Expectancy Violations Theory

of 5
21 views
PDF
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Document Description
This article describes Burgoon's expectancy violations theory. According to this theory, you are likely to respond differently to your partner's increase or decrease in intimacy depending on whether you think your partner is rewarding or unrewarding. Other factors affecting how people respond to increases and decreases in intimacy behavior (such as someone standing close to you) are discussed. 49 Expectancy Violations Theory KoryFloyd Artemio Ramirez, Jr. Judee K Burgoon d t dread when th
Document Share
Document Transcript
  ThisarticledescribesBurgoon'sexpectancyviolationstheory.Accord-ingtothistheory,youarelikelytoresponddifferentlytoyourpartner'sincreaseordecreaseinintimacydependingonwhetheryouthinkyourpartneris rewarding or unrewarding. Otherfactorsaffect-inghowpeoplerespondtoincreasesanddecreasesinintimacybehavior(suchassomeonestandingclosetoyou)arediscussed. 49 Expectancy ViolationsTheory KoryFloydArtemioRamirez,Jr.JudeeKBurgoon dtdreadwhentheywouldChrislovesherparentsdearly,butsheuse 0 areChristoheroldercometovisit.Herfatherwouldconstantlycomp ied dstartb.ghertogetmamanrother,whilehermotherwasalwaysnaggtnI ft; Chrisfeelingh·...ithherparentsalwayseaVlngbabies.Spendingtime WI. townhow- ed Thlasttimetheywerem,resentful,defensive,anddepress.e.tdremarkonhow.homplishmensanever,theydidnothingbutpraiseeraCC.dbythischange in proudtheyareofher.Chriswassopleasantlys~nfiserwardtotheirnexthh. ct allylooking 0 erparents'behaviorthatse IS au. ed dramatically.visit.Shefeelsthatherrelationshipwiththemhas [mprov ..erbalCommunicationReader. TIllSarticlewaswrittenespecIallyfor TheNonv 437  EXPECTANCIESANDEXPECTANCYVIOLATIONS 49-Floyd,Ramirez, & Burgoon Wheredoourexpectationscomefrom?Theycor_ne.romfthse~e::.EVTMbasedoncharactenstIcs 0 e III- sources,accordingto.an~are.theithnicbackground,vidualswedealwith,suchastheir age, theirsex,errefttlYnPctwomenalitFinstancewe 0 en ~~r- physicalappearanc~,andpedsont.~o~..-nressiv~thanmen,orwemaytobemorenurturinganemoIony ~'r. t-shirt.barticulatethansomeone ill aexpectsomeoneinasuittoemorebalmmunicationhave IT: Malstudiesofnonvercoandcut-os.oreover,~ever.hbehaviorsastouchandeyec~n-demonstratedculturaldifferences ill suethEuropeorLatin America tact.thuswemightexpectpeoplefromsouem.. ,,As' rScandinaVIatotouchusmorethanpeoplefromiachctristicsofparticularrela-Ourexpectationsalsocomefromcharaeleeloffanriliaritywithtionshipswehavewithotherpeople,sueasour lances withthemhaveItthwhatourexpenthem,howclosewefee 0 em,fIt'nshipwehave.Wegener-.tdthetype 0 rea 10ã tbeenourrelativestaus,an.artstobemoreaffectlOnae,ally~xpectourclosefriendsandromantIcpdn:rstandclosertousthantoself-disclosemore,totouchusmore,~t 0 cestobehavedifferentlyaltedinmanyinsan, din t Forstrangers.Wearesoexpec'..thapeerorasuborae.whenwe'retalkingwithasupenor~h.