Cited by 100Patient-Provider Communication in HealthcareLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesCommunication in Education and Healthcare

Patients characteristics affecting physician–patient nonverbal communication

STREET, RICHARD L., BULLER, DAVID B.·1988·Human Communication Research

Abstract

Previous research has reported that nonverbal elements of physician-patient communication influence medical outcomes such as patients’ understanding, compliance, and saris/action with health care delivery. This investigation examined the impact of various patients’ characteristics (age, sex, education, anxiety, and relational history with the physician) on patterns of nonverbal communication exhibited in 41 physician-patient interactions at a family practice clinic. Several findings were noteworthy. First, although they were relatively consistent in their nonverbal responses to different patients, physicians generally reciprocated patient's adjustments in response latency, pauses during speaking turns, body orientation, and interruptions and compensated patient's modifications in turn duration and gestural rates. Second, physicians nonverbally interacted with patients over 30 years of age in a less domineering and more responsive fashion (e.g., comparable turn durations, more vocal back-channels, and more nonverbal behavior reciprocity) than they did when conversing with patients under 30. Third, physicians appeared responsive to patients experiencing various degrees of anxiety. Specifically, relative to their interactions with less worried patients, physicians used less task touch with anxious patients and to a greater degree compensated the worried patients nonverbal responses. Finally, the patients sex, education, and visit (i.e., first versus repeat) had little impact on…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1988.tb00171.x

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
STREET, R. L., & BULLER, D. B.
Affiliations
  • Texas A&M University (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
Venue
Human Communication Research
Published
1988-09
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
60-90
ISSN
  • 0360-3989 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2958
OpenAlex
W2030068217
Cited by
100
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
14.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Human Communication Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Communication in Education and Healthcare
Keywords
physician-patient communication, nonverbal communication, patient characteristics, age differences, patient anxiety, turn duration, body orientation, interruptions, reciprocity, general practice, patient education

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review