The Nonverbal Expectancy Violations Theory, The 5 Assumptions: Crosscultural Communication

This is the third article in my series on cross-cultural communication. This particular article addresses the five assumptions of the Nonverbal Expectancy Violations Theory.

A nonverbal message that varies greatly across cultures is hand gestures. In the United States the hand symbol for "Ok" is a positive one. This same hand gesture in Brazil and several other Latin American countries is akin to giving someone "the finger". Former President Richard Nixon made this mistake on his tour of Latin America in a photo opportunity. Needless to say the citizens of Latin America misinterpreted his good intention as a bad one. This sort of mistake can happen to anyone who is unfamiliar with the hand gestures of other cultures. Misinterpretations such as this can happen very easily during intercultural communication with strangers.

The Nonverbal Expectancy Violations Theory began to be developed in the late nineteen eighties by Judee K. Burgoon and her colleagues. The Nonverbal Expectancy Violations Theory "is based on five assumptions and contains five propositions" (Gudykunst & Kim, 2003). These assumptions hold true across cultures but may vary in intensity. It posits that most of the non verbal messages we execute are done unconsciously. This unconsciousness makes being aware of these movements difficult to monitor in ourselves and well as others. Sometimes when we are communicating intercultural with strangers we may become aware that our anxiety level becomes heightened but we are not sure as to why this is. Often non verbal messages are the culprit.

In the Nonverbal Expectancy Violations Theory the initial assumption is that "humans have competing approach and avoidance needs" (Burgoon, 1992). People have a basic need for other people in their lives. While we have those people that we already know and are close to us, we also have a need to invite new people into our lives. Additionally when the people that are closest to us bring others into our inner circle, we must reach out and accept them and make them feel welcome into the group. An example of this would be the fiancé of our sibling or best friend. When the new person comes into the group while we should do our best to accept them there is also the competing natural tendency to scrutinize them before allowing them in which occurs simultaneously.

The second assumption in the Nonverbal Expectancy Violations Theory is that "communicators evaluate the reward potential of others" (Burgoon, 1992). What can this person bring to the situation that is a benefit rather than a liability? People who come from an individualistic culture will view this second assumption through a lens of self-benefit. Those who come from a collectivist culture will view these benefits from a group perspective.

The third assumption in the Nonverbal Expectancy Violations Theory is that "communicators develop expectations about the nonverbal behaviors of others" (Burgoon, 1992). Within ones own culture we have expectations relating the non verbal messages of others. We can reasonably predict how the other person will react, even if we have not met them before. However the specific acts of non verbal messages will of course vary greatly between cultures. As previously mentioned, salutations are a reliable form of behavior between members of ones own culture but will differ from culture to culture.

The fourth assumption in the Nonverbal Expectancy Violations Theory is "nonverbal behaviors have associated evaluations ranging from extremely positive to extremely negative" (Burgoon, 1992). When we evaluate the non verbal messages of others we will process them in a way that can generate any number of different feelings that will vary in intensity. Additionally, the same behavior can be interpreted by different cultures in different ways.

Finally, the Nonverbal Expectancy Violations Theory posits that "nonverbal behaviors have socially recognized meaning" (Burgoon, 1992). Within cultures our non verbal messages have universal meanings that everyone recognizes and interprets with relative similarity.

*If you enjoyed this informative article on The Nonverbal Expectancy Violations Theory, please view my other articles in this series by clicking my name "Tesl Goddess"

Reference:

Burgoon, J. K. (1992). Applying a comparative approach to nonverbal expectancy violations theory. In J. Blumler, K. E. Rosengren, & J. M. McLeod (Eds.), Comparatively speaking: Communication and culture across space and time (pp. 53-69). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Burgoon, J., Buller, D., & Woodall, W. (1989). Nonverbal communication. New York: Harper & Row.

Gudykunst, W. and Kim, Y. (2003). Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.