Adeola Abdulateef Elega

4.2 Descriptive Analysis of Items on Nonverbal Communication 
The researcher investigates the participant’s familiarity to nonverbal communication 
and use of nonverbal cues in their own culture. How familiar they are to nonverbal 
cues and their use in their culture is imperative to know in a study like this before 
questions start investigating the usage of nonverbal communication in North Cyprus. 
From the data collected, 148 participants representing 62.2% submits that they find it 
easy to understand nonverbal cues while those who don’t find it easy to understand 
nonverbal cues are 90 which represent 37.8% of the entire number of participants of 
the study. 
Table 2.8: Do you find it easy to understand nonverbal cues?
Frequency Percent 
Valid 
Percent 
Cumulative 
Percent 
Valid Yes 
148 
62.2
62.2 
62.2 
No 
90 
37.8 
37.8 
100.0 
Total 
238 
100.0 
100.0 
From the data collected, 112 participants representing 47.1% of the total number of 
participants are the majority asserting that grading nonverbal communication as a 
way to cope in North Cyprus deserves a “Fair” grade. 73 participants graded 
nonverbal communication as “Good” and they are represented as 30.7% of the 
participants of the study while 30 of the participants submits that nonverbal 
communication deserves “Poor” for a grade representing 12.6%. Those who accedes 
that number verbal communication deserves “Excellent” for a grade are 16 presented 
as 6.7%. 7 of the participants gave nonverbal communication “Very Poor” for a 
grade presented as 2.9%. 

---

70 
Table 2.9: If you are to grade nonverbal communication as a way of 
coping with language barrier in North Cyprus, what will you give it? 
Frequency Percent 
Valid 
Percent 
Cumulative 
Percent 
Valid Excellent 
16 
6.7 
6.7 
6.7 
Good 
73 
30.7 
30.7 
37.4 
Fair 
112 
47.1 
47.1 
84.5 
Poor 
30 
12.6 
12.6 
97.1 
Very 
poor 
7 
2.9 
2.9 
100.0 
Total 
238 
100.0 
100.0 
The result below shows that 115 participants representing 48.3% of the entire 
number of participants of this study accedes that language barrier is a problem to 
their stay in North Cyprus sometimes and they are the majority. 63 participants 
representing 26.3% says language barrier is always a major problem to their stay in 
North Cyprus. 36 of them representing 15.1% of the entire number of participants of 
the study submit ‘rarely’ and 24 of the participants representing 10.1% accedes that 
nonverbal communication is never a problem. 
Table 2.10: Language barrier is a major problem to my stay in North 
Cyprus 
Frequency Percent 
Valid 
Percent 
Cumulative 
Percent 
Valid Never 
24 
10.1 
10.1 
10.1 
Rarely 
36 
15.1 
15.1 
25.2 
Sometimes 
115 
48.3 
48.3 
73.5 
Always 
63 
26.5 
26.5 
100.0 
Total 
238 
100.0 
100.0 

---

71 
Results shows that majority of the entire number of participants of the study get 
quick response from the nonverbal cues they try to communicate with only 
“sometimes” and they are 124 (52.1%) of the participants. 84 of them get quick 
response “rarely” presented as (35.3%) while 15 of them “never” get quick response 
presented as (6.3%). 15 of them always get quick response presented as 6.3%. 
Table 2.11: I get quick response to the nonverbal cues i try to 
communicate with 
Frequency Percent 
Valid 
Percent 
Cumulative 
Percent 
Valid Never 
15 
6.3 
6.3 
6.3 
Rarely 
84 
35.3 
35.3 
41.6 
Sometimes 
124 
52.1 
52.1 
93.7 
Always 
15 
6.3 
6.3 
100.0 
Total 
238 
100.0 
100.0 
From the data gathered, 46.2% have individual approach sometimes to respond to 
nonverbal cues when buying things. 28.6% accedes that they rarely do, next is those 
who say they always do and they represent 16.4% of the entire number of