Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Abstract
The thesis aims to investigate verbal and nonverbal clues and how they influence individuals perceptions. The artifact chosen for the analysis is Matthew McConaugheys 2014 Best Actor award speech for two reasons. First and foremost, Matthew McConaughey is one of the most charming and intriguing persons to watch and listen to, whether he is acting or delivering a speech. Second, it is critical to determine if charisma is innate or can be learned. Charisma is one of the few scientific words from the social sciences that have gained widespread acceptance. It is most commonly used to describe the personal magnetism of celebrities, athletes, politicians, and other renowned figures. Therefore, the study identifies verbal and nonverbal clues and characteristics that make the performer so fascinating to watch. The research also explains what distinct verbal and nonverbal clues signify. Additionally, it examines Matthew McConaugheys body language and speech script to demonstrate to the reader what messages charismatic people send.
It is critical to learn the genuine concept of charisma in order to comprehend how it is delivered via verbal and nonverbal cues. The research provides general information about charisma from various sources, such as definitions, components, types, and attributes. Charisma is a trait that may be noticed in how a person connects with people and becomes more convincing and attractive. This capacity to capture attention and influence others may be seen in how people sound, say, and appear when communicating. The research question is How does Matthew McConaughey communicate charisma through verbal and nonverbal cues in the winning Best Actor speech? The study presents charisma and verbal and nonverbal cues, introduces the artifact, describes the methodology and application, and concludes findings.
Introduction
Charisma
Charisma is one of the few scientific terms from the social sciences that has entered everyday use. It is most frequently used to define the personal magnetism of celebrities, athletes, politicians, and other prominent personalities (Lindholm, 2018). Notably, one of the most striking aspects of the idea of charisma is that it has managed to preserve the atmosphere of mystery and even the supernatural that it was supposed to portray over two thousand years ago (Grabo et al., 2017). Reh et al. (2017) acknowledge that the concept of charisma originated from ancient Greeks, who offered the fundamental term, kharisma, which means favor or divine gift. Grabo et al. (2017) claim that historically, charisma was predominantly associated with the monarchy or religious leaders, who were regarded to have divinely bestowed powers that enabled their followers to perform outstanding or miraculous deeds. Lindholm (2018) adds that believers may consider a charismatic leader as a prophet, a savior, an incarnated divinity, or a mystic, as possessed by the gods or as conquering them; as restoring the splendor of the past or welcoming in future glory years. The flexibility of charismatic identification derives from the fact that the word alludes, above all, to the followers overwhelming emotional attachment to the leaders supernatural or superhuman qualities, whatever defined (Lindholm, 2018). Consequently, magnetism is essential for a leaders influence.
Notably, charisma does not entirely refer to an individuals personality. It primarily focuses on peoples emotional influence on everyone they interact with (Lindholm, 2018). Rudolph Sohm (18411917), a German lawyer and theologian, is known for bringing charisma into modern language, claiming that a charismatic renewal was necessary to save the church from arid legalism (Lindholm, 2018, p. 1). Although the word charisma dates back to ancient times, the contemporary emergence of importance in the study of charismatic leadership is often attributed to the theory and research of social scientist Max Weber, who explained it in 1947 as one of the three sources of authority that have the immense influence on society (Grabo et al., 2017). According to Lindholm (2018), Max Weber (18641920) was the first to remove charisma from its Christian background and introduce it into modern social theory. Nowadays, people perceive charisma as a particular attractiveness or appeal that allows an individual to impact others strongly.
Hence, Weber defined charismatic leadership as being motivated mainly by a belief in one specific individuals unique and extraordinary traits. He claimed that the ascent of such people was frequently accompanied by fast, effective, and drastic transformations (Grabo et al., 2017). Lindholm (2018) suggests that such fundamental charismatic leaders feel strangely pulled to their duty; their commitment is confirmed by the fact that people flock to them. It is the responsibility of the followers to identify charisma, which cannot function in isolation. Furthermore, charisma is a connection in which a leader, a follower, and circumstances overlap.
