Language expectancy theory

Last updated

Language expectancy theory (LET) is a theory of persuasion. [1] The theory assumes language is a rules-based system, in which people develop expected norms as to appropriate language usage in given situations. [2] Furthermore, unexpected linguistic usage can affect the receiver's behavior resulting from attitudes towards a persuasive message.

Contents

Background

Created by Michael Burgoon, a retired professor of medicine from the University of Arizona, and Gerald R. Miller, the inspiration for LET was sparked by Brooks' work on expectations of language in 1970. Burgoon, Jones and Stewart furthered the discussion with the idea of linguistic strategies and message intensity in an essay published in 1975. The essay linked linguistic strategies, or how a message is framed, to effective persuasive outcomes. The original work for the language expectation theory was published in 1978. Titled "An empirical test of a model of resistance to persuasion", it outlined the theory through 17s.

Expectations

The theory views language expectancies as enduring patterns of anticipated communication behavior which are grounded in a society's psychological and cultural norms. Such societal forces influence language and enable the identification of non-normative use; violations of linguistic, syntactic and semantic expectations will either facilitate or inhibit an audience's receptivity to persuasion. [2] Burgoon claims applications for his theory in management, media, politics and medicine, and declares that his empirical research has shown a greater effect than expectancy violations theory, the domain of which does not extend to the spoken word.

LET argues that typical language behaviors fall within a normative "bandwidth" of expectations determined by a source's perceived credibility, the individual listener's normative expectations and a group's normative social climate, and generally supports a gender-stereotypical reaction to the use of profanity, for example. [3]

Communication expectancies are said to derive from three factors:

  1. The communicator – individual features, such as ethos or source credibility, personality, appearance, social status and gender.
  2. The relationship between a receiver and a communicator, including factors such as attraction, similarity and status equality.
  3. Context; i.e., privacy and formality constraints on interaction.

Violations

Violating social norms can have a positive or negative effect on persuasion. Usually people use language to conform to social norms; but a person's intentional or accidental deviation from expected behavior can have either a positive or negative reaction. Language Expectancy Theory assumes that language is a rule-governed system and people develop expectations concerning the language or message strategies employed by others in persuasive attempts (Burgoon, 1995). Expectations are a function of cultural and sociological norms and preferences arising from cultural values and societal standards or ideals for competent communication. [2]

When observed, behavior is preferred over what was expected or when a listener's initial negative evaluation causes a speaker to conform more closely to the expected behavior. The deviation can be seen as positive, [4] but when language choice or behavior is perceived as unacceptable or inappropriate behavior, the violation is negatively received and can inhibit the receptivity to a persuasive appeal. [3]

Positive violations occur (b) when negatively evaluated sources conform more closely than expected to cultural values or situational norms. This can result in overly positive evaluation of the source and change promoted by the actor (Burgoon, 1995).

Negative violations, resulting from language choices that lie outside socially acceptable behavior in a negative direction, produce no attitude or behavior change in receivers.

Summary of propositions

Language expectancy theory is based on 17 propositions. [2] Those propositions can be summarized as listed below:

The role of intensity

These propositions give rise to the impact of language intensity—defined by John Waite Bowers [ permanent dead link ] as a quality of language that "indicates the degree to which the speaker's attitude toward a concept deviates from neutrality" [10] —on persuasive messages. [11] Theorists have concentrated on two key areas: (1) intensity of language when it comes to gender roles and (2) credibility.

The perceived credibility of a source can greatly affect a message's persuasiveness. Researchers found that credible sources can enhance their appeal by using intense language; however, less credible speakers are more persuasive with low-intensity appeals. [12] Similarly, females are less persuasive than males when they use intense language because it violates the expected behavior, [12] but are more persuasive when they use low-intensity language. Males, however, are seen as weak when they argue in a less intense manner. Theorists argue further that females and speakers perceived as having low credibility have less freedom in selecting message strategies and that the use of aggressive language negatively violates expectations. [13]

Example

To better explain the theory we look at the expectations and societal norms for a man and a woman on their first date. If the man pushed for further physical intimacy after dinner, the societal expectation of a first date would be violated. The example below with Margret and Steve depicts such a scene.

