Body language: Twist of the thinking brain

Summary: [You might view the earlier post “Body language: Motivating signals” before this.] Emotional arousal can be motivational. But people can also stop and reason critically before they act.


Our visual impressions register at two levels. When we read the body language in intense situations, our initial reaction is to immediately follow suit.

The context

Understanding the context of the situation is a more deliberate process that comes later, as we explore the image consciously.

We then recognize and elaborate on the body language. Finally we might even reverse our initial reaction and stay put instead.

Through both routes, states of emotional arousal develop. These pump up the energy appropriate for action, be it reflexively, or as the result of conscious thought.

Two circuits

The emotional brain monitors whole body actions. Its hub is called the amygdala. Two neural circuits pass through it.

The first, the subcortical circuit operates in much the same way in all higher order animal species. This is the basis of automatic reflex-like emotional behaviour.

The second, the cortical circuit, includes cognitive centres for thinking and reasoning, and is much more efficient in humans. This sustains recognition of emotional body language, and is more adept at causal assessments.



Critical reasoning

Hence people can rush into action simply because others are doing so. But they can, on the other hand, also stop and reason critically about what they should do:

They say, “Why should I run? Let me look first if there is a reason to run."

So they may also run towards the ‘danger’ than away from it - like reporters do to get scoop news.

As long as the cortical circuitry in the brain remains active, people think for themselves as and when they act, even in an emotionally charged crowd.

Issues of motivation

Group activity may be stimulated in more ways than one. The ‘reasoning’ of emotional body language may at times have more success than words in motivating behaviour.

For example, management planning may send directives for one type of group activity. Yet emotional arousal in cohesive work groups may become high enough to override the formal lines of command and control.

Human motivation is complex. Organizations need to be aware that heterogeneous groups used to different cultures and ways of doing can easily upset expectations of uniform, logical individual and group actions within any system.

Comments/opinions, anyone??