Peoples perception of charisma is subjective and may vary dramatically. According to Castelnovo et al. (2017), Max Weber argued that charisma is in the eye of the beholder and emerges from the followers desire to believe in the exceptional qualities of the particular individual. Webers insight broadened the conversation to include more extensive social and psychological dimensions. Psychoanalytic scholars, for instance, interpreted followers devotion to charismatic leaders as the result of unconscious motives (Bafoil, 2021). These may be regressive innermost desires for a parent figure thought to provide stability or a followers fulfillment of a narcissistic need for an exalted self-concept achieved via affiliation with an idealized leader (Castelnovo et al., 2017). Likewise, social psychologists have utilized self-concept, self-worth, and self-esteem to explain why people are drawn to charismatic leaders.
Charisma is recognized as a phenomenon that can aid in leadership. Castelnovo et al. (2017) argue that Webers contribution highlights two components. First and foremost, the emotional component is essential to the charisma phenomenon. In reality, Weber contended that the charismatic influence is perceived on an emotional level, as did many charisma experts who followed him. Therefore, it is radical and transvalues everything, and it represents a fundamental split with all established or reasonable rules. Second, the effects of charisma are most visible at times of emotional, physiological, financial, ethical, religious, and sociopolitical hardship (Castelnovo et al., 2017). Despite the general agreement that emotions contribute significantly to charisma, research uncertainties about the definition and assessment of charisma persist. Discrepancies happen primarily due to a conflation of charismas antecedents and outcomes. Castelnovo et al. (2017) contend that charisma has an evolutionary basis as a component of a unique and valuable human potential to transfer information through cultural learning processes (p. 544). Charisma may be described as a set of behaviors used to communicate (Maran et al., 2019). Thus, verbal and nonverbal cues can characterize these behaviors and measure charisma.
Verbal and Nonverbal Cues
Charisma has the capacity to have a significant influence on individuals and society. Tskhay et al. (2017) assert that people build impressions of charisma based on cues conveyed by leaders. According to Maran et al. (2019), charisma is characterized by highly perceptible communication that employs many salient verbal and nonverbal cues. A substantial amount of studies, for instance, proves that individuals can detect each others characteristics, group affiliations, and leadership performance relying on momentary examinations of their nonverbal conduct (Tskhay et al., 2017). When it comes to leader emergence, verbal and nonverbal cues capture followers attention, implying a greater awareness for signals (Gerpott et al., 2018). Additionally, such cues supply information on who can efficiently coordinate a group.
Significantly, charisma is perceived as a result of specific behaviors. Wang et al. (2020) acknowledge that using metaphors, storytelling, and language, showing moral conviction, and sharing collective feelings are verbal cues of charismatic conduct. Nonverbal components of charisma include proper body motions, facial expressions, gestures, and appearance (Wang et al., 2020). Charismatic methods, such as metaphors, storytelling, and gestures, have long been shown to aid in message comprehension and retention (Wang et al., 2020). Moreover, techniques such as expressing collective thoughts and exhibiting moral integrity can assist leaders in showing kindness and motivating their followers.
In terms of the symbolic part of charisma, people may actively employ physical signals like appearance and body language to communicate their ideas, vision, and drive. When creating their opinion of a leader, followers, for instance, pay extra attention to face attractiveness or highly expressive nonverbal behaviors (Antonakis & Eubanks, 2017; Trichas et al. 2017). Tskhay et al. (2017) demonstrate that humans require only five seconds of exposure to an individual to establish a clear impression of the persons charismatic presence and leadership potential. Thus, nonverbal cues such as body language, facial emotions, and an energetic voice tone contribute to charisma (Reh et al., 2017). Individuals may automatically extract about one other for some features and characteristics from extremely brief assessments of appearance and attitude (Tskhay et al., 2017). People perceive the signals and analyze them in order to construct a mental image of a specific individual.
More relevantly, charisma reveals why one persons proposals typically prevail in any group of people. Lindholm (2018) emphasizes that it is not because what the individual says is exceptionally brilliant or inspirational, but simply because the others are delighted to comply. The common idea of charisma promises to explain why one politician is revered while another is despised; why one athlete is sought after to promote products while another stays unknown (Lindholm, 2018). According to social cognition studies, people quickly and relatively effortlessly obtain information from signals generated by targets, which is aligned with signaling theory (Tskhay et al., 2017). Nevertheless, while considering the effects of charisma, it is crucial to understand if charisma can be effectively measured by observing peoples conduct.
