Haptics is wildly used as one form of nonverbal communication we experience as humans, and people believe that it is really vital to our development and health. We may use touches to share feelings and relational meanings. For
relative passes away, or a sweet lip kissing for your spouse will express all the loving words you want to say. De Vito (2002), based on Jones & Yarbrough (1985)‟s view that was “touch can communicate a wide variety of messages”, analyzed five major ones that will illustrate this great variety as follows:
• Touch communicates positive feelings for example, support, appreciation, inclusion, sexual interest or intent, composure, immediacy, affection, trust, similarity and quality, and informality (Jones & Yarbrough, 1985; Burgoon, 1991). Touch also stimulates self-disclosure (Rabinowitz, 1991).
• Touch often communicates your intention to play, either affectionately or aggressively.
• Touch may control the behaviors, attitudes, or feelings of the other person.
To obtain compliance, for example, you touch the other person to communicate “move over,” “hurry,” “stay here,” or “do it.” You might also touch a person to gain his or her attention, as if to say “look at me” or “look over here.” In some situations touching can even amount to a kind of nonverbal dominance behavior.
• Ritualistic touching centers on greetings and departures; examples are shaking hands to say “hello” or “good-bye,” hugging, kissing, or putting your arm around another‟s shoulder when greeting or saying farewell.
• Task-related touching is associated with the performance of some function, as when you remove a speck of dust from another person‟s coat, help someone out of a car, or check someone‟s forehead for fever.
Touch is used to fulfill five communicative functions as: (1) ritualistic interaction such as shaking hands and bowing; (2) expressing affect such as kissing and kicking; (3) playfulness such as flirtatious stroking and poking; (4) a control function such as grabbing someone‟s arm; and (5) a task- related function such as a nurse taking a patient‟s pulse at the wrist (Toomey, 1998: 130).
Knapp and Hall (2010, 2007) incorporated Jone & Yarbrough (1985)‟s findings along with others to mention the meanings and impact of interpersonal touch as:
Touch as positive affect: Positive touching may involve support, appreciation, affection, sexual attraction, or, if the touch is sustained, it may send a message of inclusion.
Touch as negative affect: An expression of anger of frustration may be conveyed by hitting, slapping, pinching, or tightly squeezing another‟s arm so the person cannot escape.
Touch as discrete emotions: Touch can convey discrete emotions for communicating certain feelings, such as love and sympathy.
Touch as play: Sometimes we can interpret the touching we give and receive as attemps to reduce the seriousness of a message-whether it is affection or aggression.
Touch as influence: Touch is associated with influence when the goal of touch is to persuade the other to do something.
Touch as interaction management: The “management touches” may guide someone without interrupting verbal conversation; get someone‟s attention;
indicate or mark the beginning or end of a conversation; or fulfill some ritualistic functions.
Touch as physiological stimulus: The impact of touch depends on social- contextual factors and interpretations given to the touch.
Touch as interpersonal responsiveness: Acts of touch that are perceived as deliberate are extremely salient in interaction; they are almost certain to be noticed or are likely to produce strong reactions, either positive or negative.
Touch as task related : touches serve professional or functional purposes
Touch as healing: Touch can be used as a miraculous cure for the sick and infirm.
Touch as symbolism: The act of touch itself comes to represent the significance of the relationship, ritual, or occasion.
(Knapp & Hall, 2010, 2007: 271-279) From these views, it can be argued that interpersonal touch may not always have positive and impact on communication. That is, if touch would be perceived as dominant by the person being touched, this would likely influence the cooperative interaction in a negative way. Therefore, touch must be carefully given and received due to its multi-meanings across cultures.
1.1.3.4. Haptics culture: high-contact, low-contact, and medium-contact cultures
The role of haptics is undeniable; however, it can be differently encoded and decoded among cultures through the world. Therefore it is necessary for everyone to pay attention to cultural differences when using haptic in communication. These differences in touching behavior around the world have led to the idea of contact and noncontact cultures. Hall (1966) and Montagu (1978) divided cultures into two main types in terms of haptics perception: “contact” cultures are “where people tend to interact at close distance and touch each other frequently” and “noncontact”
cultures are “where people tend to interact at close distance at greater distance and avoid touching” (Nanda & Warms, 2011,2007: 111). Nanda & Warms (2011, 2007) classified contact cultures including of Middle East, Indian, the Mediterranean, and Latin American; and noncontact cultures which are in Northern Europe, Northern America, and Japan.
Toomey (1998) stated that “Different cultures have different expectations as to who should touch whom in different interaction scene” (Toomey, 1998: 130). For example, opposite-sex handshake is accepted by Chinese, but not by Malays and Arabs; it is more common for two males in Latin America to have a friendly full
embrace than in Britain or the United States; or it is normal when you see two females in Asian cultures walking hands in hands in streets.
The findings from Remland and Jones (1995)‟s study found that “Southern European is more tactile/haptic than Northern European. Middle Eastern and Latin cultures tend toward highly haptic behavior in communication, while Asian cultures are less haptic” (Freitag & Stokes, 2009: 66). According to Freitag & Stokes (2009), Thais never touch another‟s head because they consider the head the symbol of one‟s spirit and power; Japanese do not like a stranger to touch them; or shaking hands between a man and a woman is taboo in Malaysia but normal in China.
Grundwald (2008) reported from the previous studies that the least haptically active region on earth is Asia including Myanmar-former Burma, China, Honkong, Japan, the Philipines, Taiwan, South Korea, Thailand, and Vietnam.
Northern European cultures, such as those from Finland, Germany, Great Britain, Norway, and Sweden and Anglo- Americans, and Canadian are low-contact cultures. The most interpersonally haptic active areas in the world are the Mediterranean as France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Latin America, Arab countries, Eastern Europe, and Indonesia. Touching degree is moderate in Australia and the United States.
From all these views above, the importance of nonverbal communication in general and haptics in particular cannot be denied. It's so powerful that the message sent can sometimes outweigh the verbal language. In addition, non-verbal language can help smooth out and effect the communication. It can be more of a hindrance than a help, due to different cultures' details in intercultural communication.
Therefore, it is important to be aware of these details and cultural rules of non- verbal language to help our interpretation of a message, and also to modify our behavior to fit the cultural context we are in.