~;:toinitiatetouch,to~terrupt,instance,superiorsoftenhavethe~IghereaswewouldconSIdertheseandtocontroltheflowofconversatI?nwbehaviorsinappropriateforasubordin:.tionsaccordingto EVT, iscon-Thethirdmajorsourceof 0:rr e1~ere~tways.Thecultural~n-text.We can thinkaboutcontext III aewthat can shapeourexpectancle:s;.alsandcustomsonalspace III textprovidessevernormiveeachothermorepe:salsoforinstancepeopleareexpectedto gI. ddleEastTheSOCIalontexttheUnitedStatesthanthey~~:;~:t~haviors~ecalledforwh::~~~helpsusknowwhattoexpect,dieddinggoingtochurch,p.. cal areatabasketballgame,at~e~~g~sforinstance.Eventhe his t:7ioninginabachelorparty,orSIttlll~lll.inthe1950stherewas~t~~ouse-contextinfluencesourexpe~an~:s~dwomenwouldbe;today.thatmenwouldbebrea~wmne...nofrolesisfarles~exphandthewives,whereasthistrad~tlO~;di;SI~urrelationshipsWitht.e:~hatourCharacteristicsofmdiVIus,ktogethertodetennllle~.tactoftenworbhaveaswe .I'¥,,~. contextsinwhichwemer art, peopletend.toecyconfirm.-expectationsare.Forthemostp firming behaVIOr.~owhatwethemto;we call this expectancy~~~ Thatis,whenpeop~endon'tpayingbehaviorlargelygoesunno.Itobenonnalandw_e 0 toclasswear-expectweconsidertheirbeha~orhenaprofessor~vesaringbutwemuch~ttentiontoit.Forexampe't~cewhatheorshelS'~:ornot.What .tti wemayno 1 it i appropnad 't mgappropriateaIre,.abtwhetherIISthingweonprobablywouldn'tthinktWice.ouhensomeonedoesso~:essorarrives to We do tendtonotice,however,~ wlatz' g behavior. If apr cyoton expect;wecallthis expectan 439438PartIV-ContemporaryNonverbalTheoriesIt'salmostasiftheyareclosernowthanifherparentshadbeenagreeableallalong.Buthowcanthatbe?Inanefforttounderstandsituationslikethis,JudeeBurgoonandcolleagues(Burgoon,1978;Burgoon & Hale,1988;Burgoon & Jones,1976;Burgoon,Walther, & Baesler,1992)developedexpectancyviolationstheory(EVT).PriortotheintroductionofEVT,manycommunicationscholarsassumedthatitwasalwaysbestforpeopletoactthewayothersexpectedthemtoact.Itwascommonlybelievedthatviolatingothers'expectationswouldroutinelyproducenegativeoutcomes.EVTpresentedadifferentidea,however. It suggeststhat,undercertaincircumstances,wecanactu-allyproducemorepositiveoutcomesbybehavinginunexpectedwaysthanbydoingwhatothersexpect.RecallthatChris'sparentsbehavedveryunexpectedlyduringtheirmostrecentvisit;however,theirunexpectedbehaviorsactuallyimprovedtheirrelationshipwithChris,ratherthanharmingit.AlthoughEVTwasoriginallyproposedasawaytoexplainresponsestopersonalspaceviolations,ithassincebeenrefinedandexpandedtoapplytoanumberofverbalandnonverbalbehaviors.OurgoalinthischapteristoexplaintheprinciplesofEVTandtoprovideexamplesofhowitsideasapplytoseveraleverydaybehaviors.WebeginbydiscussingthekeyconceptsofEVT,including expectancies,expectancyviolations,viola-tionvalence, and communicatorreward. Whetherwerealizeitornot,wehaveanumberofexpectanciesaboutourownandothers'behaviors.Someofourexpectanciesare predictive; thesetelluswhattoexpectinagivensituationbasedonwhatusuallyoccursinthatsituation.Forinstance,amanmayexpecthiswifetokisshimasheleavesforworkbecausethat'swhatshedoeseverymorning.~ther.expectanciesare prescriptive; thesetelluswhattoexpectinagivenSItuationbasedonwhatisappropriateordesired.Forexample,amanmayexpecthiswifetokisshimasheleavesforworkbecausethat'swhatmar-riedpeoplearesupposedtodo.Whateverformourexpectanciestake,theyhelpguideourbehaviorsinanumberofways.Whenwalkingthroughacrosswalk,weexpectmotoriststostopandwait,andwetrustthattheywill~oso.WeexpectretailerstogiveuschangewhenwepaytoomuchforanItem,andwebringittotheirattentioniftheydon't.Whenwegotothedentist,flyonanairplane,ortakeacollegecourse,weexpecttodealwithpeoplewhohavethetrainingandexperiencetheyneedtodotheirjobseffectively.  