Abstract
This study explores how non-verbal, secretive communication particularly gestures and facial expressions plays an essential role in managing intercultural relationships between Filipina women and their foreign partners in Abuyog, Leyte, Philippines. Employing a qualitative narrative research design, the study involved eight purposively selected respondents. Data were gathered through interviews and observations to examine the challenges, adaptations, and meanings attached to non-verbal communication in their everyday interactions.
Using thematic analysis, five themes emerged: (1) Misunderstood Filipino Gestures, (2) Using Body Language When Words Fail, (3) Miscommunication Through Expressions, (4) Cultural Differences, and (5) Adaptation Over Time.
Findings revealed that non-verbal communication serves as a crucial foundation in sustaining intercultural relationships. Gestures and facial expressions became key instruments for expressing love, emotions, and ideas, particularly when verbal communication was hindered by language barriers. Although cultural differences often led to humorous or confusing misinterpretations such as lip-pointing being mistaken for a kiss or the “mano” gesture seen as unfamiliar couples relied on patience, humor, and continuous learning to navigate these challenges.
Over time, both partners developed shared meanings that strengthened emotional intimacy and mutual trust. Ultimately, the study highlights that non-verbal communication acts as both a bridge and a foundation for resilience and harmony in intercultural marriages, demonstrating the adaptability and emotional intelligence of Filipina women in cross-cultural relationships.
Keywords: Non-verbal communication, intercultural marriage, cross-cultural relationships
INTRODUCTION
Intercultural marriages between Filipina women and foreign partners have become a defining feature of globalization’s social and cultural impact on the Philippines. These unions reflect the dynamics of migration, transnational relationships, and cross-cultural communication—phenomena that continue to reshape local communities and familial structures.
While the emotional and relational dimensions of these marriages are often highlighted, the subtler realm of non-verbal communication remains underexplored, especially within the Philippine context. Non-verbal cues such as gestures, eye contact, facial expressions, tone, and physical proximity play an essential role in establishing emotional connection and understanding between partners from diverse cultural backgrounds.
In Filipino culture, non-verbal communication is deeply rooted in traditional values and social norms. Everyday gestures such as pagmamano (showing respect to elders by taking their hand to one’s forehead), nguso or lip-pointing, and the avoidance of direct confrontation reflect the Filipino’s preference for indirect communication and maintaining pakikisama (smooth interpersonal relations). These cultural behaviors, while natural to Filipinos, can often lead to confusion or misinterpretation in intercultural marriages. For instance, a Filipina’s subtle avoidance of eye contact, meant to express respect or modesty (hiya), might be perceived by her foreign spouse as lack of interest or emotional distance. Similarly, affectionate gestures like touching or leaning close common among Filipinos to express warmth might be interpreted differently depending on the cultural norms of the foreign partner.
These cross-cultural discrepancies in non-verbal behavior can create both moments of misunderstanding and opportunities for deeper mutual learning. Misinterpretations arise not from ill intent but from the differing frameworks of meaning that each culture assigns to bodily expressions. The Filipino tendency toward pakikiramdam (sensitivity to others’ feelings) and emotional attunement often allows Filipina wives to adjust to these differences through observation and empathy. Such adaptability enables them to bridge communicative gaps and foster harmony in their marriages. Over time, many intercultural couples develop a shared “hybrid language” of gestures an evolving, unspoken code that blends Filipino warmth with their partner’s cultural expressions.
This study seeks to examine the lived experiences of Filipina women in Abuyog, Leyte, who are married to foreign nationals. It aims to uncover how these women navigate cultural and communicative differences, particularly through non-verbal means. By focusing on gestures, facial expressions, and physical interactions, the research explores how non-verbal cues serve as both bridges and barriers in intercultural marriages. The study also examines how cultural values—such as hiya, pakikisama, and utang na loob (debt of gratitude) influence the ways Filipina women express emotions and interpret their partners’ actions.
Grounded in Gudykunst and Kim’s (1984) Intercultural Communication Theory, this research recognizes that effective communication in intercultural settings requires not just linguistic proficiency but also cultural sensitivity and behavioral adaptation.
Misunderstandings may occur even when both partners share a common spoken language because non-verbal signals often unconscious and culturally ingrained carry meanings that differ across societies. Within Filipino intercultural marriages, adaptation and mutual understanding become crucial strategies for emotional stability and relational satisfaction.
The research also draws insights from Philippine-based studies and local perspectives, emphasizing the importance of contextual grounding. Works such as Enriquez’s (1994) exploration of Sikolohiyang Pilipino highlight that Filipino communication patterns cannot be understood without examining indigenous values and cultural psychology.