Margret: "I had a really good time tonight, Steve. We should do it again."

Steve: "Let's cut the crap. Do you want to have sex?"

Margret: "Uhhh..."

Margret's language expectations of a first date were violated. Steve chooses an aggressive linguistic strategy. If Margret views Steve as a credible and appealing source, she may receive the message positively and, thus, the message would be persuasive. If Margret perceives Steve as an ambiguous or low-credible source, Steve will not be persuasive. In such a case, Steve should have used a low-aggressive message in his attempt to win Margret to his idea of having sex.

Criticism

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ M. Burgoon and Miller, 1985; M. Burgoon, Hunsaker & Dawson, 1994; M. Burgoon, Jones & Stewart, 1975
  2. 1 2 3 4 M. Burgoon and Miller. 1985
  3. 1 2 M. Burgoon, Hunsaker & Dawson, 1994
  4. ↑ M. Burgoon, 1994; M. Burgoon and Miller, 1985
  5. ↑ Dillard & Pfau, 2001, p. 122
  6. ↑ Dillard & Pfau, 2001, p. 123
  7. ↑ Dillard & Pfau, 2001, p. 124-125
  8. 1 2 Dillard & Pfau, 2001, p. 126
  9. ↑ Dillard & Pfau, 2001, p. 127
  10. ↑ Bowers, 1963, p. 345; 1964, p. 416
  11. ↑ M. Burgoon and Miller, 1977
  12. 1 2 M. Burgoon, Dillard & Doran, 1983; M. Burgoon, Hunsaker & Dawson, 1994; M. Burgoon and Miller, 1985
  13. ↑ M. Burgoon, Dillard & Doran, 1983
  14. 1 2 M. Burgoon, 1993

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Attitude (psychology)</span> Psychological construct, a mental and emotional entity that inheres in, or characterizes a person

In psychology, attitude is a psychological construct that is a mental and emotional entity that inheres or characterizes a person, their attitude to approach to something, or their personal view on it. Attitude involves their mindset, outlook and feelings. Attitudes are complex and are an acquired state through life experience. Attitude is an individual's predisposed state of mind regarding a value and it is precipitated through a responsive expression towards oneself, a person, place, thing, or event which in turn influences the individual's thought and action.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Elaboration likelihood model</span> Dual process theory

The elaboration likelihood model (ELM) of persuasion is a dual process theory describing the change of attitudes. The ELM was developed by Richard E. Petty and John Cacioppo in 1980. The model aims to explain different ways of processing stimuli, why they are used, and their outcomes on attitude change. The ELM proposes two major routes to persuasion: the central route and the peripheral route.

Expectancy violations theory (EVT) is a theory of communication that analyzes how individuals respond to unanticipated violations of social norms and expectations. The theory was proposed by Judee K. Burgoon in the late 1970s and continued through the 1980s and 1990s as "nonverbal expectancy violations theory", based on Burgoon's research studying proxemics. Burgoon's work initially analyzed individuals' allowances and expectations of personal distance and how responses to personal distance violations were influenced by the level of liking and relationship to the violators. The theory was later changed to its current name when other researchers began to focus on violations of social behavior expectations beyond nonverbal communication.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reactance (psychology)</span> Unpleasant emotion experienced when behavioral freedom is threatened

In psychology, reactance is an unpleasant motivational reaction to offers, persons, rules, or regulations that threaten or eliminate specific behavioral freedoms. Reactance occurs when an individual feels that an agent is attempting to limit one's choice of response and/or range of alternatives.

Surprise is a brief mental and physiological state, a startle response experienced by animals and humans as the result of an unexpected event. Surprise can have any valence; that is, it can be neutral/moderate, pleasant, unpleasant, positive, or negative. Surprise can occur in varying levels of intensity ranging from very-surprised, which may induce the fight-or-flight response, or little-surprise that elicits a less intense response to the stimuli.

