An amusing phenomenon of social life is the way each generation takes pride in any progress made during its lifetime, yet longs for the “good old days,” when manners—it is believed—were more refined. This perennial feature of life points to three things: first, we seek change, but sometimes resent it; second, comfort depends on familiarity; and third, the customs and manners of a given age embody its values and experience.

Manners—in words and in deeds—are the lubricant social groups use to convey the degree of respect or disrespect we feel toward ourselves and others. At the individual level, things like speech, grooming, and style of dress reveal how secure or insecure we feel about ourselves. Inarticulate speech suggests that a person is ill at ease or can’t be bothered to connect with the listener. “Outrageous” outfits suggest that the normal teen tasks of differentiating and defining oneself have not yet been successfully completed, and there is still a need to defy the social norms of an older generation.

In group life, forms of address indicate the social status of the persons involved. Some words, or a given level of language, are considered appropriate among peers, but not with people to whom one must show respect, such as a boss, minister, or professor. Subject matter perceived as socially acceptable or taboo indicates what are considered the limits of privacy and deference, and dress codes spell out the importance or value attributed to a particular occasion. Even table manners have a variety of meanings. At the simplest level, table manners have to do with not assaulting others with unpleasant behavior. At more conventional or subtle levels, they spell out the pecking order—that is, the group’s social boundaries, and the distinction between those who “belong” and those who don’t. An example of this is an apocryphal tale about the secret criteria for admission to the prestigious British universities, Oxford and Cambridge. Supposedly, at their final interview dinner, candidates were served pie made with unpitted cherries. The candidate’s admission allegedly depended on how well he (no women admitted in those days, of course!) handled this awkward social situation.

Manners have both private and public functions. They cue us in to a person’s status and character, and what we can expect from them; they are blueprints for the existing social structure. Human nature is inherently social—and that means hierarchical. because the individual’s turf—the boundaries of his right to privacy and self-determination—varies with the characteristics of the culture he lives in, the two functions of manners are intimately interwoven.

Well-being and success

My concern here is with the impact of manners on individual well-being and success. In a nutshell, individual well-being depends on one’s self-esteem. This is grounded in two factors: our trust in our ability to deal with life and the image we have of ourselves and our value to others.

Gruff or outright offensive behavior offends us and may trigger the urge to fight back, to assert our right to be respected. Alternatively, it makes us want to avoid the offensive person in simple self-defense. But even less obvious behaviors, such as refusing eye contact, or withholding some other form of acknowledgement, can make us feel disregarded, dismissed, and invisible. These slights inflict grievous harm to our sense of personal value. In the long run, feeling devalued leads to loss of self-esteem and self-trust. If we feel devalued and threatened, we often retaliate and devalue others in turn. This starts a vicious circle of contempt that can only lead to widespread depression and demoralization.

Extensive research on familial abuse shows that more lasting damage is inflicted by verbal abuse, such as name calling and attributions of worthlessness, than by any other form of mistreatment. Verbal abuse directly affects one’s internal sense of oneself, and the damage persists into adulthood. Consider, for instance, the experience of many parents who feel ineffectual in their efforts to guide their children. Key complaints on both sides are “disrespect” and “out of control.” Out of frustration, the family language frequently drifts into name calling. Or consider the experience of the wife who continually nags her husband because he never clearly acknowledges her requests. Conversely, a husband may feel that what he does is never good enough because he never receives positive feedback. These experiences are mediated by verbal and nonverbal messages encoded in a family’s manners and attitudes.

Actions speak louder than words

Non-verbal aspects of communication, such as body language, facial expression, tone, etc., convey our attitudes. Nonverbal messages always accompany verbal statements, and they affect us at an even deeper level than words because they bypass the screening to which the language centers of our brain, located in the neocortex, automatically subject incoming information. This screening issues such judgments as right or wrong, accurate or inaccurate, relevant or irrelevant, and always accompanies the verbal messages received. Since non-verbal messages frequently do not reach the cognitive brain centers of the neocortex, they elude this screening. In short, this part of the brain is responsible for “gut feeling” and our emotional reactions to people. Being aware of the fact that polite, considerate speech needs to be accompanied by equally sensitive body language is important when trying to create authentic, meaningful relationships with other people.

In recent years, scientists have begun to appreciate how much verbal and nonverbal cues contribute to the success or failure of an individual. This discovery has led to the recognition of different dimensions of human functioning, now labeled “emotional intelligence” and “social competence.” These terms refer to a person’s ability to recognize, name, and manage his or her own emotional states; recognize social cues; and choose the quality of the interpersonal messages that person sends out in interactions with others. Extensive research on the performance of the most effective top executives of large corporations has established that the key factor in long-term success is not IQ but “emotional competence,” the ability to sustain an effective internal image of oneself based on creating a positive interpersonal climate for others. Clearly, in the world of the alpha executive, there is no room for bad manners.

Still River Road resident Francesca von Broembsen is a psychologist in private practice in Concord. She specializes in self-development and life coaching. Readers can ask her a question for a later column by sending an email to features@harvardpress.com.