What is expectancy violations theory in simple terms?

When someone behaves differently than we expect, we pay attention and try to interpret what it means. Depending on who they are and how we read the behavior, the result can be good or bad.

Can violating expectations lead to good outcomes?

Yes. A violation interpreted positively, such as a well-liked person approaching more warmly than expected, can leave a better impression than simply behaving as expected.

Expectancy Violations Theory

🎨 Media, Arts & Culture By CampusDown Wiki Editorial Team Last updated October 27, 2026

Expectancy violations theory is a communication theory explaining how people interpret and respond when a conversational partner behaves differently than expected. Judee Burgoon proposed it in the 1970s, starting from research on personal space, the distance people keep from one another while talking. The theory holds that violating expectations does not always produce bad outcomes; depending on who commits the violation and how it is interpreted, it can produce better outcomes than conforming to expectations.

Contents

1. Expectations and violations
2. Reward valence and violation valence
3. Relationships and later developments
4. FAQ
5. References

Expectations and violations

Burgoon and Jones (1976) argued that in conversation people hold expectations, grounded in social norms and personal experience, about how much distance others will keep. These expectations vary by culture, relationship and situation. When a partner comes much closer or stays farther away than expected, we notice it and become aroused, with attention shifting to the behavior, and we try to interpret what it means. Burgoon (1978) formalized this process as a model and tested it experimentally. Burgoon and Hale (1988) later extended the theory beyond personal space to immediacy behaviors in general, such as gaze, touch and gestures.

Reward valence and violation valence

The theory rests on two evaluations. The first is communicator reward valence: the more attractive, high-status or useful a partner is, the higher their reward valence. The second is violation valence: whether the expectation-violating behavior itself is interpreted positively or negatively. For example, when an attractive partner holds eye contact longer than expected, it may be read as a sign of interest and become a positive violation, whereas the same behavior from a stranger may feel threatening. In experiments, Burgoon and Walther (1990) reported that positive violations by high-reward communicators can be evaluated more favorably than conforming to expectations. Burgoon (1993) also described how expectancy violations connect to emotional reactions such as surprise, joy and anger.

Relationships and later developments

Afifi and Metts (1998) studied expectancy violations in close relationships such as romantic partners and friends, reporting that various violations, including sudden expressions of affection, betrayal and changes in attitudes toward the relationship, can bring people closer or drive them apart. The theory has since been applied to online communication, teacher–student relationships and intercultural communication. Burgoon, Stern and Dillman (1995) developed it into interaction adaptation theory, which considers needs and desires as well as expectations to explain how people match or diverge from each other's behavior during interaction. Expectancy violations theory is regarded, alongside uncertainty reduction theory, as a leading theory of interpersonal communication.

FAQ

What is expectancy violations theory in simple terms?: When someone behaves differently than we expect, we pay attention and try to interpret what it means. Depending on who they are and how we read the behavior, the result can be good or bad.
Can violating expectations lead to good outcomes?: Yes. A violation interpreted positively, such as a well-liked person approaching more warmly than expected, can leave a better impression than simply behaving as expected.

Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26

References

Burgoon, J. K., & Jones, S. B. (1976). Toward a theory of personal space expectations and their violations. Human Communication Research, 2(2), 131–146. The first version of the theory, on personal space.
Burgoon, J. K. (1978). A communication model of personal space violations: Explication and an initial test. Human Communication Research, 4(2), 129–142. Adds reward valence and arousal and offers an initial test.
Burgoon, J. K., & Hale, J. L. (1988). Nonverbal expectancy violations: Model elaboration and application to immediacy behaviors. Communication Monographs, 55(1), 58–79. Extends the model to immediacy behaviors such as gaze and touch.
Burgoon, J. K., & Walther, J. B. (1990). Nonverbal expectancies and the evaluative consequences of violations. Human Communication Research, 17(2), 232–265. Experiments on nonverbal expectancies and evaluations of violations.
Burgoon, J. K. (1993). Interpersonal expectations, expectancy violations, and emotional communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 12(1–2), 30–48. Links expectancy violations to emotional communication.
Burgoon, J. K., Stern, L. A., & Dillman, L. (1995). Interpersonal Adaptation: Dyadic Interaction Patterns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Interaction adaptation theory, the successor to EVT.
Afifi, W. A., & Metts, S. (1998). Characteristics and consequences of expectation violations in close relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15(3), 365–392. Types and consequences of violations in close relationships.

Reports and materials that use this theory (Korean)

There are no materials dedicated to this theory yet, but you can search related reports in the CampusDown library (Korean).

Find more reports · Search '기대위반이론' on CampusDown →

Uncertainty reduction theoryWhat is uncertainty reduction theory? Berger and Calabrese’s 1975 axioms, how talk and nonverbal warmth reduce uncertainty in first meetings, passive, active and interactive strategies, the extension to intercultural communication, and criticisms.🧠 Psychology Relational dialectics theoryWhat is relational dialectics theory? Baxter and Montgomery’s 1996 framework, the tensions of autonomy and connection, openness and closedness, predictability and novelty, internal and external tensions, coping strategies, and examples.🧠 Psychology Social exchange theoryWhat is social exchange theory? Contributions of Homans (1958), Thibaut and Kelley (1959) and Blau (1964), rewards and costs, comparison level and comparison level for alternatives, reciprocity, power, applications and criticisms.🧠 Psychology Politeness TheoryWhat politeness theory is: how speakers adjust language to protect each other's face. Covers Brown and Levinson's positive and negative face, face-threatening acts and five strategies, critiques from Japanese, impoliteness and discursive approaches.👥 Sociology Attribution TheoryWhat is attribution theory? Heider’s internal vs external attributions, Kelley’s covariation model, Weiner’s three dimensions of achievement attribution, the fundamental attribution error, actor–observer and self-serving biases, with classroom and workplace examples.🧠 Psychology

Latest ArticlesView all ›

New guides for college study and assignments (Korean)

This article was last updated on October 27, 2026. It is based on widely recognized original works and textbooks; when citing it in a paper, please check the original sources listed in the references.