CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Chronemics

study of the role of time in communication

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 24, 2026
Entity authorityQ2018606 ↗
Source-derived summary

Chronemics is an anthropological, philosophical, and linguistic subdiscipline that describes how time is perceived, coded, and communicated across a given culture. It is one of several subcategories to emerge from the study of nonverbal communication.

According to the Encyclopedia of Special Education, "Chronemics includes time orientation, understanding and organisation, the use of and reaction to time pressures, the innate and learned awareness of time, by physically wearing or not wearing a watch, arriving, starting, and ending late or on time." A person's perception and values placed on time plays a considerable role in their communication process.

The use of time can affect lifestyles, personal relationships, and professional life. Across cultures, people usually have different time perceptions, and this can result in tension or friction between individuals. Time perceptions include punctuality, interactions, and willingness to wait.

Definition

Chronemics is the study of the use of time in nonverbal communication, though it carries implications for verbal communication as well. Time perceptions include punctuality, willingness to wait, and interactions. The use of time can affect lifestyles, daily agendas, speed of speech, movements, and how long people are willing to listen.

Fernando Poyatos, Professor Emeritus at the University of New Brunswick, coined the term chronemics in 1972.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Chronemics” as study of the role of time in communication. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1972—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Chronemics, study and role can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as study of the role of time in communication. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 24, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q2018606. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1972.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Chronemics”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Chronemics primary sources, Chronemics archive and Chronemics research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Chronemics”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Chronemics” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.