Expectancy Violations Theory explains how people react when their expectations of another person's behavior are violated. We form expectations based on social norms, past experience with the person, and the context of the interaction. Violations of expectations like interpersonal distance cause relational arousal and distract us from the interaction. According to the theory, violated expectations are judged negatively while met expectations are judged positively. When expectations are unclear, we interpret violations based on the person's ability to reward or punish us. The theory also relates to how people adapt their interactions based on violations to manage expectations going forward.

1. EXPECTANCY VIOLATIONS THEORY Introduction to Communication Theories By Anne Cortez | Adamson University

2. Discussion Outline
•Expectations and Experience
•Expectancy, Violation Valence, Communicator Reward
•Interaction Adaptation
•Summary

3. A
B

4. Expectations dictate our experience.

5. Expectancy Violations Theory (EVT) - explains how people react when their expectations are violated

6. We have expectations about the behavior of another person based on social norms, our previous experience with the other person and the situation in which the behavior occurs.

8. Interpersonal Distances (Edward Hall)
•Intimate distance : 0-18 inches
•Personal distance : 18 inches - 4 feet
•Social distance : 4 -10 feet
•Public distance : 10 feet - infinity

9. What happens when expectations on interpersonal distances are violated?

10. Relational arousal - a heightened state of awareness, orienting response, or mental alertness that stimulates a review of the relationship

11. When your expectations are met, you don’t notice the behavior, but when they are violated, you become distracted by the behavior.

12. Core Concepts of Expectancy Violations Theory
EXPECTANCY
VIOLATION VALENCE
COMMUNICATOR REWARD VALENCE

13. EXPECTANCY
•What people predict will happen (rather than what they desire)
•Influenced by context, relationship, and communicator characteristics

14. Context – culture and environment Relationship – similarity, familiarity, liking, and relative status Communicator characteristics- physical features, personality, communication style

15. VIOLATION VALENCE
•The perceived positive or negative value assigned to a breach of expectations, regardless of who the violator is

18. According to EVT, when expectancies are met, the other person’s behaviors are judged as positive and when they are violated, the behaviors are judged as negative.

19. What if the action is equivocal? When the meaning of an action is unclear, we interpret the violation in light of how the violator can affect our lives.

20. COMMUNICATOR REWARD VALENCE
•Result of a mental audit of gains and losses
•The sum of positive and negative attributes brought to the encounter plus the potential to reward or punish in the future

21. What enhances a person’s reward potential? Status, ability, and good looks of the communicator. And the quality of the conversation itself.

22. How do we apply the Expectancy Violations Theory in our daily lives?

23. Interaction Adaptation Theory (IAT) A systematic analysis of how people adjust their approach when another’s behavior doesn’t mesh with what’s needed, anticipated, or preferred

24. Interaction position - A person’s initial stance toward an interaction as determined by a blend of personal requirements, expectations, and desires (RED)

26. Reciprocity - A strong human tendency to respond to another’s action with similar behavior

27. EXPECTANCY VIOLATIONS
•Humans have expectations – verbal and non- verbal like distance, eye contact, etc
•When expectancies are met, the other person’s behaviors are judged as positive and when they are violated, the behaviors are judged as negative
•Whether judged as good or bad, violations cause the perceiver to be relationally aroused

28. EXPECTANCY VIOLATIONS
•When expectations are violated, you look to the violator to evaluate the experience, calculate the gain and loss (violation and communicator reward valence) and predict future interactions
•We adjust our approach or interaction to manage and adapt to expectations

29. REFERENCES
Em Griffin, A First Look at Communication Theory, 2006. Stephen Littlejohn and Karen Foss, Communication Theory, 2010.

30. QUESTIONS?