440PartIV-ContemporaryNonverbalTheoriesteachaclasswearingnothingbutundergarments,forinstance,wewouldmostcertainlynoticeit!That'sbecause,asEVTsuggests,expectancyvio-lationscatchourattentionandheightenourawarenessofthesituation.EVTpredictsthatourresponsestosuchsituationsarelargelydeterminedbytwofactors:theviolationvalenceandthecommunicatorrewardlevel.VIOLATIONVALENCEManytheorieswouldpredictthatanytimeourexpectationsarevio-lated,wearelikelytoreactnegatively.Thisisbecause,forthemostpart,peoplevalueconsistencyandpredictabilityintheirlives.Whenunexpectedeventsoccur,therefore,theyforceustoadmitthatourpredictionswerewrongandtheycancauseustofeeluncertainaboutthefuture.EVTcon-cedesthatexpectancyviolationsoftendoproducemorenegativeoutcomesthanexpectancyconfirmations.However,itpartswayswithothertheoriesbysuggestingthat,undercertaincircumstances,expectancyviolationscanproduceoutcomesthatareactuallymorepositivethanthoseproducedbyexpectancyconfirmations,Thatis,EVTrecognizesthatviolationshavea valence attachedtothem,meaningthattheyaresometimesconsideredpositiveandsometimesconsiderednegative. An examplemighthelpclaritythispoint.Forherbirthdaylastyear,LouisewantedherhusbandDantotakehertodinneratafancyrestau-rant.Shebegandroppinghints(somelesssubtlethanothers)severalmonthsinadvanceandwasfairlycertainshewouldbegettingwhatshewanted.IfDanhad,infact,takenhertoafancydinner,thatwouldhavebeenanexpectancyconfirmationanditwouldhavemadeLouisehappy,sincethat'swhatshewantedandwhatshehadcometoexpectwouldhap-pen.SupposethatDanhadgivenheronlyabirthdaycardandnothingmore.Acardisprobablylessdesirablethanafancydinner;therefore,thisiswhatEVTreferstoasa negativeviolation. Suppose,however,thatinsteadoftakinghertodinner,DanhadbookedthembothonacruisetotheBahamas.Eventhoughthatisn'twhatLouiseexpected,it'sprobablymoredesirablethanbeingtakenouttodinner.EVTreferstothisasa pos- itiveviolation. Whatdetermineswhetheranexpectancyviolationispositiveorneg-ative?AccordingtoEVT,wemakeacoupleofimportantjudgmentswhenourexpectationsareviolatedthathelpustolabeltheexperienceaspositiveornegative.Oneofthesejudgmentsisaboutthenatureofthebehavioritself.Certainbehaviors(e.g.,beingpunchedintheface)arequiteoftenconsiderednegativenomatterwhatthesituationis.Thus,whensomeonepunchesusunexpectedly,wearemorelikelytoconsiderthatanegative 441 49-Floyd, Ramirez, & Burgoon ..all otherthingsbeingequal.Otherviolationthana~ositive violation. e)havemorepositiveinherentmean-behaviors(e.g., being takenona cruisider VI.olationsnvolvingsuch behav- .likely to eonsi mgs, andsowearemore.iorstobepositivethannegative.thtcommunicationbehaviorsare It isoftenthecase,ho~ever,anotimmediatelyhaveasen~ofambiguousinmeaning.ThatIS,wem::haviortobepositiveorn~tl:e.whetherweconsideranu~e~e will turnourattention to ~udgmg EVT predictsthatinsuchsituations,wh.latedourexpectations.therewardlevelofthepersonorpeoplew 0 VIOCOMMUNICATOR REWARDLEVEL meone youdon't di atabusstopwhensorsonalLet'ssayyouarestan ng h to you toviolateyour~e kn andstandscloseenoug _....aI't.