Individuals steady features and nonverbal actions determine how charismatic they appear to others. Charisma and leadership may be predicted based on appearance and behavioral signals (Tskhay et al., 2017). Reh et al. (2017) examine the specific modal cues that leaders might utilize to communicate charisma, either directly or indirectly. These signals can arise from the individuals body as well as the environment, and followers might assume charisma from them. Notably, these embodiment studies have not related physiological cues to an assessment of charisma per se, but rather to other personality traits, such as authority, assertiveness, expertise, success, attractiveness, sincerity, expressiveness, or righteousness (Reh et al., 2017). To organize the plethora of data for these signals, Reh et al. (2017) classify them into four main categories: power, competence, warmth, and morality (p. 493). The traditional characteristics of social assessment are competence and warmth. Morality has been suggested as a third component of social evaluation. Consequently, power was included as a fourth dimension since it is an essential trait, especially in an organizational setting.
Power is defined as the ability and means to impose ones will on individuals asymmetrically. Reh et al. (2017) state that general physical appearance, face, body posture, and voice contribute to power. Significantly, the vertical dimension of space is central to the idea of power. Physical height, in particular, is associated with a variety of success characteristics in organizational contexts, including social esteem, performance, wealth, and leader development, all of which may potentially be analogs for power (Reh et al., 2017). Height is just one perspective cue derived from a more abstracted and embodied aspect of vertical space, based on embodied point of view. Reh et al. (2017) acknowledge that the influence of height-related cues can extend throughout the surroundings, with a new study demonstrating that even subtle cues can have comparable consequences. Television and print media deliberately exploit camera angles to describe individuals as powerful versus weak.
The evolutionary perspective provides one interpretation for the association between power and verticality, such as physical height. Height was a sign of strength and, hence, a benefit that contributed to power during human evolution (Reh et al., 2017). More powerful people are frequently depicted from below, requiring the viewer to look up to them, and less influential people are frequently depicted from above, requiring the audience to look down at them.
There is an indication that face signals play a significant part in power perception. One power cue discovered was the proportion of a persons face visible to a viewer concerning the rest of the body, a concept known as facism or facial prominence (Reh et al., 2017). Thus, an observer would regard a person as more powerful if a photograph or a video included a more considerable proportion of the face in comparison to the body. Facial expressions, in addition to angles and ratios, impact power assumptions. Reh et al. (2017) suggest that persons with dropped brows, for example, are viewed as more dominating than people with raised brows, and a relaxed-looking face is considered as more authoritative than an anxious facial expression. People who display their rage, on the other hand, are viewed as more powerful owing to the terrifying impact of an angry face (Reh et al., 2017). Simultaneously, individuals who demonstrate melancholy are viewed as weak and less influential.
Visual dominance is another face measure of power; how often people stare at their conversational partner when talking versus while their interaction partner is speaking. When exercising power through speech, people tend to look at the other person more when they speak than the other person (Reh et al., 2017). People do the opposite when they have less authority in a discussion; they gaze more at their interaction partner when listening than when they talk. This effect might be attributed to a frightening feeling of personal spacea grounded physical perception (Reh et al., 2017). Maran et al. (2019) demonstrate that when a leader directs their gaze to the eyes of their followers, they focus their attentional resources on the audience while ignoring other potentially relevant information from the surroundings. To followers, this may signal that a leaders focus is on them and that their message is specifically intended for them (Maran et al., 2019). Therefore, case examples of charismatic individuals, intriguingly, frequently allude to the intensity of the leaders gaze.
Consequently, maintaining eye contact is generally required in order to keep the discussion continuing and gauge the other persons attention and responsiveness. The most basic nonverbal element of interaction, eye-directed gaze, has a powerful signaling effect (Grossmann, 2017). It has three purposes as a signal: first, it is extremely visible and intended to transmit; second, it influences the receivers impressions; and third, it molds the latters conduct (Maran et al., 2019). As a result, eye-directed gazing diverts attention, fosters archetypal leader perceptions, stimulates approach, and encourages collaboration. Tskhay et al. (2017) concluded in their study that attractive individuals who did not wear glasses, made greater eye contact, and recited more vital ideas were rated as more charismatic. Maran et al. (2019) postulated that leaders eye-directed gazing was a communication activity and, therefore, related to their charisma. The scientists used eye-tracking to measure respondents gaze throughout a simulated leadership situation in which they sought to inspire followers toward a shared objective. Maran et al. (2019) discovered that respondents perceptions of their charisma predicted the frequency and length of gaze directed at their followers eyes in two investigations. Furthermore, longer and more constant eye-directed contact made leaders look more charismatic as well as exemplary of their role in the eyes of their audiences.