Interpersonal deception theory (IDT) is one of a number of theories that attempts to explain how individuals handle actual deception at the conscious or subconscious level while engaged in face-to-face communication. The theory was put forth by David Buller and Judee Burgoon in 1996 to explore this idea that deception is an engaging process between receiver and deceiver. IDT assumes that communication is not static; it is influenced by personal goals and the meaning of the interaction as it unfolds. The sender's overt communications are affected by the overt and covert communications of the receiver, and vice versa. IDT explores the interrelation between the sender's communicative meaning and the receiver's thoughts and behavior in deceptive exchanges.

Fear appeal is a term used in psychology, sociology and marketing. It generally describes a strategy for motivating people to take a particular action, endorse a particular policy, or buy a particular product, by arousing fear. A well-known example in television advertising was a commercial employing the musical jingle: "Never pick up a stranger, pick up Prestone anti-freeze." This was accompanied by images of shadowy strangers (hitchhikers) who would presumably do one harm if picked up. The commercial's main appeal was not to the positive features of Prestone anti-freeze, but to the fear of what a "strange" brand might do.

Most investigators accept the definition of language intensity proposed by John Waite Bowers: a quality of language that "indicates the degree to which toward a concept deviates from neutrality." Intensity as a lexical variable in communication studies has generated extensive empirical research.

Inoculation theory is a social psychological/communication theory that explains how an attitude or belief can be protected against persuasion or influence in much the same way a body can be protected against disease–for example, through pre-exposure to weakened versions of a stronger, future threat. The theory uses medical inoculation as its explanatory analogy—applied to attitudes rather than to a disease. It has great potential for building public resilience against misinformation and fake news, for example, in tackling science denialism, risky health behaviours, and emotionally manipulative marketing and political messaging.

Compliance gaining is a term used in the social sciences that encompasses the intentional act of altering another's behavior. Research in this area originated in the field of social psychology, but communication scholars have also provided ample research in compliance gaining. While persuasion focuses on attitudes and beliefs, compliance gaining focuses on behavior.

Judee K. Burgoon is a professor of communication, family studies and human development at the University of Arizona, where she serves as director of research for the Center for the Management of Information and site director for the NSF-sponsored Center for Identification Technology Research. She is also involved with different aspects of interpersonal and nonverbal communication, deception, and new communication technologies. She is also director of human communication research for the Center for the Management of Information and site director for Center for Identification Technology Research at the university, and recently held an appointment as distinguished visiting professor with the department of communication at the University of Oklahoma, and the Center for Applied Social Research at the University of Oklahoma. Burgoon has authored or edited 13 books and monographs and has published nearly 300 articles, chapters and reviews related to nonverbal and verbal communication, deception, and computer-mediated communication. Her research has garnered over $13 million in extramural funding from the National Science Foundation, the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Counterintelligence Field Activity, and the National Institutes of Mental Health. Among the communication theories with which she is most notably linked are: interpersonal adaptation theory, expectancy violations theory, and interpersonal deception theory. A recent survey identified her as the most prolific female scholar in communication in the 20th century.

James Price Dillard is a distinguished professor of Communication Arts and Sciences Department at Penn State University. He has authored and co-authored over 50 manuscripts primarily on the role of emotion and persuasive influence. Dillard graduated in 1976 from the University of Kansas with a Bachelor's degree in Speech Communication and Psychology. In 1978, he earned his Master's degree in Communication from Arizona State University and in 1983, he received a Ph.D. in Communication from Michigan State University. Dillard is currently teaching Measurement in Communication Science and Persuasive Message Processing classes at Penn State University. His awards include the NCA Golden Anniversary Award for the most outstanding, Distinguished Book Award, Communication and Social Cognition Division of the National Communication Association and many others.