~ncy violation, since wowcomesup alify as an 1:lAP ~-- weinteractspace.Thiswouldclearlyqu.... ;n distancefrom us whIefnlookonlytaintaina eel~. gative?weexpectstrangers 0 m.his.lationpositiveo~ ne h tambiguous;awiththem.However,ISt.~~elf,werealizeitISso~ew~owsomeone,atthenatureofthebehaVIor.alaninterestingettm~:teAccordingopersonalspaceviolation can Signt to dominateorintim~b· looking onlybutitmightalsosignalan.~:::fhevalenceofth~~ola~~~h:personwho EVT, whenwecannotd~cIaboutthecharacterist~csthatpersonto be. atthebehavior,wethinkewardingweconSIdertiswhenwe see causedtheviolation,andhowrregardpositively(thaukely to see theWhentheviolator.issom~ohn;e:~value),we~~~~ypeoplewho .are him orherashaVIngahig r violationscatR>t' d can come ina iti eHoweve, ti e Rewa!. violationitselfaspo~lI~.be·udged as negaIV.ur personal space IS unrewardingtous will likely J whoinvaded yo red thatheorshenumberofforms.suppose~h~:;~umightbe ~:e; hisapositive vio- extremelyattractive.Int S cldprobablyconSI rpowerful.or anstoodsoclosetoyou,~dyOU~famoUS, : w~~h~~nalspaceviola-lation.Likewise, if thisperso ost likelyconsIdereelled as thoughbeorauthorityfigure,youwould~uposethepersons;:wouldpro~lYcon-tiontobepositive.However,k. In P t1..: nstance,~ to be negat!,·e. .wee lUã latIonshehadnotbathedmadingandtheVIOsiderthepersontobe unr ewarnONSECTANC\' VIOLt\~-- EFFECTSOF EXP differentoutrom.e!l.lations cause t1..~tn(l!;iti\oc {10- _---tJlllCJ VIO _M redicts uar-bil ega- Accordingto EVT, e:'l ';'specificallY, r. v £ ~tions,wenthanexpectancyconfumatl:v~outco Illes than CO lations will causemorepaSI  442 PartIV-ContemporaryNonverbalTheoriestiveviolations will producemorenegativeoutcomesthanconfirmationswill.Inoneoftheinitialtestsofthetheory,Burgoon(1978)examinedhowstudentsrespondedtodifferentlevelsofproximitytoaninterviewer. As hypothesized,therewardvalueoftheinterviewer(whichBurgoonmanip-ulatedbyhavingtheinterviewerprovideeitherpositiveornegativefeed-backwhiletalkingtostudents)significantlyaffectedstudents'perceptionsoftheinterviewer'scredibilityandattractiveness.Moreover,personalspaceviolationsenactedbyrewardinginterviewerswerefavoredovervio-lationsenactedbynonrewardinginterviewers,asEVTwouldsuggest.Later,inaseriesoffieldexperimentsonproximity,BurgoonandAho(1982)providedfurtherevidencethatrewardingcommunicatorsoftenengenderthemostfavorableoutcomesbyviolating,ratherthanconfirm-ing,personalspaceexpectations,whilenonrewardingcommunicatorsusu-allycreatethemostfavorableoutcomesbyconfirming,ratherthanviolat-ing,personalspaceexpectations.OtherexperimentstestingEVThavedemonstratedsimilareffectswithrespecttoanumberofinterpersonalbehaviors,includinggaze(Burgoon,Manusov,Mineo, & Hale,1985;Manusov,1984),touch(Burgoon & Walther,1990;Burgoonetal.,1992),immediacyandconversationalinvolvement(Burgoon & Hale,1988;Bur-goon,Newton,Walther, & Baesler,1989),andpleasantness(Burgoon & LePoire,1993;Burgoon,LePoire, & Rosenthal,1995). KeyPointsofExpectancyViolationsTheory 