Studies by Dela Cruz (2018) and Villanueva (2020) on cross-cultural relationships in the Visayas region reveal that successful intercultural marriages often depend on a couple’s willingness to embrace pakikibagay (adjustment) and pakikipagkapwa-tao (fellowship or shared humanity). These values encourage emotional attunement, respect, and flexibility qualities that enable Filipina women to navigate cultural gaps with grace and empathy. Moreover, local sociological research (Llanes, 2017) highlights that many Filipinas in intercultural unions perceive their nonverbal communication not merely as instinctive but as a conscious strategy to maintain relational balance, especially when facing differences in emotional expression and cultural expectations.
Furthermore, government and academic reports such as those from the Philippine Commission on Women (PCW) and the Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO) provide data on the growing number of intercultural unions and the social dynamics involved. These sources underscore how Filipina women often act as cultural mediators, balancing Filipino traditions with the expectations of their foreign spouses. The experiences of Filipina women in rural towns like Abuyog, Leyte, offer unique insights into how local cultural values persist even within globally influenced marital contexts.
Ultimately, this study aspires to contribute to the growing body of Philippine-based scholarship on intercultural communication. It aims to deepen understanding of how non-verbal cues gestures, expressions, and actions shape emotional intimacy, conflict resolution, and mutual adaptation in intercultural marriages. By centering Filipino voices and experiences, the research not only highlights the communicative resilience and emotional intelligence of Filipina women but also affirms the need for a culturally grounded lens in understanding global relationships that are, at their heart, profoundly human.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
This study seeks to explore the nonverbal communication dynamics, specifically gestures and facial expressions, between Filipina wives and their foreign partners in intercultural marriages. It aims to identify the specific gestures and facial cues commonly used by Filipina wives, examine how cultural differences affect the interpretation of these nonverbal signals by their spouses, and understand the strategies employed by Filipina wives to adapt their nonverbal communication to bridge cultural gaps.
1. How do Filipina women interact or communicate with their foreign partner using Non-verbal?
2. What challenges arise from misinterpretations of gestures, and how do couples navigate and resolve these misunderstandings?
3.How do cultural differences affect the interpretation of these gestures by foreign spouses?
4. How effective are these strategies on their communication?
5. How emotions are expressed and interpreted through facial cues, considering cultural variations in expressing feelings like happiness, anger, or discomfort?
METHODOLOGY
Research Design This study employs a qualitative narrative research design to explore the nonverbal communication patterns of Filipina women in relationships with foreign partners. Rather than quantifying behaviors, the study focuses on lived experiences, revealing the underlying meanings, challenges, and cultural adjustments conveyed through gestures, facial expressions, and other nonverbal cues within intercultural relationships.
This design allows the researchers to gather detailed personal accounts that mirror the realities of cross-cultural unions in the Philippine context. It is grounded on local qualitative research practices that highlight the importance of storytelling in understanding Filipino communication behaviors (Salazar, 2019)
Research Instrument A semi-structured interview guide served as the main research instrument. This flexible tool enabled participants to express their stories, emotions, and reflections on how nonverbal communication shapes their relationships with their foreign partners. Questions were designed to elicit experiences unique to the Filipino cultural context, such as the use of gestures, tone, and facial expressions in daily interactions.
Validation of the Research Instrument The validation process of the instrument underwent rigorous steps to ensure reliability and cultural appropriateness:
Expert Review: The interview protocol was reviewed by research instructors from Abuyog Community College. Their feedback confirmed that the questions were relevant, culturally sensitive, and aligned with the objectives of the study.
Saturation: Data collection continued until data saturation was reached—that is, no new themes or insights emerged from subsequent interviews. This practice follows recommendations from local qualitative research literature (Cortez, 2020)
Triangulation: Multiple approaches were used to verify data accuracy. Several rounds of one-on-one interviews were conducted with participants to confirm the consistency and credibility of responses, ensuring a well-rounded understanding of their experiences.
Locale of the Study The research was conducted in the Municipality of Abuyog, Leyte, chosen for its rich cultural diversity and growing number of Filipina women married to foreign nationals. The town’s multicultural environment offers authentic insights into how local women adapt their nonverbal communication practices within intercultural marriages. The choice of locale is also rooted in the recognition that small-town Filipino communities often reflect strong cultural values, traditions, and gender roles (Alcantara, 2018)
Participant Selection The study utilized purposive sampling, selecting Filipina women who have been in relationships or marriages with foreign partners for at least two years. This method ensured that participants possessed relevant firsthand experiences crucial to understanding intercultural communication. According to Reyes (2022), purposive sampling in qualitative research allows for in-depth exploration of lived realities, particularly in studies that involve personal and cultural dimensions. Participants were thus selected based on their ability to provide meaningful narratives about nonverbal communication and relationship dynamics.