Body movements exhibit the same geometrical patterns that transmit emotions in faces. Reh et al. (2017) mention that dancers portraying an intimidating character utilized more diagonal postures and angular motions in ballet performance films, whereas performers conveying a warm personality used more circular poses and movements. Studies on body position have revealed comparable results. Compared to a closed position, less interpersonal distance and an open body posture are associated with higher projected authority (Reh et al., 2017). Another factor that works in tandem with physical attributes to impact power perception is vocal cues (Reh et al., 2017). When people feel forceful, indignant, or convinced in their replies, they tend to talk louder.
Given that these emotions are associated with dominating sorts of actions, the idea of power appears to be incorporated in voice loudness. Wang et al. (2020) claim that charismatic speakers communicate with varying pitch, loudness, pace, fluidity, intensity, and an overall dynamic voice tone on a nonverbal level. These speech features are frequently linked with a more engaged and dynamic manner of speech, and they all predict higher charisma scores (Wang et al., 2020). Similarly, Yang et al. (2020) suggest that audiovisual research of charisma utilizing video recordings has also discovered that speech is an essential modality of perceived charisma. Charismatic voices, for example, were louder, higher, stronger, and had more variety in pitch. According to text-based correlates of charisma, presenters who used more questions were judged as more charismatic; nonetheless, speakers who talked about themselves and their feelings, particularly those communicating negative emotions, were viewed as less charming (Yang et al., 2020). As a consequence, one of the hallmarks of charisma is positivity; the use of an expressive voice is also a crucial part of charismatic conduct.
A deeper knowledge of how the different relevant characteristics contribute to charisma is required to analyze, quantify, and teach charismatic speech successfully. According to Niebuhr et al. (2018), as measured by the hypo-hyper scale, articulatory patterns must become an intrinsic aspect of phonetic investigation on presenter charisma. Their findings, together with rhetorics persistent urge for precise articulation, lead to a significant systematic divergence between more and less charismatic speakers, which impacts numerous segmental aspects and merits a complete and accurate phonetic description. Listeners may place a higher value on clarity in speaker pronunciation. Nevertheless, an all-too-clear pronunciation in a meeting with a small group of colleagues may be less captivating than in front of a huge audience when presenting a professional speech (Niebuhr et al., 2018). According to Niebuhr et al. (2018), another critical component is the speaking rate. This factor, like clear pronunciation, is positively associated with speaker charisma.
Furthermore, general expressiveness adds charm to a speech or performance. According to research on perceived charisma in speech, differences in pitch range and standard deviations are connected to charisma (Wang et al., 2020). Thus, speech rate is a nonverbal activity that focuses on employing changes and contrasts in speech production to highlight the messages that the person desires to express. Instructions for pitch in the voice should be centered on utilizing an animated voice to express passion, as opposed to a flat voice, which has no change in pitch in a non-charismatic form (Wang et al., 2020). Power assumptions are based on signals that mainly concern how individuals appear, such as height, posture, facial expression, and how they speak.
Competence is perceived as a critical feature of impression construction, covering characteristics such as intellect, expertise, and creativity. Reh et al. (2017) claim that overall physical appearance is a nonverbal cue that exudes competence; for instance, people are often seen as less capable when their face resembles a baby face (Reh et al., 2017). As opposed to a mature face, a baby face is often more round, with big eyes, high brows, a small nose, a high forehead, and a small chin. Furthermore, prolonged eye-gaze, upright posture, and eye contact were substantially and positively associated with perceived intelligence. The literature also indicates some overlap between embodied signals associated with competence and those associated with power (Reh et al., 2017). Faces, for example, appear to be particularly powerful indicators for both power and competence.
