Communication accommodation theory

Each one of us is aware that our style of speech changes depending on a wide range of variables such as the setting, the topic of discourse, the person we are interacting with, the purpose of the interaction, and so on. For instance, we tend to speak more slowly when conversing with foreigners, or use grammatically simple language with babies or children (babytalk). In other words, we accommodate to others by adjusting our communicational behaviour to the requisite roles that participants are assigned in a given context. Communication accommodation theory (CAT) is a theory of communication developed by Howard Giles, Donald Taylor and Richard Bouhris. It argues that “when people interact they adjust their speech, their vocal patterns and their gestures, to accommodate to others. It explores the various reasons why individuals emphasize or minimize the social differences between themselves and their interlocutors through verbal and nonverbal communication. This theory is concerned with the links between language, context and identity. There are two main accommodation processes described by this theory: convergence and divergence. Convergence refers to the strategies through which individuals adapt to each other’s communicative behaviors, in order to reduce these social differences. Meanwhile, divergence refers to the instances in which individuals accentuate the speech and non-verbal differences between themselves and their interlocutors. Sometimes when individuals try to engage in convergence they can also end up over-accommodating, and despite their good intentions their convergence can be seen as condescending. There are various examples of communication accommodation theory that we observe everyday in our day to day life. For example when we are speaking to the elderly we tend to change our speech and mannerism. We tend to speak in a softer tone and show respect through our speech and actions. During our day, we tend to change and adapt in every situation like talking to the boss, talking to parents, talking to children we change in every situation. Researchers used this phenomenon to formulate a theory on how we can get people to trust us. They stated that we can just subtly copy the mannerisms, speech, actions of the person we are interacting with. On a subconscious level they tend to like and approve of us. Thus communication accommodation can be used to develop a better relation with other individuals. For example: http://youtu.be/Cc7quH-i_0w

The above link shows a video where Phoebe (of F.R.I.E.N.D.S) is trying to accommodate to Mike's parents on their first meet. Here, we can see that she has changed her typical American accent to a 'posh' accent. Communication Accommodation Theory does not only apply to one's way of speaking but it may also be applied to how one may dress.

Expectancy violation theory

The theory was developed on the basis of expectancy violation model by Judee Burgoon. The Expectancy Violation Theory looks at how individuals react to the communication of others, either positively or negatively. The theory suggests that people hold expectations about the verbal and non-verbal behavior of others. Individuals will respond in specific ways when expectancies are violated. Communication occurs during the exchange of information, and this communication can be either verbal or nonverbal. Individuals have preconceived notions (or expectancies) of how others should act. Violations of expectancies cause arousal and compel the recipient to initiate a series of cognitive appraisals of the violation. The theory proposes that expectancy will influence the outcome of the communication as positive or negative and predicts that positive violations increase the attraction of the violator and negative violations decrease the attraction of the violator.

The Expectancy Violation Theory looks at how individuals react to the communication of others. Either communication is reinforced in a positive manner (i.e. smiling, agreeing, eye contact, etc.) or in a negative manner (i.e. frowning, creating a physical distance, etc.). We learn what we consider to be appropriate through our interactions with others and our culture. (Burgoon, 1993a).

At the heart of this theory is the notion of “personal space” and our reactions to others who seem to “violate” our sense of personal space, which the theory defines as “the invisible variable volume of space surrounding an individual that defines individual’s preferred distance from others. Personal space varies according to cultural norms and individual preferences. Personal space represents the balance between conflicting needs for affiliation and privacy. For us to better understand the said theory, Let us site an example. The perfect one is the movie “How to lose a guy in ten days”. The movie is a feel-good romantic comedy with a twist of drama. The movie tells a story of two different people bound to meet at the right place at a right time but with the wrong reasons. Andy is a magazine writer who works on a magazine article entitled ”How to lose a guy in ten days” which centers on how Andy will be dumped by the guy she is dating in just ten days. Ben is a an executive in an advertisement company who bets with his boss that he can make a woman fall in love for him in just ten days. But where is the EVT? How is the movie connected with EVT? Let us site some scenes that have a connection with the concepts with the Expectancy Violation Theory.

In the first part of the movie, Ben invited Andy into his place after they meet at the party then the first violation began. A girl who just met a guy is not expected to do what Andy did - at least for those who conform to morality in the 21st century. He is trying to provoke Ben into a more physical intimacy through kissing. She is trying to light up a flame of intimacy between the two of them. In this scene, Andy’s actions are the violations while she herself is the violator. But Ben did not entertain her action of seducing thus the action was perceived differently. Ben did not took it negatively because he did not back of or was turned of which was supposedly Andy’s objective. But let us also put into consideration that Ben controlled his action because of his motive-for Andy to fall for him thus the reward valence made its entrance. Ben thought of the reward he will get. But in the same scene he showed physical arousal which is one of the concepts of EVT. Physical arousal is defined as the behavior that the communicator employs during the interaction such as moving out at uncomfortable speaking distance which Ben showed in the scene, He moved out at the distance when the interaction-kissing- happened.

Another scene that could be related to EVT is those scenes where Andy was always sticking with Ben. She would always call him at work and would always want to be with him, even the time that Ben spends with his friends, Andy’s existence should be felt. Ben then reacted into Andy’s suffocating actions. He felt that he needs space from all of Andy’s whims. His reaction can be called as violence valence-negatively, is Ben’s case. Violation valence refers to the positive or negative assessment of a deviation from expected behavior. In the movie, Ben showed a violence valence because of Andy’s unexpected behavior which deviates from the norms. Ben finds the behavior distressing thus making him feel negative valence towards Andy.

Certainly, the movie “How to lose a guy in ten days” showed a lot of potential scenes that could be related to the Violation Expectancy Theory. It is because the plot of the movie showed unexpected behaviours. The motives of the characters also speak for themselves. The context plays the vital role on its relevance to EVT. The movie the right example for it showcased a lot of non-verbal cues that the actors project.

Example2

A sales assistant is showing a person an expensive gadget of a moderate quality. This sets the price-performance expectation. Then, the sales assistant shows them a mid-priced one which sounds much better. They then 'share' (and so amplify) the person's surprise at the superior quality at a moderate price. The person happily walks out with the new gadget, convinced they have a bargain.