Expectancy Violation Theory

To begin, the expectancy violation theory was developed to predict and explain the impact of unexpected communication behaviors (Burgoon & Walther, 1990). The founder of the expectancy violation theory, Judee Burgoon (1993) states “expectancy violations exert significance on people’s interaction patterns, on their impressions of one another, and on the outcomes of their interactions” (p. 40). In other words, Burgoon concluded from various experiments that people judge or evaluate communication with others in a negative or positive manner, based on their individual expectation of the interaction and their judgement of the communicator. When people do not act in accordance with their expectations, one turns to evaluating their communication behavior, for it can be verbal or nonverbal as well as how this behavior makes them feel.

According to Littlejohn & Foss (2015), “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” (p. 368). In other words, both the social and idiosyncratic level contribute factors that lead to an expectation in behavior. Furthermore, the factors derive from three classes of variables: actor variables, relationship variables, and context variables (Littlejohn & Foss, 2015). The variable, actor refers to characteristics associated to the individuals, for example, their gender, age, or race. The variable, relationship refers to characteristics associated with two or more individuals, for example in regards to their status, ancestral or romantic connection. The variable, context refers to frame of reference the interaction takes