Movement behaviour is organized in patterns

In movement behaviour research, many analysis systems are tailored to detect certain classes of movements in the movement behaviour and then give them value. As an example, in McNeill's coding system for hand gestures (1992), cer-tain hand movements are identified in hand movement behaviour and then clas-sified as iconic, metaphoric, or deictic. Few analysis systems are designed to classify all movement in a behaviour. As an example, in the kinesic analysis by Birdwhistell (1952), movement behaviour is segmented into kinemes, which are units of kinesic behaviour (for the detailed description of Birdwhistell's system see Chapter 3). As compared to the assessment of pre-selected movement units, the latter type of movement behaviour analysis opens the research options to analyze the sequences and combinations of movement units.

A pattern is "a regular and intelligible form or sequence discernible in the way in which something happens or is done" (Oxford English Dictionary). A move-ment pattern may be characterized by a temporal sequence consisting of several subsequent movement types, e.g. self-touch  gesture  shift  self-touch.

Likewise, is may be a combination of several movement types displayed by dif-ferent parts of the body at a time, e.g. crossing the legs + folding the hands + raising the head. Since long, it has been documented that the individual move-ment behaviour is highly reliable with regard to such sequences and combina-tions (Darwin, 1890; Allport & Vernon, 1933). A related well-known

phenome-non is, for example, that we can recognize a person by her/his gait pattern long before we can identify her/him by her/his bodily appearance. In a study on whole body expression in dance, individuals displayed individually retest-reliable combinations of moving the body in four different improvisation tasks, e.g. small kinesphere combined with bound flow and predominant use of the upper body (Lausberg et al., 1996).

The individual movement behaviour is highly reliable just as its association with cognitive, emotional, and interactive states. As an example from the au-thor’s data, in cheerful situations, Mr. A.A. always showed a complex move-ment pattern in a nearly identical form: laughing  then pushing up his glasses with the left hand  then folding the arms  then pressing the knees together.

Mrs. N.G. reliably performed the following pattern in depressive contexts: left shoulder shrug  then an adjustment of the left bra strap with the left hand

then a verbal statement with a depressive connotation. Note that in the two examples, neither the glasses nor the bra strap were displaced so that they would have needed to be adjusted again.

Already Darwin (1890) had described that in the process of becoming a ha-bitual pattern, the original function of a movement could get lost. Then its only function remains to be part of a pattern. Darwin's interpretation shows some overlap with Birdwhistell's structuralist view that considered that any body movement was an arbitrary sign, which was per se meaningless and which only served as the maintenance and regulation of interaction. Thus, even body movements that seem to be purposeless have a function since they contribute to a pattern. Therefore, the proposition is here that body movements are not dis-played accidentally or randomly. The exception is pathological hyperkinetic syndromes⁴, the types of which are described in Chapter 3. They are mainly caused by functional or structural disorders of subcortical motor regions. With this exception in mind, it is argued here that given the expanded definition of 'function', which includes co-establishing a pattern, in healthy individuals any body movement has a function.

Patterns can consist of all classes of movement behaviour including postures and rest positions. Specific mental states and specific topics in interactions co-occur with specific rest positions (Darwin, 1890; Scheflen, 1973; LaFrance, 1982; Davis & Hadiks, 1990; Davis & Hadiks, 1994; Wallbott, 1989; Klein-smith & Berthouze, 2007). As noted above, in psychoanalytic and psychothera-peutic sessions 'autistic gestures' could be reliably elicited through association experiments and during emotionally loaded issues (Sainsbury, 1955; Mahl, 1968). In these specific contexts, the 'autistic gestures' were displayed reliably in almost identical manners across the psychotherapy sessions. Given the

4 For the moment, it shall be maintained that certain body movements displayed in neu-ropsychiatric disease, notably hyperkinetic syndromes, do not have a function in this sense. However, future research may reveal that even these movements have some kind of function, for example, that they serve to maintain an equilibrium within a pathologi-cal state.

ity of individual movement patterns, changes in these patterns can be used as an indicator of changes in the mental state or even in personality traits over time (Davis & Hadiks, 1990). When considered in response to therapist interventions, the patient's movement pattern changes in psychotherapy may indicate therapeu-tically relevant moments (Davis & Hadiks, 1994). In a case study on a doctor-patient interview, the doctor-patient's typical movement patterns were identified, such as repetitive rocking with the trunk (Lausberg, 2011). Changes in this pattern, such as interruption of the trunk rocking, co-occurred with verbal utterances that had been identified as therapeutically relevant in an independently conducted discourse analysis.

In the field of criminology, research on movement patterns coded during in-terviews of criminal suspects has helped to identify movement cues to deception (Davis & Hadiks, 1995). Of particular note is evidence that the cue set related to deceptive responses is distinctly different than the set of cues associated with topic stress level, suggesting that the movement patterns can distinguish what are primarily affective processes from cognitive processes such as formulating a false story while concealing information (Davis et al., 2005).

Patterns may not only occur at the intra-individual level but also at the inter-individual level. A specific movement - mental state combination in an individ-ual may co-occur regularly with a specific movement - mental state combination in the individual's partner, and vice versa. Scheflen (1963, 1973) first identified these interaction patterns in psychotherapy sessions. He observed reliable intra-dyadic movement sequences between patient and therapist over several psycho-therapy sessions. As an example, the patient assumed a certain posture by grasp-ing the right knee with the hands  then the therapist performed a ‘Bowl’-gesture  then he lighted up a pipe, etc. According to Scheflen, the ‘communi-cational program’ that is characterized by a defined sequence of both partners’

movements, serves to regulate and stabilize the partners' relationship. To his opinion, the identification of such implicit movement interaction patterns is highly relevant for a successful therapy as these implicit patterns consolidate neurotic relationships.

To summarize, movement behaviour is organized in reliable within-subject and between-subjects patterns. There is ample empirical evidence that these movement patterns are associated with specific cognitive, emotional, and inter-active states, such that they constitute complex movement – emotion – cognition – interaction patterns. Given that the only function of a movement can be to con-tribute to a pattern, with the exception of certain pathological conditions, it is argued that any body movement has a function.

The detection of movement patterns helps to explore emotional, cognitive, and interactive patterns as well as changes of these patterns. This application of movement analysis is especially relevant in fields that aim at developing per-sonal competence, e.g. in learning contexts and psychotherapy.

2.4 The temporal dimension of movement units provides insight