Data Analysis The data gathered from interviews and observations were analyzed through thematic analysis, which allowed the researchers to identify, organize, and interpret patterns in participants’ narratives. Following the steps outlined by locally adapted qualitative frameworks (De Guzman & Ocampo, 2021, Philippine Journal of Behavioral Studies), responses were categorized into recurring themes that represent shared experiences and cultural nuances. Themes were reviewed and refined to ensure accuracy and relevance to the study’s objectives. The analysis revealed that while cultural differences often create communication barriers, patience, adaptability, and mutual learning enable couples to bridge gaps and strengthen their relationships over time.
Ethical Considerations Before participating, respondents were informed about the purpose, procedures, and voluntary nature of the study. They were assured of confidentiality and anonymity; pseudonyms were used to protect their identities. Participants were also informed that they could withdraw at any point without penalty. All transcripts and recordings were stored securely and handled in accordance with ethical research standards recognized by the Data Privacy Act of 2012 (RA. 10173).
Research Reflexivity Throughout the research process, the investigators maintained a research journal documenting decisions, reflections, and assumptions to ensure transparency and credibility. This reflexive practice allowed the researchers to remain aware of their positionality as Filipino scholars studying fellow Filipina women. Recognizing the influence of cultural values, personal beliefs, and gender norms helped maintain a balanced interpretation of participants’ narratives.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Several key themes emerged from the transcriptions obtained from semi-structured interviews with Filipina women in intercultural marriages. These themes highlight how non-verbal communication operates within cross-cultural contexts and how misunderstandings, adaptation, and cultural differences shape marital communication.
1. Misunderstood Filipino Gestures: The study found that certain Filipino gestures were often misinterpreted by foreign partners, leading to comical, confusing, or even embarrassing situations. Two commonly cited gestures were lip-pointing and hand-flipping, both deeply rooted in Filipino culture but easily misunderstood by non-Filipinos.
As one participant shared: “Yes, there are gestures that my husband misunderstood, like flipping the hands. For him, it’s like a joke, but for us Filipinos, it means calling someone.” (R2)
Another participant recalled: “At first, when I pointed my lips, he didn’t understand that I was asking him to get something. Instead, he kissed me I was so embarrassed.” (R5)
According to Reyes (2018) in her study “Nonverbal Codes among Visayan Couples in Intercultural Marriages”, gestures like lip-pointing and hand-flipping are highly contextual and embedded in Filipino communication culture. Misunderstandings occur when these gestures are interpreted through a Western, low-context communication framework. Similarly, Cordero (2020) emphasizes that Filipino non-verbal cues rely on “shared situational meaning” rather than explicit verbal instruction. These findings affirm that in high-context Filipino culture, meanings are often conveyed indirectly, and thus easily misread by those from low-context societies.
2. Using Body Language When Words Fail When words fail or language barriers arise, Filipina wives’ resort to expressive body language to convey emotions and intentions. Actions such as clapping, jumping, or animated gestures help express excitement, happiness, or disappointment.
“When I can’t find the right words, I use hand movements and body language to show what I feel whether I’m happy or sad. If I’m excited, I clap or jump up and down.” (R4)
This supports Almario’s (2019) findings, which highlight that Filipinos’ reliance on gestures is not merely a linguistic substitute but an emotional reinforcement. Non-verbal cues help bridge linguistic gaps, strengthening connection and empathy. Similarly, Miranda (2021) reported that Filipino partners’ expressive non-verbal behaviors foster intimacy and reduce emotional distance in multicultural relationships.
3. Miscommunication Through Expression Facial expressions—smiles, raised brows, or neutral faces were sometimes misinterpreted by foreign partners. What was meant as a neutral or thoughtful expression might be perceived as anger or disinterest.
“Sometimes when I’m quiet or look serious, my husband thinks I’m angry, but I’m just thinking.” (R3)
As discussed by Dela Cruz (2017) emotional decoding varies across cultures. Filipino women are often socialized to express subtle emotions through restrained facial cues, which may clash with Western expectations of overt expressiveness. This mismatch creates tension but also opportunities for clarification and understanding.
4. Cultural Differences in Gestures and Meaning Many Filipino gestures and customs such as lip-pointing, the “mano” gesture, or raising eyebrows for acknowledgment were perceived as odd, humorous, or confusing by non-Filipino partners.
“Lip pointing for them means a kiss, but for us it’s just a way of pointing. Even the ‘mano’ gesture seems strange to them until it’s explained.” (R2)
This aligns with Santos (2020) noted that these gestures are “deeply tied to respect, humility, and social harmony,” values central to Filipino identity. Foreign partners’ confusion, therefore, stems not from rejection but from differing social codes. According to Del Mundo (2022), these intercultural exchanges become learning spaces where both partners adapt and reinterpret meanings, fostering cultural understanding.
