EXPECTANCY VIOLATIONS THEORY:
CORE CONCEPTS:
Expectancy Violation theory Definition
Expectancy violation theory is concerned primarily with the structure of messages (non-
verbal). It asserts that when communicative norms are violated, the violation may be
perceived either favourably or unfavourably, depending on the perception the receiver has of
the violator. Violating another’s expectation is a strategy that may be used rather than conforming to
another’s expectation.
Expectancies: These are enduring cognitions about anticipated verbal and nonverbal
communication. They have two components:
Social Level: Rooted in roles, rules, norms, and practices typical of a culture,
community, or context.
Idiosyncratic Level: Based on person-specific knowledge of an individual's typical
communication patterns.
"Expectations are enduring cognitions about the anticipated verbal and nonverbal
communication of others." (Burgoon & Hale, 1988)
"At the social level they encompass the roles, rules, norms, and practices that typify a
given culture, community, or context. At the idiosyncratic level, they encompass
person-specific knowledge related to another’s typical communication practices."
(Burgoon, 2019)
Factors Influencing Expectations: Expectations are shaped by three main categories of
variables:
Actor Variables: Characteristics of the individual, such as gender, age, cultural
background ("contact" vs. "noncontact" cultures).
Relationship Variables: Characteristics defined by the interacting individuals,
including status, familial relationship, and attraction.
Context Variables: Features of the setting and the type of interaction (e.g., formal
vs. informal, seated vs. standing).
Expectancy Violation: This occurs when another person's behaviour falls outside the range
of expected behaviour and is sufficiently noticeable.
"An expectancy violation occurs when another’s behaviour falls outside this range
and is sufficiently deviant to be noticed." (Burgoon, 2019)
Communicator Reward Valence: Receivers assess the net positive or negative value that a
communicator holds for them. This is influenced by factors like character, competence,
composure, sociability, dynamism (ethos), and the potential for positive or negative
consequences (reinforcement learning).
"According to EVT, receivers assess (albeit usually unconsciously) the net reward
value that a communicator holds for them." (Burgoon, 2019)
Arousal and Distraction: Violations are predicted to increase psychological and/or
physiological activation and divert attention towards the source of the violation.
"EVT predicts that violations are arousing—they elicit psychological and/or
physiological activation— and distract a recipient’s attention from the ostensible main
topic of conversation and toward the source of the violation." (Burgoon, 2019)
Interpretation and Appraisal: Individuals engage in a two-stage process:
Assigning meaning to the violation itself (e.g., is close proximity aggressive or
ingratiating?).
1|P a g e
, Appraising the act as desirable or undesirable (e.g., is close proximity wanted or
unwanted?).
This process is often moderated by the characteristics of the violator.
Violation Valence: The net result of the interpretation and appraisal process, where the
violation is categorized as positive or negative.
KEY PROPOSITIONS AND FINDINGS:
Impact of Violation Valence:
Positive violations are predicted to produce more favourable outcomes than positive
confirmations of expectations.
Negative violations are predicted to produce more negative outcomes than negative
confirmations.
"Positive violations are predicted to produce more favourable outcomes than are
positive confirmations; negative violations are predicted to produce more negative
outcomes than are negative confirmations." (Burgoon, 2019)
EVT suggests that "there are occasions where violation is not a negative" and that it
can be "beneficial to violate in what is called a 'positive violation.'" (Burgoon,
Interview)
Role of Communicator Reward: The reward valence of the communicator significantly
influences how a violation is interpreted and evaluated. A positive violation from a high-reward
communicator can be more beneficial than conforming to expectations, as it can increase
awareness of their positive qualities.
"So, for example, if I think really positively of you, and you become… Oh you do, you
do! And I do… and I am engaged in an interaction with you and you become even
friendlier than I had expected, I might in this case become even more aware of what
you’re doing... and as a result of your doing the violation, I’m actually even more
favourably disposed toward you." (Burgoon, Interview)
Strategic Communication: While not advocating for constant deliberate violation, EVT
suggests that in planned communication, individuals can make strategic choices about
deviating from expectations to potentially achieve more positive outcomes, especially if they
are perceived positively.
"But I think there are times when I think we plan our communication where you could
make choices." (Burgoon, Interview)
Empirical Support and Evolution: Initial tests focusing on a "threat threshold" for close
proximity were not supported. The theory was revised to emphasize the role of violation
interpretation. Subsequent research has supported the predictions regarding positive and
negative violations across various nonverbal behaviours like proximity, eye gaze, immediacy,
touch, and posture. EVT has been applied to diverse communication contexts, including
persuasion, intercultural interactions, and deception.
"Initial tests of the theory focused on violations of conversational distance and
predicted that close violations exceeding a very close threshold called the threat
threshold would have negative consequences regardless of who committed them.
However, the results did not support the existence of a threat threshold. The theory
was then revised, and the role of violation interpretation became more prominent."
(Burgoon, 2019)
IV. Judee Burgoon's Perspective on Theorizing:
Burgoon describes theory as a "set of systematic hunches about the way things operate,"
informed by existing research and literature.