Humans have developed a distinct facial musculature for emotional responses and share a common social language for reading facial movements. Faces serve as a key retrieval signal for instinctive trait assessments; facial displays also infer sentiments and objectives (Trichas et al., 2017). People try to deduce underlying emotions and intentions by observing actions such as facial expressions. Trichas et al. (2017) emphasize that when someone witnesses an angry facial expression, they may assume the emotional state of anger and conclude that the presenter exhibits anger-related personality qualities such as being short-tempered or bossy. Smiling facial expressions are more trusted than non-smiling facial expressions, while angry facial expressions are related to feelings of strong authority.
Positive emotional expressions of leaders influence the impacts of charismatic leadership on perceptions of leader effectiveness and attractiveness. According to Trichas et al. (2017), the impact happens most likely through an emotional transmission process in which positive leader emotions link to positive follower sentiments. Trichas et al. (2017) developed several theories on the effects of observing leaders with pleasant versus worried expressions. The choice of the cheerful expression was consistent with previous research that demonstrated that expressions of positive emotion are related to higher leadership. A worried look was considered a negative facial stimulus.
Warmth is defined as a quality that includes compassion, friendliness, supportiveness, generosity, and honesty (Reh et al., 2017). People assume warmth faster than any other quality based on initial impressions. Morality is described as an abstract notion that describes actions or ideas that individuals see as decent or unethical (Reh et al., 2017). It includes characteristics such as justice, sincerity, truthfulness, and tolerance and is an essential guiding principle for individuals of many cultures. Morality relates to a persons or groups good appraisal.
Awe and adoration are members of a broader family of sentiments known as moral emotions. Sy et al. (2018) claim that moral emotions differ from other emotions in that they appear to have developed to control the conduct of people within a community. For instance, admiration and its close relative elevation have a solid social dimension; imitating ideal role models promotes the transfer of optimal behaviors in a community, including moral practices. Awe promotes prosocial conduct by encouraging ego reduction and a sense of belonging to others (Sy et al., 2018). Because of their social orientation, moral emotions are an excellent place to start when trying to understand the link between charismatic leadership and follower feeling. Marciniak (2018) also identifies three aspects of charisma: presence, power, and warmth. The notion of presence refers to being present in ones interactions with others, evoking goodwill toward others, and exuding authority.
Hence, these characteristics comprehensively characterize leadership and are associated with charisma. Marciniak (2018) argues that combining power, presence, and warmth fosters the development of four types of charisma: visionary, authority, kindness, and presence-based charisma (p. 249). The power component is associated with two styles: visionary and authority. Leaders use their engagement, confidence in the groups growth aspirations, experience, and expertise, as well as wisdom, to foresee the sequence of events and the implications of recommended actions. The authority type of charisma is based on status and confidence, while the visionary type is about persuading others to believe what the leader says. The remaining approaches, kindness, and presence-based, are distinguished by an emotionally warm, sympathetic attitude to people that does not obstruct goal development and criticism.
Charismatic people arouse human sensitivity to their impact by emitting dual, nonverbal status signals. Keating et al. (2020) emphasize that charismatic peoples bodies convey subservience and authority, warmth and power, responsiveness and competence, stimulating perceivers dual method and motivational avoidance processes and creating the circumstances for exceptionally intense psychological relationships. Researchers frequently concentrate on the positive messages that charismatic leaders send, such as enthusiasm, arousal, love, and trustworthiness (Keating et al., 2020). According to these viewpoints, the core of charisma is the presentation and promotion of pleasant arousal in followers. Charisma complements the interpersonal connection experience of leaders and followers in the dual projection of a responsive, welcoming social component and a formidable, frightening dimension in the more remote, exceptional relationship context of leaders and followers (Keating et al., 2020). Therefore, in leadership, like in life, the evaluative aspects of interpersonal warmth and power, or, alternately, warmth and competence, play an essential role in social perceptual space.
Charismatic leaders use nonverbal warmth and likeability cues in various ways. They smile naturally, keep pleasant eye contact, utilize a range of gestures, posture their upper bodies toward people they are conversing with, and touch others during talks (Goman, 2019). It is critical to connect verbal and nonverbal communication by concentrating on the messages emotional purpose in order to look more charismatic. Goman (2019) suggests standing straight, drawing shoulders back, and keeping head high. Individuals will begin to feel more confident in themselves simply by taking this bodily stance. Smiling can have an even greater favorable impact on the brain and mood (Goman, 2019). Throughout the encounter, charming people give nonverbal signs of warmth and likeability.
