I don’t have an issue with non-verbal communication as a concept. If you’re boring on stage, make distracting movements, or wave your arms around unnecessarily, you need to work on that—just as you would work on your script, audience engagement, and overall performance.
My challenge with non-verbal communication, presentation skills, body language or whatever we name it, is that many speakers believe the path to becoming a strong, commercially successful speaker is paved with body language alone – which is simply not true.
A strong body language alone can never compensate for a poorly crafted keynote if you’re a professional speaker. It might be useful as a tool for a CFO who needs to make dry financials interesting, but for a professional speaker, it doesn’t hold up. Looking for tools or shortcuts to “make shit shine” is not the answer. If you aim to succeed as a speaker, focusing on body language is simply not the place to start.
To explain my stance – and at times, my distance – from body language in public speaking, let me take you back to my early days in the speaking industry. It was in the autumn of 2000, at a lecture at the Technological Institute in Copenhagen, that I, as a newcomer to professional speaking, first heard a presentation on techniques and the supposedly enormous importance of non-verbal communication when speaking to an audience.
The speaker confidently stated he mastered multiple languages but asserted that body language was the essential human language since spoken words only made up 7% of our communication during presentations. The remaining portion, he claimed, was body language (55%) and tone (38%).
I looked around the room and wondered why no one else seemed to question this bold claim. It was delivered with absolute certainty, like gospel truth: “It’s wild, but that’s just how it is. I didn’t make this up – t’s what research tells us”, the speaker asserted.
Later that day, these same numbers were repeated by another speaker who also focused on body language, naturally championing her field’s importance.
In the following months and years, I heard the “55-38-7 rule” repeatedly quoted by professional speakers, sales managers, HR managers, and even a municipal director, who claimed that body language was crucial in communication.
There were no concrete references. It was simply asserted with phrases like:
-
- “That’s just how it is.”
-
- “Communication experts agree.”
-
- “Research shows.”
-
- “Everything suggests.”
-
- “It turns out that.”
-
- “Today, we know that.”
I could see the appeal in making the intangible aspects of body language and non-verbal communication measurable and concrete, especially for those teaching non-verbal communication. But these statements troubled me. As I at that time attended lectures and presentations daily, nothing in my observations supported the idea that the spoken words were so insignificant.
So, I had to investigate where these magical numbers came from and how anyone managed to measure them so precisely. The “55-38-7” rule originated from studies on non-verbal communication conducted in 1967 by Mehrabian & Ferris and Mehrabian & Wiener.
I quickly encountered critical articles questioning the validity of this research, and soon after, I learned that the lead researcher, Iranian-American psychologist Albert Mehrabian, was well aware that parts of his findings had been misunderstood and widely misrepresented.
At some point, Mehrabian’s research ended up in the wrong hands and became a misguided simplification of a complex matter".
As early as 1997, Dr. David Lapakko, an Associate Professor in Communication Studies at Augsburg College, wrote about the misuse of Mehrabian’s findings, and revisited this topic in a 2007 article. In it, Lapakko quotes Mehrabian: “My findings are often misquoted. Clearly, it is absurd to imply or suggest that the verbal part of all communications constitutes only 7% of the message. Suppose I want to tell you that the eraser you are looking for is in the second right-hand drawer of my desk in my third-floor office. How could anyone contend that the verbal part of this message is only 7% of the message?”
Mehrabian’s studies mention “7 percent verbal, 38 percent vocal, and 55 percent facial.” In translations, such as in Scandinavian, these terms are often rendered as “7 percent spoken words, 38 percent intonation, and 55 percent body language.” It’s clear that translating “vocal” as “intonation” is debatable and that “facial” as “body language” is a stretch.
Yet, people around the world have shared this interpretation for decades, and to this day, the myth about body language’s dominance over spoken words persists and is taught widely.
Body language is not the problem
I have nothing against body language; it undoubtedly plays a role for you as a speaker. But it doesn’t wield the decisive influence that the myth suggests. We cannot equate body language’s role in negotiations, job interviews, dating, or parenting with its role for a professional speaker.
Over the years, I’ve confronted many HR professionals about why they allow leaders and employees to be taught the “55-38-7 rule.” Most recently, a leader in a large organization admitted, “Yes, I know that one. It’s what we teach our employees and leaders. We did the same in my last company. Honestly, I have no idea where it comes from or if it’s fact or fiction. I’ve always heard that body language is far more important than words. Is that really wrong?”
This global HR manager is not alone in holding this belief. Presentation skills are in demand because we assume that how we say things is more important than the message itself, and because it’s reassuring to have numbers backing up our statements.
Mehrabian likely conducted a fine study, and it was never his intention to spread misinformation. But his studies were initially misunderstood and then misused by promoters of non-verbal communication who wanted an easy answer. The 55-38-7 model is a gift for the uncritical. They can adopt it and have a universally usable, ready-made standard.
What has always shocked me is how many speakers continue to promote non-verbal communication and the myth without addressing its accuracy. Perhaps this is because there’s a market for such simplified messages; leaders need their teams to relate to something concrete, and catchy messaging pays.
The misunderstanding of Mehrabian’s conclusions is a prime example of how theory and “research” can be twisted to suit a particular narrative. The 55-38-7 rule isn’t the only misused element in teaching presentation skills. New statistics regularly appear, making presentation techniques and non-verbal communication seem like rocket science.
The bottom line is that, even as a professional speaker, you cannot ignore body language. However, it’s essential to be realistic about what focusing on body language can actually do for your career as a speaker. Consider whether you have more significant challenges to prioritize. Body language should only become a focus once you have a marketable speaking product and are refining your performance.
Even ChatGPT has joined the nonsense.
When posting this article, I asked ChatGPT, “Can you provide a scientific example that shows the importance of body language in keynote speaking?” And voilà, the internet is awash with countless copies of Mehrabian’s model, and ChatGPT can’t yet detect its flaws.
ChatGPT: The Mehrabian Experiment (1971) examined how people interpreted emotionally charged words when there was a discrepancy between spoken words, tone, and body language. Participants listened to words like “love” and “hate,” spoken with either positive or negative tone and body language, and were then asked to evaluate the emotional meaning.
Results:
Mehrabian concluded that when words, tone, and body language don’t align, we tend to rely on non-verbal cues:
-
- Only 7% of the message was attributed to words.
-
- 38% was attributed to tone.
-
- A full 55% was attributed to body language.
While the “7-38-55 rule” doesn’t apply to all communication, it highlights the role of body language and tone for emotional understanding and trust.