2|P a g e
CORE CONCEPTS:
Expectancy Violation theory Definition
Expectancy violation theory is concerned primarily with the structure of messages (non-
verbal). It asserts that when communicative norms are violated, the violation may be
perceived either favourably or unfavourably, depending on the perception the receiver has of
the violator. Violating another’s expectation is a strategy that may be used rather than conforming to
another’s expectation.
Expectancies: These are enduring cognitions about anticipated verbal and nonverbal
communication. They have two components:
Social Level: Rooted in roles, rules, norms, and practices typical of a culture,
community, or context.
Idiosyncratic Level: Based on person-specific knowledge of an individual's typical
communication patterns.
"Expectations are enduring cognitions about the anticipated verbal and nonverbal
communication of others." (Burgoon & Hale, 1988)
"At the social level they encompass the roles, rules, norms, and practices that typify a
given culture, community, or context. At the idiosyncratic level, they encompass
person-specific knowledge related to another’s typical communication practices."
(Burgoon, 2019)
Factors Influencing Expectations: Expectations are shaped by three main categories of
variables:
Actor Variables: Characteristics of the individual, such as gender, age, cultural
background ("contact" vs. "noncontact" cultures).
Relationship Variables: Characteristics defined by the interacting individuals,
including status, familial relationship, and attraction.
Context Variables: Features of the setting and the type of interaction (e.g., formal
vs. informal, seated vs. standing).
Expectancy Violation: This occurs when another person's behaviour falls outside the range
of expected behaviour and is sufficiently noticeable.
"An expectancy violation occurs when another’s behaviour falls outside this range
and is sufficiently deviant to be noticed." (Burgoon, 2019)
Communicator Reward Valence: Receivers assess the net positive or negative value that a
communicator holds for them. This is influenced by factors like character, competence,
composure, sociability, dynamism (ethos), and the potential for positive or negative
consequences (reinforcement learning).
"According to EVT, receivers assess (albeit usually unconsciously) the net reward
value that a communicator holds for them." (Burgoon, 2019)
Arousal and Distraction: Violations are predicted to increase psychological and/or
physiological activation and divert attention towards the source of the violation.
"EVT predicts that violations are arousing—they elicit psychological and/or
physiological activation— and distract a recipient’s attention from the ostensible main
topic of conversation and toward the source of the violation." (Burgoon, 2019)
Interpretation and Appraisal: Individuals engage in a two-stage process:
Assigning meaning to the violation itself (e.g., is close proximity aggressive or
ingratiating?).
1|P a g e
, Appraising the act as desirable or undesirable (e.g., is close proximity wanted or
unwanted?).
This process is often moderated by the characteristics of the violator.
Violation Valence: The net result of the interpretation and appraisal process, where the
violation is categorized as positive or negative.
KEY PROPOSITIONS AND FINDINGS:
Impact of Violation Valence:
Positive violations are predicted to produce more favourable outcomes than positive
confirmations of expectations.
Negative violations are predicted to produce more negative outcomes than negative
confirmations.
"Positive violations are predicted to produce more favourable outcomes than are
positive confirmations; negative violations are predicted to produce more negative
outcomes than are negative confirmations." (Burgoon, 2019)
EVT suggests that "there are occasions where violation is not a negative" and that it
can be "beneficial to violate in what is called a 'positive violation.'" (Burgoon,
Interview)
Role of Communicator Reward: The reward valence of the communicator significantly
influences how a violation is interpreted and evaluated. A positive violation from a high-reward
communicator can be more beneficial than conforming to expectations, as it can increase
awareness of their positive qualities.
"So, for example, if I think really positively of you, and you become… Oh you do, you
do! And I do… and I am engaged in an interaction with you and you become even
friendlier than I had expected, I might in this case become even more aware of what
you’re doing... and as a result of your doing the violation, I’m actually even more
favourably disposed toward you." (Burgoon, Interview)
Strategic Communication: While not advocating for constant deliberate violation, EVT
suggests that in planned communication, individuals can make strategic choices about
deviating from expectations to potentially achieve more positive outcomes, especially if they
are perceived positively.
"But I think there are times when I think we plan our communication where you could
make choices." (Burgoon, Interview)
Empirical Support and Evolution: Initial tests focusing on a "threat threshold" for close
proximity were not supported. The theory was revised to emphasize the role of violation
interpretation. Subsequent research has supported the predictions regarding positive and
negative violations across various nonverbal behaviours like proximity, eye gaze, immediacy,
touch, and posture. EVT has been applied to diverse communication contexts, including
persuasion, intercultural interactions, and deception.
"Initial tests of the theory focused on violations of conversational distance and
predicted that close violations exceeding a very close threshold called the threat
threshold would have negative consequences regardless of who committed them.
However, the results did not support the existence of a threat threshold. The theory
was then revised, and the role of violation interpretation became more prominent."
(Burgoon, 2019)
IV. Judee Burgoon's Perspective on Theorizing:
Burgoon describes theory as a "set of systematic hunches about the way things operate,"
informed by existing research and literature.
2|P a g e
