Expectancy Violation Theory in Relation to Cultural Shock - Research Paper Example

Expectancy violation Theory in relation to Cultural Shock Introduction – Expectancy Violation Theory in relation to Culture Shock The theory of expectancy violations basically strives to explain the reaction of an individual towards the unexpected behavior of the other individuals (Jussim et al, 1987). It also explains different perceptions and standards of people regarding the limits that they set for judgment of one’s action as violation or breech of their personal space. According to the expectancy violation theory communication is a process in which information of highly relational content is exchanged and information affects the expectations of the other people who perceive it in different manner on the basis of the mutual link between the involved individuals (Murray and Jackson, 1982). Social norms and communication characteristics are the basic element of the expectancy violation theory. Expectancy Violation Theory sees communication as the medium through which people exchange information with one another. Communication can also be used to violate the expectations of another person as either negative or positive depending upon the link between the two people. However, experts also explain this theory as in communicating with others; people generally have an expectation of the way the other person will react verbally or non-verbally. The Expectancy Violation Theory assesses the way in which we react to someone’s non-verbal behavior (Kunda and Thagard, 1996). Cultural shock is when people or a person enters into a new culture when they migrate to a new place or experience new people around them. The difficulty they have in adjusting in that culture and amongst the people is known as cultural shock. Expectancy Violation Theory closely related to cultural shock as the people who are new to the society will face difficulties in keeping expectations from the people as to what their reaction will be. As the behaviors are new, there will be vague predictions about the expectations of the people on the communications made whether verbal or non-verbal (Burgoon, 1993). Summarizing the theory When having a communication with someone’s, the reaction of the person can either be positive or negative, which means that either the person will smile or will show a rude reaction (Marques, 1990). The theory examines that the people carry expectations when they interact with others and these expectations are from the culture or the individuals in that culture. They make predictions about the non-verbal communications, and there are times when their expectations violate (Jussim et al, 1987). Personal space refers to a space that has to be maintained while interacting with the people. There are certain experiments that can be used as examples when talking about the part of theory that examines the personal space (Burgoon, 1993). The experiment is done breaking the norms and the values of the personal space and assesses the practical to the Expectancy Violation Theory. In the experiment, a man or woman walks up to a random person in a public place. In order to create communication to ask how the feel about people who drink and drive, they go really close to them to ask, thus invading their personal space (Mandler, 1975). This is an example that directly relates to the Expectancy Violation Theory, and it shows the reaction people have when their private space is invaded. The example shows that the personal space that is socially acceptable is about 4-5 inches and anyone who breaks the distance will experience a negative reaction of the person (Murray and Jackson, 1982). Many students face cultural shock when they go abroad for their studies. This has been seen as an ongoing process in which people experience new things, new people, new cultures; they make predictions and break their expectations. The modified Expectancy Violation Theory shows the many expectations of the students studying abroad that are violated mostly because of the cultural shock. Synthesis of Scholarship - Comparison and contrast of different approaches The expectancy violation theory has been explained and studies by different social scientist from the perspective of cultural shocks because when a person interact with the individuals of other culture they are more uncertain about the potential response and outcome of their interaction with the people of other cultural group (Mandler, 1975). Kaunda and Taggard (1996) studied the judgment patterns of different groups tend to be very complex especially when it comes to cultural differences and the interactions are also highly affected by the judgment patterns of the people that they use to interpret the communication process between them. Mandler (1975) suggests that most of the times when the expectations are met the interaction between the individual generated positive outcomes whereas the violation of the expectancies also leads towards arousal. Burgoon (1993) proposes that the violation of the expectancies might also cause emotional intensification that will have string impact upon the future interactions between these people and when they belong to different cultural groups, it will have even more intense effects because certain stereotypical thinking would also be affected and possibility strengthened by the violation of the expectancies. Murray and Jackson (1982) also suggest that the violation of the expectancies tend to have very negative emotional effects as people use to strongly perceive the unexpected behavior of the people of other cultural groups as compared with their own. Contrary to this approach, the black sheep model presented by Marques (1990) allows understanding the expectancy violation theory in the cultural context but from a different and contrary perspective as he defines that the people use to judge the favorable in group members more positively as compared with the favorable out-group members whereas at the same time, the unfavorable in group members are also judged more negatively than the unfavorable out group members. This in group polarization has broad implications to the cultural shocks because people of same cultural groups tend to have different judgment patterns for the people of their own groups and judge differently the out group members. Jussim et al (1987), on the other hand present the preposition that culture might be a factor in determining the potential violation however, it is a complex process and it is not possible to make a general judgment that could be applicable to all situations where the people of different culture interact. This is because people tend to have different expectancy violations for their own group members as compared with the others (Burgoon, 1993). For instance, a Belgian perceiver will have more expectations from a likeable fellow Belgian as compared with the likeable North African. It implies that culture makes core difference in the behaviors and perceptions of the people when it comes to the expectancy violation theory because the interaction between the people highly depends upon their cultural identities that compel them to act and react in certain manners. Conclusion It has been unveiled that there are certain strength and weaknesses of the expectancy violation theory due to which the theory has been widely appraised as well as criticized on certain grounds. At first, there is limited scope of thought and research being devoted to the theory. The theory presents violation as highly consequential act that is always negative in nature and increases uncertainty though it has been argued that the frequency, seriousness and valance of violation vary from situation to situation and could not be explained through same standards in different situation (Burgoon, 1993). The theory also seems weak on the point that interpersonal communication is a complex process in which there are certain contingency conditions that are overlooked in this theory. The theory does not allow predicting the behavioural outcomes of the particular situations due to which the theory seems impractical. However, at the same time there are certain strong prepositions of the theory that add to its strength like it provides detailed understanding of the issues including personal space, interpersonal communication and the potential outcomes of this process. The theory is a significant approach towards understanding the social behaviours and the potential outcomes of the interaction between the people. The review of these research studies and theories proposed by different social scientists allow gaining insight to the differences in the approaches towards the expectancy violation theory in the cultural context. According to some theorists, people tend to have more intense negative reaction towards the in-group fellows as compared with the out group individuals whereas according to some other approaches the individuals tend to reach extremely emotional and negative when there is violation of their expectancies from the people of the other group. The entire discussion could be sum up with the conclusion that expectancy violation theory becomes highly complicated when it comes to the cultural shock situation. People use to have different patterns of judgements and perceptions while communicating with the members of other cultural groups and in such situation it becomes extremely difficult to predict specific type of reactions from the people through any single theoretical standpoint as there are lots of variations in the behavioural patterns of the people when it comes to the interactions between the individuals of different cultural groups. References Burgoon, J. (1993). ‘Interpersonal expectations, expectancy violations, and emotional communication’. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 12, 30-48. Kunda, Z. & Thagard, P. (1996). ‘Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors: A parallel-constraint-satisfaction theory’. Psychological Review, 103, 284-308. Jussim, L., Coleman, L. M. & Lerch, L. (1987). ‘The nature of stereotypes: A comparison and integration of three theories’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 536-546. Mandler, G. (1975). Mind and emotions. New York: Wiley. Marques, J. M. (1990). ‘The black-sheep: Out-group homogeneity in social comparison settings’. In D. Abrams & M. Hogg (Eds). Social identity theory: Constructive and critical advances (pp. 131±151). London: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Murray, C. B. & Jackson, J. S. (1982). ‘The conditioned failure model of Black educational underachievement’. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 10, 276-300. Read More