EXPECTANCY VIOLATIONS THEORY Judee Burgoon

Personal space Expectations: No one elseThe study of peoples use of comes close PROXEMICS space as a special elaboration of culture. (Edward Hall)

Four Interpersonal Distances A. Intimate Distance (0 18 inches) B. Personal Distance (18 inches 4 feet) C. Social Distance (4 feet 10 feet) D. Public Distance (10 feet - )

I need space. Personal space. [Personal space] invisible, variable volume of space
surrounding an individual that defines that individuals preferred distance fromothers. (J. Burgoon)
Some thirty inches from my nose The frontier of my Person goes, And all the untilled air between Is private pagus or demesne. Stranger, unless with bedroom eyes I beckon you to fraternize, Beware of rudely crossing it: I have no gun, but I can spit. (Prologue: The Birth of Architecture, W.H. Auden)

An applied test of the original STUDEN SITUATION model... PREDICTED ACTUAL

T ANDRE Spoke in an intimate eyeball-to-eyeball distance. (Crossed the Invisible Threat Threshold. Belinda asks for help regarding another course. Asked his teacher out to play water polo with him and some friends. OUTCOME Physical and Psychological Dsicomfort (A BIG FAT NO) We review our relationship with a person that acts in a curious way. a person with punishing power ( Charlie) would do best to observe proxemic conventions. An lack of personal approach in invitations would not gather a positive response. OUTCOME The author wrote the recommendation the next day. Belinda's request was declined. *

BELINDA

CHARLIE

Charlie backed off to a 7 ft-distance but still, his invitation was declined. They had lunch together the next day.

DAWN

Dawn invited the teacher to lunch the next day (while standing at the other end if the room)

Result
* attempt to apply Burgoons original model to conversational distance between the author and the students didnt meet with much success. The theoretical scoreboard read: Nonverbal expectancy violations model: 1 Unpredicted random behavior: 3

A CONVOLUTED MODEL BECOMES AN ELEGANT THEORY



Elegant theory gracefully concise and simple. Since the first introduction of the theory to the academic world, Burgoon has already removed extraneous features and streamlined her model. By extending its scope, she has produced a complete theory. Her original nonverbal expectancy violations model was concerned only with spatial violationsa rather narrow focus.

What Expectancy Violations Theory Denotes Now..



Expectancies exert significant influence on peoples interaction patterns, on their impressions of one another, and on the outcomes of their interactions. Violations of expectations in turn may arouse and distract their recipients, shifting greater attention to the violator and the meaning of the violation itself. People who can assume that they are well regarded by their audience are safer engaging in violations and more likely to profit from doing so than are those who are poorly regarded.

When the violation act is one that is likely to be ambiguous in its meaning or to carry multiple interpretations that are not uniformly positive or negative, then the reward valence of the communicator can be especially significant in moderating interpretations, evaluations, and subsequent outcomes. . . . In other cases, violations have relatively consensual meanings and valences associated with them, so that engaging in them produces similar effects for positive and negative valenced Communicators. - J. Burgoon

CORE CONCEPTS

Expectancy
Expectancy is what is predicted to occur rather than what is desired. . Expectancy is based on context, relationship, and communicator characteristics

Violation valence
The violation valence is the positive or negative value we place on the unexpected behavior, regardless of who does it. If the valence is negative, do less than expected If the valence is positive, do more than expected. Although the meanings of most violations can be determined from context, some nonverbal expectancy violations are truly ambiguous.

Communicator Reward valence valence is the The communicator reward

sum of the positive and negative attributes that the person brings to the encounter plus the potential he or she has to reward or punish in the future. Puzzling violations force victims to search the social context for clues to their meaning and thats when communication reward valence comes into play.

Interaction Adaptation: Adjusting Expectations

EVT has been used to explain and predict attitudes and behaviors in a wide variety of communication contexts.

14

Men and womens expectations for first dates and compares those expectations with their actual experiences. Paul Mongeau

15

Burgoon has also re-assessed EVTs singlesided view and now favors a dyadic model of interpersonal adaptation.

Interaction adaptation theory is an

extension and expansion of EVT

Interaction position encompasses three

factors.

16

R.E.D Factors
Requirements: outcomes we all need to fulfill
our basic needs to survive, be safe, belong, and have sense of self-worth

Expectations: what we think really will happen Desire: what we personally would like to see
happen.

17

Ethical Reflection
Immanuel Kant Before we knowingly violate anothers expectation we should consider whats ethical. Everytime we speak or act, we have a moral obligation to be truthful.

Ethical Reflection
Categorical Imperative duty without exemption. It is a method of determining right from wrong by thinking through the ethical valence of an act, regardless of motive. Act only on that maxim which you can will to become universal law.

CRITIQUE
Judee Burgoons Expectancy Violations Theory continues to meet five of the six criteria of a good scientific theory:
Her theory advances a reasonable explanation for the effects of expectancy violations during communication. The explanation she offers is relatively simple and has actually become less complex over time. The theory has testable hypotheses that the theorist is willing to adjust when her quantitative research doesnt support the prediction. The model offers practical advice on how to better achieve important communication goals of increased credibility, influence, and attraction.

However, we wish for more reliable predictions