Effort, Shape, and Embodied Cognition

Posted on June 22, 2015 by Carol-Lynne Moore

In Warren Lamb’s schema, the individual can use effort and/or shape to give Attention, form an Intention, and make a Commitment. By observing a person’s movement patterns, it is possible to discern whether the individual tends to be Assertive, that is, to apply effort to get results, or whether the person is more concerned to gain Perspective by using shaping.

For example, individuals high in Assertion tend to feel that “nothing happens unless I make it happen.” Their embodied actions incorporate focusing to probe for information, applying pressure to support determination, and pacing time to implement a decision at the opportune moment. In contrast, individuals high in Perspective get results by positioning themselves. They open themselves to explore a broad range of information and ideas, arrange what they have found hierarchically in terms of its value, and steer implementation strategically to avoid problems and achieve desired results.

In a pilot study conducted by Brenda Connors, Richard Rende, and Tim Colton, twelve military officers were assessed to see if patterns of body movement could provide predictive insight into individual differences in decision making. The movement assessments identified individuals high in Assertion (effort) in contrast to individuals high in Perspective (shape). The subjects were presented with four decision-making scenarios in a laboratory setting. Their responses were measured along two dimensions – number of information draws and total response time. Individuals high in Assertion reached for less information and had faster response time than those high in Perspective.

As the embodied cognition theorists posit, this small study demonstrates that there is a relationship between body movement and cognitive processes. You can explore this relationship further at the Embodied Decision Making seminar. Learn more…

Extension Systems and Movement Study II

Posted on February 19, 2015 by Carol-Lynne Moore

When I did the Laban Movement Analysis Program at the Dance Notation Bureau in the mid-1970s, we were required to document our final projects using two extension systems: simplified Labanotation (motif writing) and film. The latter documentation was accomplished with a small super 8 camera, a mode of recording that is now obsolete.

Several years later, Irmgard Bartenieff and I purchased the first videotape equipment for the Laban Institute. We bought Sony Betamax because of its high quality. Almost overnight, this equipment became obsolete, because the American market wholeheartedly went for VHS – the quality was not as good but it was cheaper.

Nevertheless, I have been a devoted user of videotape recording ever since for one reason and one reason only – the power of the rewind. For detailed analysis of movement, the capacity to replay brief actions multiple times is invaluable.

That is why I am sorry to see VHS going the way of super-8 and Betamax. It is true that digital recordings have higher resolution and can be played on computers and projected so that the moving images are more life size. But the discretionary control with rewinding is more finical and, what is worse from my point of view, it is not possible to see the movement in reverse, as one can with videotape. This makes relocating fleeting actions much more difficult. Not insurmountable, but more difficult.

This short history reiterates the strength and weakness of extension systems. When doing live movement observation, the movement disappears as it is occurring. Even when a movement sequence has been “set” and can be repeated, it is never exactly the same. This is where mechanical recording devices become helpful through the power of the rewind. Yet as each new device adds functions, others are lost.

“Extensions may indeed be powerful,” Kaoru Yamamoto writes, “yet typically not remarkably flexible or versatile.”

For example, the Movement Pattern Analysis community has found that we do not get good inter-observer reliability results when analysts work only from videotape. However, we do get good results when analysts observe the live interview first, in the flesh, and use the videotape of the interview for additional coding. We came to this conclusion after consultation with an expert from the Educational Testing Service. She observed our practice and concluded that something “flies through the air” in live observation that is not replicable in a filmed recording of movement. Her conclusion substantiates Edward Hall’s view, “No matter how hard it tries, the human race can never fully replace what has been left out of extensions in the first place.”

The Warren Lamb Legacy: Freedom through Movement Analysis

Posted on May 26, 2014 by Carol-Lynne Moore

In the weeks since movement pioneer Warren Lamb died at the age of 90, I have had many occasions to reflect Warren’s life, our friendship, and what Warren fashioned from the insights he garnered from Rudolf Laban.

Laban referred to movement as “man’s magic mirror.” Lamb found a way to capture what is reflected in movement and give it practical relevance. In doing so, he moved far, far beyond “body language.”

The Movement Pattern Analysis profile Lamb developed reveals a person’s unique motivational pattern. It shows what kind of challenges are stimulating, and what kinds of demands cause stress. Thus the profile enables the individual to grasp where his strengths lie and to find a situation to suit those strengths.