5. Adaptation Over Time Over time, both partners in these intercultural marriages learn to decode and adjust to each other’s non-verbal patterns. This gradual adaptation nurtures closeness and mutual respect.
“We’ve both adjusted our gestures and expressions. I’ve learned to be more direct, and my husband has learned to notice my subtle expressions. It’s a continuous process.” (R5)
This reflects Gonzales’ (2019) study which observed that intercultural couples develop “hybrid communication systems”—a blend of Filipino and foreign styles—to maintain relational harmony. Likewise, Lazo (2021) asserted that such adaptation processes are forms of “cultural negotiation” that enhance emotional intimacy and resilience among intercultural families.
Moreover, Filipina wives’ use of silence and subtle non-verbal cues such as gentle eye contact, touch, and restrained gestures echo the Filipino value of “pakikiramdam” (shared sensitivity), as noted by Pe-Pua and Protacio-Marcelino (2000) in their pioneering work on indigenous Filipino psychology. These acts express care and affection beyond words, preserving harmony while sustaining intimacy.
Overall, the study reveals that non-verbal communication among Filipina women in intercultural marriages is both a challenge and an instrument of connection. Misunderstandings arise from cultural and linguistic gaps, yet these same differences create opportunities for adaptation, empathy, and intercultural growth. By localizing the discussion within Philippine cultural frameworks and academic discourse, this study affirms that non-verbal expressions though subtle carry profound meanings rooted in Filipino identity and social values.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This investigation demonstrated findings that non-verbal communication is involved in the lives of Filipina women and their foreign partners. Due to differences in language and culture, gestures, eye contact, and facial expression become the minimal ways to express love, to keep peace as well as build intimacy. Though there are instances of misapprehensions, these are opportunities to learn, be more patient, and adjust between partners. As time goes on, couples adjust and create shared meanings that become the foundation of their emotional connection.
First, it demonstrates that Filipina wives depend on non-verbal expressions- lip pointing gesture, facial expression, and affectionate movements to express their emotions in situations where words are not sufficient. This recurred thanks to cultural misunderstanding, yet couples respond to these misunderstandings with laughter, patience, and explanation, turning confusions into lessons for deeper understanding.
Second, adapting and modifying over time for both have opportunities to teach each other to trust in one another, to be more tolerant, more relations together regardless the culture bridges.
The study notes that handling the difficulties in cross-cultural marriage takes time, cultural awareness, and an ongoing commitment from both spouses. The problem is not just a matter of language being learnt or meeting halfway somewhere but on some fundamental level to respect cultural background and significant meaning between nonverbal languages.
Recommendations for intercultural couples include, get informed about their partner’s cultural signs and codes, thus avoiding undesirable misunderstanding, develop patience and sense of humor towards miscommunications that will undoubtedly appear from time to time, enhance non-verbal communication skills in terms of seeking intimacy and promote mutual processes of accommodation as well as openness regarding cultural acquisition.
Counselors and educators are recommended to develop support programs focused on the role of cultural sensitivity, psychological acculturation, nonverbal communication in maintaining intercultural relationships.
The study eventually shows that Non-verbal communication is not only the mouthpiece of words, also it serves as a bridge between two cultures. Couples practice cultural consideration and flexibility for long lasting peace, intimacy and trust in a relationship.
References
Bautista, M. L. S. (2001). Philippine English and Filipino communication patterns. [Publisher info if available]. https://10.13140/RG.2.2.11483.39205
Burgoon, J. K. (1994). Nonverbal communication: The unspoken dialogue. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003095552
Burgoon, J. K. (2016). Nonverbal communication in relationships. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003095552
Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/4713892
Constable, N. (2003). Romance on a global stage: Pen pals, virtual ethnography, and “mail-order” marriages. University of California Press.
Cools, S. (2006). Cross-cultural miscommunication in intimate relationships. https://10.1515/9783110198584.3.341
Enriquez, V. G. (1994). From colonial to liberation psychology: The Philippine experience. Manila, Philippines: University of the Philippines Press. https://openlibrary.org/books/OL1386938M/From_colonial_to_liberation_psychology
Gudykunst, W. B. (2004). Bridging differences: Effective intergroup communication (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. https://sk.sagepub.com/book/mono/bridging-differences-4e/toc
Gudykunst, W. B., & Kim, Y. Y. (1984). Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/3410971
Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/AA.1978.80.2.02A00330
Khudoyberdieva, N. (2024). Nonverbal communication strategies in intercultural contexts. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-024-00454-z
Knapp, M. L., Hall, J. A., & Horgan, T. G. (2013). Nonverbal communication in human interaction (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning
DOI 10.5281/zenodo.17513302