Significantly, nonverbal cues can have a more significant impact on how a message is interpreted compared to the speech itself. Markus Koppensteiner from the University of Vienna conducted a series of recent research on how individuals communicate with their hands, with astonishing findings (Robson, 2018). Even when all other criteria are considered, hand gestures indicate crucial aspects of an individuals personality, such as extraversion and authority. Robson (2018) argues that hand movements may also alter peoples impressions of a speakers actual height, making them look several inches taller or shorter. Given that taller people are naturally thought to be better leaders, it is plausible that the hand motions produce a type of visual illusion to enhance perceived height, which adds to impressions of higher authority (Robson, 2018). Essentially, extraversion tended to be associated with increased hand motions overall, with only brief intervals of immobility. The magnitude of vertical movements proved to be the source of authority perceptions whether the hand moves from the lectern to chest height (Robson, 2018). People who use these sorts of broad gestures on a frequent basis are perceived as less agreeable but more dominant.
Charisma is frequently presented verbally through the use of metaphors. When charismatic leaders employ metaphors to evoke a certain feeling in order to encourage followers, the metaphors will be consistent with the emotion they are aiming to evoke (Sy et al., 2018). Wang et al. (2020) state that metaphors are powerful, persuasive tools that alter information processing and structuring by clarifying the message. Moreover, these strategies can evoke feelings, activate symbolic meanings, and improve recall. Tur et al. (2018) assessed charisma using objective indicators of charismatic signalings, such as metaphors, contrasts, and strength of conviction. They discovered that more usage of these signaling methods predicted more views for TED talks as well as better evaluations for the extent to which the speech was considered to be inspirational.
Undoubtedly, storylines and anecdotes are also frequently used as charismatic tactics, as they make the message accessible and simple to memorize. Nonetheless, Wang et al. (2020) illustrate the most vital verbal strategies to create charismatic speech. Metaphors and analogies, for instance, highlight the similarity of two concepts, which are frequently diametrically opposed. People hear stories and remember those that touch profoundly with them; stories play a significant role in human learning. Wang et al. (2020) add that repetition and rhyme direct the audiences attention to the essential topics conveyed. When delivering a speech, it is critical to exude confidence. Charismatic leaders frequently set high expectations for themselves and their followers and show confidence in achieving these objectives (Wang et al., 2020). Mutuality and inclusion are effective verbal cues; both tactics make use of inclusive words, such as we and our. According to Wang et al. (2020), depending on the type and objective of the self-disclosure, increasing self-disclosure may capture listeners attention and assist making the information relevant. Finally, the use of humor in discourse has the ability to bring the persons involved closer together. Both verbal and nonverbal behaviors promote self-efficacy and make the message unforgettable.
Additionally, it is crucial to mention the attributes of charismatic people. According to PCA (n.d.), the most common characteristics include confidence, gesticulation, remarkable storytelling abilities, and mirror effect. Charismatic individuals are self-assured in the sense that they make daring judgments feel comfortable believing in themselves. They do not require external approval and often avoid terms like I guess, I hope, I suppose, I expect, maybe, probably in their speech (PCA, n.d., para. 2). Moreover, confident behavior indicates self-assurance. Insecurity is communicated by leaning back, fumbling, or playing with ones hands (PCA, n.d.). Charismatic people do not mind using expansive hand movements when telling their stories. Leaders should look their audiences in the eyes and focus on engaging them with liveliness and face-to-face communication.
A good storyteller presents a story from the heart, unconcerned with the audiences reaction or potential lack of interest. Based on PCA (n.d.), the storyteller realizes that the audience will be fascinated. Charismatic people have a solid capacity to interest an audience via tale-telling; they intentionally or unintentionally emulate their interlocked body language (PCA, n.d.). The mirror effect, also known as mirroring, is a simple technique for making others like the speaking person by mimicking their facial expressions, intonations, and movements (PCA, n.d.). Moreover, it always works because the approach focuses on the nature of human narcissism: an interlocutor unknowingly learns to believe that the leader is on the same wavelength as
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.