As one of Lamb’s clients recently wrote to me:
“I often think about my profile. It has helped me know what to get involved in and how to avoid pitfalls. If only I could have had it at 20 years old!”

Lamb himself summed up his legacy in the following way:
“Much of my life’s work has been dedicated to helping people become aware of their distinctive pattern of movement so that they can, truly, be free.”

Boycott Body Language

Posted on April 28, 2014 by Carol-Lynne Moore

As I mentioned in my last blog, popularity is seductive. The chance for serious movement analysis to garner publicity through the national media is almost irresistible. However, when serious study gets showcased as “body language,” the publicity does little to foster appreciation of movement.

A case in point is the March 7 story in USA Today bearing the headline, “Pentagon studies Putin’s body language to predict his actions.” The studies referred to involved legitimate analysis of movement patterns. Yet the press merely referenced this work as “body language.” Various additional banners read: “A Twitch, A Limp; U.S. Is Watching” and “Pentagon reads Putin’s lips, and rest of body.”

A subsequent interview with a CMA (though not one actually involved in the Pentagon’s studies) was aired on CNN. Then Jon Stewart used excerpts of the interview on his March 11 airing of the Daily Show, largely to lampoon the Pentagon’s studies of Putin’s movement. “What’s with the body language thing?” Stewart quipped. “It would be good information if you were on a date with him.” Referring to some of Putin’s isolated gestures, Stewart indulges in further parody, “Oh, he touched his nose. I think it means he’s going into the Ukraine.”

I would like to encourage all readers who are serious students of movement to boycott the use of the term “body language.” The meanings the public associates with this term are not the meanings we want associated with what we do.

So, the next time someone asks if you do body language, JUST SAY NO!

Why is Body Language Popular?

Posted on April 21, 2014 by Carol-Lynne Moore

There seems to be a great divide in the American public’s awareness of movement.

When it comes to watching sports, like the recent Winter Olympics in Sochi, the American viewing public seems perfectly happy to witness a progressive process of change. This appreciation of movement as movement accounts for the popularity of events like downhill skiing, figure skating, and ice dance, where Bergson’s “flux and continuity of transition” are particularly obvious.

When it comes to everyday activities, this appreciation evaporates. Movement is omnipresent in working and conversing. It may be less obviously patterned and spectacular than movement in sport and dance, but there is still progressive development, fluctuation, and continuity over time. Nevertheless, when the American public turns its attention to common action, it demands that movement be reduced to “body language” – a simple set of snapshots with fixed meanings. The most important aim of studying movement in everyday life seems to be the production of a “How-to-Do-It” book on seduction, discerning lies, or gaining popularity.

Popularity itself is seductive. Even people who are very serious about understanding nonverbal behavior, like Albert Scheflen, resort to the use of the term “body language.” However, translating serious movement study into body language terms can backfire.

That is why I am starting the “Boycott Body Language” initiative. Find out why in my next blog.

Body Language and Social Order

Posted on April 7, 2014 by Carol-Lynne Moore

In Body Language and Social Order, Albert Scheflen argues that body language is used for political control, manipulation, and the maintenance of power and class hierarchies. The book reveals how specific bodily behaviors in public places reinforce the status quo. Scheflen utilizes numerous candid photographs of men, women, and children to support his arguments.

When I first read this book many years ago, I found it deeply disturbing. I felt that body movement was a liberating force, not a binding one. Scheflen’s perspective made me reflect.

While reflecting, I began to look more closely at the behaviors Scheflen had flagged. Most involved still poses or isolated gestures. In other words, Scheflen was not actually looking at movement of the whole body. He was observing what was static, not what was dynamic. No wonder he concluded that body language tends to preserve order and social stability!

As Rudolf Laban observes, stability and mobility alternate in human movement behavior. Continuous movement of the whole body is punctuated by moments of stillness and by instances when only a single part of the body is in motion. These postures and gestures can be singled out, just as camera captures a moment in time and freezes it forever.

However, there is a big difference between looking at snapshots isolated from the stream of bodily movement and observing the stream itself. In the next blog, I examine differences between the study of body language and the analysis of body movement in more detail.