Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Literature review on expectancy violation theory
Effects of emotional abuse on children
The effect of social influences on developing or modifying behaviour
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Literature review on expectancy violation theory
Personal Application I have experienced EVT in practice in my own life especially as a troublesome child. I recall one instance where my mother called the police on me after I had decided to stay after school and hang out with friends without letting her know. After realizing that my mother was furious with me after she was on the phone with my friend’s mother, I rushed home expecting to face fury that even hell hath not. To my great surprise, and hence expectation violation, my mother only silently and calmly walked into my room, sitting on my bed as she looked at the floor. In an incredibly measured tone, she simply asked why I had done what I had done (I was raised very strictly as to come straight home from school and not go outside). After my prepubescent response, she simply left saying I was grounded for two months. This experience was and is particularly jarring for …show more content…
This theory was expounded upon when viewed in light of the two studies that examined EVT in romantic relationships and in CMC context of social media sites. The Social Expectancy Violations Study revealed that not only do expectancy violations generate larger ERP responses, but also that recall was more consistent with negative than it was with positive behavior. In the Victim Effect Study found that a rape victim was more likely to be believed if their emotional behavior matched police expectancy of stereotypical behavior. The last study, Getting What’s Expected, further strengthened EVT by recording students’ expectancy violations in a sociology course. Of course, this has very practical application in everyday life. I have personally experienced it when facing punishment as a child and can testify to its effectiveness in generating affective responses. This theory may very well lead to an evolution of how we understand human responses to expectancy
The teachers would initiate a “shock” to the student every time they got an answer wrong, but the teachers were unaware that the shock was fake. As the experiment continued, the shocks became more severe, and the students would plead for the teacher to stop since they were in pain. Despite the fact, that the participants continuously asked the authoritative experimenter if they could stop, “...relatively few people [had] the resources needed to resist authority” (Cherry 5). The participants feared questioning the effectiveness of the experiment, or restraining from continuing in fear of losing their job, going to jail, or getting reprimanded by Yale. A majority of the participants were intimidated by the experimenter, hence why they continued to shock the students, even though they knew morally, it was incorrect what they were doing. This experiment concluded, “...situational variables have a stronger sway than personality factors in determining obedience...” (5). One's decisions are based on the situation they are facing. If someone is under pressure, they will resort to illogical decision making. There thoughts could potentially be altered due to fear, or hostility. In conclusion, the rash, incohesive state of mind, provoked by fear will eventually lead to the rise of
Watson, John B.; R Rayner, (March 2000) Conditioned emotional reactions, American Psychologist, Vol 55(3), 313-317.
Watson, J. B. (1920). Conditioned emotional reactions. The American Psychologist, 55(3), 313-317. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/
Expectancy Theory suggests that human actions are guided by the expected results of those actions (Expectancy Theory). It proposes that humans act in a certain way only if they believe that that the action is going to result in a certain desired outcome. Therefore, this theory acknowledges that humans exercise choice on their actions. This choice is exercised in three different ways, which are classified as expectancy, Instrumentality, and valence (Expectancy Theory). Expectancy refers to the knowledge and belief that one can effectively do a particular action; instrumentality refers to the belief that one will be rewarded upon effectively executing a particular action, and valence refers to the level of value a person places on the rewards being offered after properly executing a particular action (Expectancy
A norm is a group-held belief about how followers should perform in a given environment.[1] Sociologists describe norms as informal identifications that administer society’s performances, while psychologists have adopted a more general classification, recognizing smaller group divisions, like a team or an office, may also endorse norms detached or in addition to cultural or societal expectations. [2] Norms running counter to the activities of the primary society or culture may be conducted and retained within small subgroups of society. [3] For example, Crandall (1988) noted that certain groups like cheerleading squads, dance troupes, sports teams, and sororities have a rate of bulimia, a publicly recognized life-threatening disease that is much higher than society as a whole. Social norms have a way of maintaining order and organizing groups. [4]
