Day 2 - Expectancy Violations Theory PDF

Preview

Summary

Cliff Scott...

Description

Day 2 - Expectancy Violations Theory #Class/COMM2100

Define: Expectancy Violation Communicator Characteristics Relationship / Mini-max Violations Individual Preferences Heightened Arousal

Recall: Humans hate unpredictability. Verbal vs Non Verbal Combination The "I" vs "Me" Verbal vs Nonverbal Communication Verbal Communication Non-Verbal Communication: Tone of voice Rate of speech How you pronounce things Does not involve how you pronounce, say, etc.

Expectancy Violations Theory Started as another theory used to Describe Personal Space “Invisible, variable volume of space surrounding an individual that defines… preferred distances from others” We usually don’t ever tell another our personal space boundaries Cultural norms Varies a lot from culture to culture In US Individualistic A lot space to work with Individual preferences Amount of children per house 3 vs 7 children

Ex. Meeting a girl and married her that had 7 siblings Sitting uncomfortably close next to you. Norm Developed. Approach-avoidance needs As individuals Tool Designed for one purpose

becomes another purpose

Stick with the original tool Initially developed as a theory of personal space

Expectancy Violation Expectancy What is predicted to occur Not necessarily what we want to occur

Context Cultural norms–contact vs. non-contact cultures Setting How are you doing? Process expectancy violations. At the end of hours vs in a comfortable setting

Relationships Similarity, familiarity, liking, status Like / Dislike person. Personal outlook. Low, High, Equal status Expectancy violated depend on status How much people perceive they are similar and like each other shape predictability

Communicator characteristics Introvert vs Extrovert Gender, age, race/ethnicity Appearance Communication style Violations sex attracted vs not attracted to

Violations Arousal to distract (Not just sexual arousal) Externally determined. Automatic behavior. There is an external cause.

People don’t have control over arousal Example: Desire to self protection. Fight or flight. Idea that arousal and distract is involuntary. Determinism vs Volunteerism Natural of relationship, shifting attention to the violator and the meaning of the violator.

Violation valence: Does the receiver perceive it as positive or negative? Negative valence do less than expected Positive valence do more than expected Example: intimacy from spouse vs. unexpected touch from stranger. Do more or less of violation valence in relationships Example 1: intimacy with someone else, more or less depending about response. We don’t always have the information. Basis of partial information. Make educated guesses on how to behave Perceive signals of wanting to be kissed (positive valence) Example 2: ask for a favor and suspect that they don’t like you Do less space violation (negative valence)

Social Exchange Theory Communicator Reward Valence Sum of positive or negative attributes or potential rewards or punishments a person brings to the encounter Mediates how we respond to expectancy violations. Mini-max (Burgoon) Humans have a tendency to minimize pain, cost, and maximize pleasure and rewards A lot of our behavior can be associated with how people perceive people subconsciously about cost and rewards How much can a person do for me? How much can this person help you? How much can a person to me? How you are treated? Like vs Dislike Positive or Negative to receiver or perpetrator? Receiver.

People are tempted to not tempted Theory change over the years Communicator Reward Characteristics not positive.

Objectivist Theory of communication: Explain

Predict

Control

Communication Example: Connections: Predictions in weather. Tornadoes sirens Why do pattern of predictions matter? What leads to likeliness? Why and how funnel clouds form? Can we predict likeness with given data? If we can predict, we can intervene to increase control. Don’t we live in a world where it’s nice that you can predict what the weather is? Non-communication. Expectancy Outcomes - provide better training

Explore Cool / Connecting Topics: People inappropriately rubbing shoulders in the library example with friends vs unknown people. Culture plays a role in career working with global connections of people. How do you communicate with face to face conversations through cultures? How has the social exchange theory change over the years?

Connecting Questions: How do people use Personal Space? Hall (not COMM scholar, anthropologist) developed - Proxemics Zones People have different reactions when they violate there personal space Family and especially Romantic Partners. “Go along to get along” The “Outsider” aka The person who’s thinking about what to do and not do. Follow the social norms that seem to exist in whatever setting you are in. Aren’t there positive settings where personal space and violating expectations? Burgoon’s Theory (COMM Scholar). Yes! In a Romantic Setting. When someone you are romantically attracted to violates your personal space.

Violating Personal Space Kissing. First kiss for example. Not upsetting. Unexpected. Human beings need to feel touch. Do we perceive it as a violation if the need of the violation is welcomed? Expectancy is about what you think will probably happen. Heightened Arousal When people violate our personal space We are cognitively aroused. Distracted towards this violation. Don’t we all know this feeling? I know this feeling. Relationship evaluation. Say someone likes you, but they don’t like you back. Would you do less or more violation in terms of violation valence? Probably do less. Depends on the situation. Expect to use more negative violation valance. Is the theory itself easy or difficult to explain and is the idea of theory explains the phenomenon? The ladder of the two. Burgoon’s Theories Explanation: yes. Useful: yes. Falsifiability: yes. Does the theory make predictions specific enough that we would know whether or not there are accurate that they are right or wrong? Burgoon’s Theories are falsifiable on purpose. Prediction: shaky. Can we predict things with this theory? Doesn’t predict the framework with variables that don’t turn out isn’t always accurate. Doesn’t mean you should toss out the theory Use as a baseline and in context. Additional variables can be added to increase predictive outcomes. Theories are constantly evolving and changing....