The 7% rulereality, fiction, or misunderstanding, Volume 2011 Issue October, October 2011 | BY Philip Yaffe

Full citation in the Digital Library |PDF


Volume 2011, Number October (2011), Pages 1-5

The 7% rule: fact, fiction, or misunderstanding Philip Yaffe DOI: 10.1145/2043155.2043156

In 1971, Albert Mehrabian publiburned a book Silent Messperiods, in which he debated his research study on non-verbal communication. He concluded that prospects based their assessments of credibility on components various other than the words the salesperson spoke—the prospects stupassed away assigned 55 percent of their weight to the speaker"s body language and also another 38 percent to the tone and also music of their voice. They assigned just 7 percent of their credibility assessment to the salesperson"s actual words. Over the years, this limited experiment developed to a idea that movement and also voice coaches would be even more practical to teaching effective communication than speechauthors. In fact, in 2007 Allen Weiner publimelted So Smart But... mentioning how to put this principle to work-related in institutions.

You are watching: About 75 percent of effective communication is:

Phil Yaffe thinks that the 7 percent preeminence is a pernicious myth. He debunks the notion that in an oral presentation, what you say is significantly much less vital than exactly how you say it. He rejects the claim that content accounts for just 7 percent of the success of the presentation, while 93 percent of success is attributable to non-verbal components, i.e. body language and vocal selection. The myth arises from a gross misinterpretation of a clinical experiment. It needs to be put to rest both for the benefit of presenters and also the sake of scientific integrity.

Peter J. Denning Editor

Have you ever before heard the adage that interaction is only 7 percent verbal and also 93 percent non-verbal, i.e. body language and vocal variety? You most likely have actually, and if you have actually any type of sense at all, you have actually ignored it.

Tbelow are specific "truths" that are prima face false. And this is one of them. Asserting that what you say is the leastern important component of a speech insults not just the intelligence of your audience, but your own knowledge as well.

The entirety objective of a lot of speeches is to convey indevelopment, or to promote or protect a suggest of check out. Without a doubt, correct vocal array and also body language can aid the process. But by their incredibly nature, these ancillary activities can convey just focus or emovement.

The proof? Although now we presumably live in a visual world, most information is still promulgated in written develop, where vocal variety and body language play no function. Even the "interactive" Net is still mainly composing. The large majority of world who surf the Net perform so searching for texts, through which they may connect via hyperweb links, but it is still fundamentally message.

Likewise via a speech. If your words are inqualified of acquiring your message throughout, then no amount of gestures and also tonal variations will do it for you. You are still obliged to carefully structure your information and look for "le mot juste" (the best words or phrases) to express what you desire to say.

So just what does this "7% Rule" really mean?

The beginning of this inimical adage is a misinterpretation, favor the adage "the exception that proves the ascendancy." This is something else human being say without examining it. If you think that this is actually true, I will demonstrate at the end of this post that it isn"t. But first points initially.

In the 1960s Professor Albert Mehrabian and colleagues at the University of California, Los Angles (UCLA), performed research studies into human interaction trends. When their outcomes were publimelted in professional journals in 1967, they were commonly circulated throughout information media in abbreviated create. Because the figures were so easy to remember, the majority of world forgained around what they really expected. Hence, the myth that interaction is only 7 percent verbal and 93 percent non-verbal was born. And we have been experiencing from it ever before given that.

The truth is Professor Mehrabian"s research study had actually nopoint to do via providing speeches, bereason it was based on the indevelopment that can be conveyed in a solitary word.

Subjects were asked to listen to a recording of a woman"s voice saying the word "maybe" 3 various means to convey liking, neutrality, and disliking. They were also displayed photos of the woman"s challenge conveying the exact same three emotions. They were then asked to guess the eactivities heard in the taped voice, seen in the photos, and also both together. The result? The topics appropriately determined the emovements 50 percent even more often from the photos than from the voice.