1.Peopledevelopexpectationsabouttheverbalandnonverbalcommunicationofothers.2.Violationsoftheseexpectationsarearousinganddistracting,causingthereceivertopayattentiontocornmunlcator,relationship,andviolationcharacteristicsandmeanings.3.Communicatorrewardlevelinfluenceshowambiguouscommunicationbehaviorsareinterpretedandevaluated.Ambiguousbehaviorsbyrewardingcommunicatorswillbejudgedpositivelywhilethesamebehaviorsbyunrewardingcommunicatorswillbejudgednegatively.4.Violationvalencesareafunctionof(a)theevaluationoftheactualbehavior,(b)whetherthebehaviorisinterpretedasmorepositiveormorenegativethanwhatweexpected,and(c)howmuchitdiffersfromourexpectation.Positiveevaluationsoccurwhenactualbehaviorsaremorefavorablyevaluatedthanexpectedbehaviors.Whenactualbehaviorsarelessfavorablyevaluatedthanexpectedbehaviors,negativeviolationsoccur.5.Comparedtoconfirmingexpectations,positiveviolationsproducemorefavorableoutcomesandnegativeviolationsproducemoreunfavorableones.AdaptedfromBurgoon,Stem,&Dillman(1995). 49-Floyd, Ramirez, & Burgoon 443 SUMMARy .urda-to-daybehaviorsandgive~sOurexpectations guide manyof 0 tt wenoticeitwhenpeople vio- asenseofcontroloverourlives;consequen y, ectedbehaviorislargelytdrespondtounexplatethem.Howweevaluae~hbhavioritselfandonourassess-dependentonourinterpretatlOnof~ehectedthebehavior.Incasesdithperson IS w 0 enaactu- mentofhowrewarnge.hwhatweexpected,wemaywhenthebehaviorismoredesITabletannwhatweexpected in th~.frrst ally bemoresatisfiedthan if wehadgottetsnowbecausetheyposltIvely .f II ertoher paren place,justas ChrIS ee sc 0 violatedherexpectations. References fnalspaceviolations:Expli-.tionmodel0perso h 4129-142. Burgoon, J. K(1978).A corom;;caanCommunicationRes~a; 'h'conversationalcationandaninitialte~t. um interpretations0oUC, 59 Burgoon, J. K(1991). Relational ~es;:nverbalBehavior, 15, :::~ecls ofviola-distance,andposture.~~~T~field expe:un entson hs, 49,71-88. Burgoon, J. K, & Aho, L.(. CommunicatWnMonog;a:I'Pa :ons: Modelelab- t' aldistance. _~ ,.t ,ncy vio., tions of conversa ion L (1988). Nonverbal e,..p<'~-- communicationMono- Burgoon, J. K, & Hale,J...diacybehaVlors. I· i onto lmIDe orationand appica 1 nal space expecta- gra phs, 55, 58-79.76) Towardatheoryofper5°h 2 131-146. SB (19·.. Researc,, les Burgoon,J. K, & Jones,.'. umancommunzcatwn unicationexpectanCl,tionsandtheirviol~tiO~ If (1993). Effectsofc07nonevaluations?fcom-Burgoon, J.K, & L~p~rre,'dexpectanCYdisco~0 neommunicatwnRe- actualcoinmuIDcatlOn, an. t'onbehaVlor. Huma .romum ca 1ã exmunicatorsandtheirco ects ofpreinteraction- search, 20, 67-96. Rosenthal, R. (199~). Efii. rocity and compensa-Burgoon, J. K,LePoire, B. A, & unicationonperceIver recJ~ocialpsychology, 31, pectanciesandtargetcorom mal ofExperimental tion in dyadicinteraction. Jou 85) Effects ofeye gaz~ 287-321. P & Hale,J.L. (19.. terPretation. Jon .VMineo,·, nal essage 10 Burgoon, J. K,Manusov,.,tinandrelatiomNverbalhiring,credibility,a~a~ ~33-146. Baesler,E. J. (1989). :verbal ofNonverbalBehavwr,, Walther J. B., & nt JournalofN DA'.olveme·Burgoon, J. K,Newto.n,. d conversationalmv.. Dyadic expectancyviolationsan rso nal aJe,ptatwn; Behavior, 13, 97-1l!_ & Dillman,L. (1~95)-=:ity ~s.dtheevaluativeBurgoon, J. K,Stern,L.,ewYork: CaJIl bndgeexpectanCles an 232-265. interactionpatterns. NJB (1990). Nonverbal. tionResearch, 17, BJK & Walther,.. eommu nJCf1. urgoon,.,. 1 ti ns Human fVloa10.consequences 0
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks
SAVE OUR EARTH

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!

x