Cognitive valence theory (CVT) is a theoretical framework that describes and explains the process of intimacy exchange within a dyad relationship. Peter A. Andersen, PhD created the cognitive valence theory to answer questions regarding intimacy relationships among colleagues, close friends and intimate friends, married couples and family members. Intimacy or immediacy behavior is that behavior that provides closeness or distance within a dyad relationship. Closeness projects a positive feeling in a relationship, and distance projects a negative feeling within a relationship. Intimacy or immediacy behavior can be negatively valenced or positively valenced. Valence, associated with physics, is used here to describe the degree of negativity or positivity in expected information. If your partner perceives your actions as negative, then the interaction may repel your partner away from you. If your partner perceives your actions as positive, then the interaction may be accepted and may encourage closeness. Affection and intimacy promotes positive valence in a relationship. CVT uses non-verbal and verbal communications criteria to analyze behavioral situations.

Interpersonal (Interaction) adaptation theory (IAT) is often referred to as a theory of theories. Several theories have been developed to provide frameworks as explanations of social interactions. After reviewing and examining various communication theories and previous empirical evidence pertaining to interpersonal communication, a need to address ways in which individuals adapt to one another in interactions became apparent. The importance of observing both sides of a dyadic interaction lead to the development of the interpersonal adaptation theory. The theory states, individuals enter interactions with expectations, requirements, and desires, which combined establish an interaction position. Once the interaction begins, the difference between interaction position and the other party's actual behavior determines whether the individual will adapt and continue the communication positively or not.

Relational transgressions occur when people violate implicit or explicit relational rules. These transgressions include a wide variety of behaviors. The boundaries of relational transgressions are permeable. Betrayal for example, is often used as a synonym for a relational transgression. In some instances, betrayal can be defined as a rule violation that is traumatic to a relationship, and in other instances as destructive conflict or reference to infidelity.

Power and dominance-submission are two key dimensions of relationships, especially close relationships in which parties rely on one another to achieve their goals and as such it is important to be able to identify indicators of dominance.

The heuristic-systematic model of information processing (HSM) is a widely recognized model by Shelly Chaiken that attempts to explain how people receive and process persuasive messages. The model states that individuals can process messages in one of two ways: heuristically or systematically. Whereas systematic processing entails careful and deliberative processing of a message, heuristic processing entails the use of simplifying decision rules or ‘heuristics’ to quickly assess the message content. The guiding belief with this model is that individuals are more apt to minimize their use of cognitive resources, thus affecting the intake and processing of messages. HSM predicts that processing type will influence the extent to which a person is persuaded or exhibits lasting attitude change. HSM is quite similar to the elaboration likelihood model, or ELM. Both models were predominantly developed in the early to mid-1980s and share many of the same concepts and ideas.

In social psychology, the Yale attitude change approach is the study of the conditions under which people are most likely to change their attitudes in response to persuasive messages. This approach to persuasive communications was first studied by Carl Hovland and his colleagues at Yale University during World War II. The basic model of this approach can be described as "who said what to whom": the source of the communication, the nature of the communication and the nature of the audience. According to this approach, many factors affect each component of a persuasive communication. The credibility and attractiveness of the communicator (source), the quality and sincerity of the message, and the attention, intelligence and age of the audience can influence an audience's attitude change with a persuasive communication. Independent variables include the source, message, medium and audience, with the dependent variable the effect of the persuasion.

Nonverbal influence is the act of affecting or inspiring change in others' behaviors and attitudes by way of tone of voice or body language and other cues like facial expression. This act of getting others to embrace or resist new attitudes can be achieved with or without the use of spoken language. It is a subtopic of nonverbal communication. Many individuals instinctively associate persuasion with verbal messages. Nonverbal influence emphasizes the persuasive power and influence of nonverbal communication. Nonverbal influence includes appeals to attraction, similarity and intimacy.

The Emotion-in-Relationships model (ERM) describes a theory designed to predict individual's experiences towards emotions. First introduced by Ellen Berscheid in 1983, it was further developed in cooperation with Hilary Amazzalorso in 2001. ERM proposes that intense emotions in a close reciprocal relationship occur when the relationship partner violates our expectancies and thereby interrupts a behavior sequence. The situation is unconsciously evaluated, leading to a positive or negative feeling, which depends on whether the violation of the expectancies is a facilitation or a threat.

References

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.