There are many different things that influence our behavior from internal influences to social norms. Social norms are explicit rules that govern how we behave in our society. Social norms influence our behavior more than any of us realize, but we all notice when a norm has been broken. Breaking a social norm is not an easy task and often leads us feeling uncomfortable whether we broke the norm ourselves or witnessed someone else breaking it. Sometimes however, you just have to break a norm to see what happens our professor gave us an assignment that is really easy, but also difficult to do because we have to break a norm in from of people. We had two choices, choice number one, facing people while standing in an elevator, and the other choice
A social norm is classified as a standard expectation of what is the correct or deemed acceptable conduct that a member of a society has. The social norm that I chose to violate is the one where as I describe, you evade people’s personal space. What defines giving people their personal space and not getting too close, is that out of respect in my opinion, people need to have space to breathe and to move. If you get too close to people, either the person is going to think you are sexually intimidating him or she, you are just creepy, or even worse think you are rude for intimidating a right people have to be inches away from you. As I was getting ready to do the assignment of monitoring the reactions I would get for violating any social norm of my choice, I had a hard time thinking about which social norm I was going to
Social interaction is the foundation upon which humanity has built our language, politics, and each and every relationship we have with another being. Our communication with the world is the building block of society and has controlled the way we interact with others from the beginning of humankind. It is a straight forward psychological path that is seemingly irrelevant to the mundanity of everyday life until that path is interrupted. To do so is considered a Social Violation of the Norm, or, put simply, a Norm Violation. In this experiment, I was asked to come up with a social faux pas that was both within the guidelines of the law and generally safe for the person in violation of the norm. For my norm violation I chose to upon entering
Observation allows researchers to experience a specific aspect of social life and get a firsthand look at a trend, institution or behaviour. It promotes good communication skills, improves decision making and enhances awareness.
To violate a social norm, i will be greeting strangers in a nontraditional way. This norm acts as a mechanism of social control by getting people to give an approved reaction to meeting strangers. It allows us to be friendly without getting too personal. Normally when we greet a stranger we say something along the lines of, “Hello, how are you?”, and the other person responds by saying something like, “Good, how about you?”. Instead I will respond by giving them some unusual greetings to break this social norm.
There are many things that influence our behavior from internal influences to social norms. Social norms are implicit or explicit rules that govern how we behave in society (Maluso, class notes). Social norms influence our behavior more than any of us realize but we all notice when a norm has been broken. Breaking a social norm is not an easy task and often leads us feeling uncomfortable whether we broke the norm ourselves or witnessed someone else breaking it. Sometimes however, you just have to break a norm to see what happens.
In this project, we were asked to violate a social norm in a public areas and make observations on what we saw and how our audience responded. The social norm that I choose to violate was to do some weird thing in the middle of the zebra-crossing by making other people wait. This experiment was quite fun and embarrassing to see the face of people who were waiting for my weird act in the middle of the road. I went with my friends to do this experiment in front of Fayard Hall. I monitored the reactions of many people from the front screen of their vehicles, from their repetitive horn sound, etc, throughout the experiment to observe the good result. This violation of social norms seems to be very dangerous, but still I tried my best.
What happens when things don’t go as planned? What do we do when our beliefs are challenged? Do we hold true to our values or can we be persuaded to change our views? That is what we will discuss over the next few pages using the Social Judgement Theory (Griffin, Ledbetter, Sparks, 2015) and the Expectancy Violation Theory (Griffin, Ledbetter, Sparks, 2015).
Our studies found that nonconformity leads to positive inferences of status and competence when it is associated with deliberateness and intentionality. In other words, observers attribute heightened status and competence to a nonconforming individual when they believe he or she is aware of an accepted, established norm and is able to conform to it, but instead deliberately decides not to. In Zuckerberg’s case, for example, many observers saw his decision to wear a hoodie on his tour of the most important Wall Street banks to be a deliberate choice.
Edited by Raymond J. Corsini. Encyclopedia of Psychology, Second Edition, Volume 3. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.