In the second examine, topics were asked to listen to nine videotaped words, 3 intended to convey liking (honey, dear, thanks), three to convey neutrality (possibly, really, oh), and three to convey disliking (don"t, brute, terrible). Each word was pronounced 3 different means. When asked to guess the emotions being conveyed, it turned out that the topics were even more influenced by the tone of voice than by the words themselves.

Professor Mehrabian merged the statistical results of the two research studies and also came up with the currently famous—and famously misused—rule that communication is only 7 percent verbal and 93 percent non-verbal. The non-verbal component was comprised of body language (55 percent) and tone of voice (38 percent).

Actually, it is incorrect to speak to this a "dominance," being the result of just 2 research studies. Scientists typically insist on many type of more corroborating studies prior to calling anything a dominion.

More to the allude, Professor Mehrabian"s conclusion was that for inconsistent or contradictory communications, body language and tonality might be even more accurate signs of meaning and emovements than the words themselves. However before, he never intended the results to apply to normal conversation. And definitely not to speeches, which must never be incontinual or contradictory!

So what have the right to we learn from this research to assist us end up being much better speakers?

Basically, nothing. We must still depend on what excellent orators have actually constantly known. A speech that is perplexed and also disorganized is a poor speech, no matter exactly how well it is delivered. The significance of a great speech is what it says. This can be magnified by vocal selection and also appropriate gestures. But these are auxiliary, not primary.

Toastmasters Internationwide, an international club dedicated to enhancing public speaking, devotes the initially 4 chapters of its beginner"s manual to organizing the speech itself, consisting of a chapter particularly on the prominence of words in conveying interpretation and feeling. Only in Chapter 5 and Chapter 6 does it concern itself via body language and also vocal range.

I do not recognize how to quantify the relative importance of verbal to non-verbal in moving speeches. But I have actually no doubt that the verbal (what you actually say) have to overcome by a wide margin.

One of the most renowned speeches of all time is Abraham Lincoln"s "Gettysburg Address." Its 272 words proceed to inspire 150 years after they were spoken. No one has actually the slightest concept of Lincoln"s motions or voice tones.

Now, what around that various other oft-quoted misconception "the exception that proves the rule?"

If you reflect for a minute, you will realize that an exemption deserve to never before prove a rule; it have the right to only disprove it. For example, what happens once someone is decapitated? He dies, right? And we understand that this dominion holds, bereason at least when in history once someone"s head was chopped off, he didn"t die!

The problem is not via the adage, but through the language. In old English the term "prove" expected to test, not to confirm as it does this day. So the adage really means: "It is the exemption that tests the dominance." If tbelow is an exception, then tbelow is no preeminence, or at leastern the rule is not complete.

Native English speakers are not alone in proceeding to mouth this nonsense; in some various other languages it is even worse. For instance, the French actually say "the exemption that confirms the rule" (l"exemption qui confirme la règle), more than likely bereason it was misinterpreted from English. This is quite unequivocal, leaving no room for doubt. But it is still wrong.


Philip Yaffe was born in Boston, Massachusetts, in 1942 and also grew up in Los Angeles, wright here he graduated from the University of California through a level in math and physics. In his senior year, he was likewise editor-in-chief of the Daily Bruin, UCLA"s daily student newspaper. He has even more than 40 years of endure in journalism and global marketing interaction. At various points in his career, he has been a teacher of journalism, a reporter/function writer through The Wall surface Street Journal, an account executive with a significant global push connections firm, European marketing communication director through 2 significant global companies, and also a starting companion of a specialized marketing interaction company in Brussels, Belgium, wright here he has actually lived since 1974. Amongst Yaffe"s current books are The Gettysburg Approach to Writing & Speaking favor a Professional and also Science for the Concerned Citizen (accessible from Amazon Kindle).

See more: Which Of The Following Is Not A Principal Reason Why An Employee May Be Transferred?


Permission to make digital or tough copies of all or component of this work for personal or classroom usage is granted without fee gave that duplicates are not made or dispersed for profit or commercial advantage and that duplicates bear this alert and the full citation on the initially page. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, calls for prior specific permission and/or a fee.