Instead, they were turning their heads to looks almost anywhere else as a sort of escapism. Meanwhile, the parents seem to hang on to everything the tour guides say, watching each hand gesture they make, and the tour guides make a LOT of hand gestures. The tour guides all have very similar body language, and it is all very open and confident yet casual. They make a lot of emphatic hand gestures, make eye contact, and keep their stances very open. It makes sense that OSU would hire students like this for tour guides, because they are the first impression people get of the university, so they want it to be a positive one.

Alas, that was the extent of my 30 minutes of observation, but I think I learned some interesting themes throughout communication. Technology more often than not is used as a cue that a person is not interested in starting a conversation or listening to a current conversation. It is also used in the place of companionship when a person is alone, but that seems to be mostly for the younger generations. Also, where a person’s eyes are focused, how their body is angled, and what they do with their arms and hands are very indicative of their interest in a person or conversation. I enjoyed people watching quite a bit, and I think it has made me aware of how I may appear to others through my use of technology and my nonverbal cues.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *