The Hidden Rules of Social Interaction

Social norms and the cooperative principle dictate much of your daily life.

Have you ever thought of the countless social norms you abide by on a daily basis, both knowingly and unknowingly? These are often called the “unspoken” or “unwritten” rules of society, many of them being deeply ingrained into the minds of basically everyone.

Examples of Implicit Social Norms

• When standing in line at an ATM, you most likely feel the instinct to stand a considerable distance away and not look directly at the screen. Nobody wants to feel or look like a thief.
• There’s the phenomenon of everyone standing face-forward in elevators. I remember the first time I rode an elevator and still abided by this principle.
• Another example is standing just an inch too close to someone. Standing just a little too close (or a little too far away when waiting in line) just feels wrong and sometimes creepy.
• There’s also keeping eye contact with someone for just a second longer than what we know deep down as normal. Making eye contact for 2–3 seconds is fine. Any longer than that and it becomes staring.
• When going to use the urinal in a public bathroom, and one of them is currently being used, most men will know never to use the one directly next to it.
• Likewise, in a movie theater or other public venue with seating, if most of the seats are empty, never sit directly next to or near another person. Generally, you would place at least 2–3 seats on every side between you and others.

Hidden Rules of Conversation

There are countless more examples of implicit social norms we could probably think of, but let’s move on to the hidden rules of conversation. Like the implicit social norms I listed above, we follow these rules of conversation both knowingly and unknowingly every single day and in every conversation. The rules are often described by the cooperative principle, which states that participants in a conversation have an implicit agreement to have an effective conversation with each other.

The principle is broken down into four maxims called Grice’s Maxims. First, there’s the maxim of quantity. You only give as much information as is required and no more. For example, attaching the word “vegan” to “vegan burger” is necessary since not all burgers are vegan. However, it would be weird to say that your cereal product is “uranium-free.” That just sounds suspicious.

The second maxim is the maxim of quality. This is to tell the truth, an important component of any conversation. The third maxim is the maxim of relation. What you are adding to the conversation must be relevant to that conversation, and often that conversation only. The fourth maxim is the maxim of manner. You must be clear in your message and avoid ambiguity. Ironically enough, Paul Grice’s description of this maxim is, you could argue, itself a violation of the maxim:

‘Be perspicuous’

• Avoid obscurity of expression.
• Avoid ambiguity.
• Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).
• Be orderly.

But, he was a philosopher, so I suppose he gets a pass.

These aren’t strict rules that you must abide by at all times, just guidelines. In fact, some people will intentionally violate or flout these guidelines to pass along a particular message with even more hidden meaning.

Examples of Maxims at Play

Proper Use of Maxims

Here is one example of a piece of dialogue abiding by each of the four maxims.

Person 1: “I’m out of cash.”

Person 2: “There’s an ATM over there.”

Looking at these two statements from a strict standpoint, they have no relation to one another. However, the first person can infer a lot more from the second person’s statements than what was explicitly stated purely from the context of the conversation. “I’m out of cash, and this person told me there was an ATM over there. I must be able to get cash out of the ATM.” It would be extremely redundant if the second person had gone, “I hear you are out of cash. You could take your debit or credit card, walk over to the ATM, enter your information, and withdraw cash from your bank account.”

The first maxim is satisfied here because both people provided only the necessary information and nothing more. The second was satisfied, assuming the first person didn’t lie about not having cash and the second person didn’t lie about there being an ATM nearby. The third was satisfied since offering the location of an ATM is relevant to the statement, “I’m out of cash.” It wouldn’t have been relevant if the conversation had gone like this:

Person 1: “I’m out of cash.”

Person 2: “There’s a convenience store next door.”

Person 1: “Oh, is there an ATM over there?”

Person 2: “No.”

Lastly, the fourth maxim was satisfied since saying “There’s an ATM over there” is pretty clear and straightforward in the context.

Intentional Disregard of Maxims

There are times when people will intentionally misuse or disregard these maxims to implicate a deeper meaning, usually referred to as flouting. For example, imagine someone seeing a painting on the wall and uttering, “The frame is really beautiful.” On its face, there is no insult here. However, it breaks the fourth maxim, the maxim of manner. They implicate a far deeper meaning, in that they think the painting is ugly.

Often, people will flout a maxim to denote sarcasm or irony. For example, imagine you are watching a baseball game and yell “Adam is a great baseball player!” This could have multiple meanings, depending on when and how it was stated:

• If you meant it positively, like after he hit a home run, then the maxim of quality is obeyed.
• If you meant it negatively, like after he struck out, then the maxim of quality is disobeyed.

Conclusion

We follow hidden social rules regarding behavior and conversation every day without realizing it, yet it dramatically affects how our life turns out. When it comes to social norms, it’s difficult to disobey them without facing some sort of pushback. But, the “rules,” or guidelines, of conversation are flexible and can sometimes be disregarded to convey a different meaning.