Burgoon et al. (2016) use expectancy violations theory to examine how different forms of interfaces that confirm or violate user expectations affect the communication process, social judgments, ability to influence, and accuracy to recall associated with HtEAC (communication with a computer generated person). Burgoon et al., (2016) have participants interact with an embodied agent or with a human partner to solve a task. Their results suggest that people trust EAs more than actual human beings (Burgoon et al., 2016).
Chiles & Roloff (2014) use expectancy violations theory to understand the relationship between expectations and responses to apologies. Their participants answer open-ended questions that ask them to describe a hurtful event, …show more content…
Meltzer & McNulty (2011) have participants evaluate an ostensible male or female candidate for a job as a university professor who either violated or did not violate the stereotype that men are not particularly nurturing. They find that consistent with predictions, participants evaluate a hypothetical male professor who is described as particularly nurturing more favorably than they evaluate an equivalent female professor (Meltzer & McNulty, 2011). This discovery suggests that negative stereotypes do not always lead to less favorable evaluations; rather, negative stereotypes that are violated by unambiguous information can lead to more favorable evaluations through contrast effects (Meltzer & McNulty, …show more content…
They ask college students for their opinion on cell phone use in relation to romantic relationships and record their responses (Miller-Ott & Kelly, 2015). They find that particular romantic contexts evoke higher levels of attentiveness, however, participants did not object to the presence of phones, but did define as expectancy violations with too much usage of them and some types of usage (Miller-Ott & Kelly, 2015).
Sidelinger & Bolen (2015) use the frame of expectancy violations theory to examine instructors’ compulsive communication and determine whether or not a talkaholic teacher is a misbehaving instructor. They have 86 participants report to a female instructor and 81 report to a male instructor (Sidelinger & Bolen, 2015). Results indicate that nonverbal immediacy fully mediates the negative associations between instructors’ compulsive communication and students’ affect for the instructor and course (Sidelinger & Bolen,
Chiles & Roloff (2014) use expectancy violations theory to understand the relationship between expectations and responses to apologies. Their participants answer open-ended questions that ask them to describe a hurtful event, …show more content…
Meltzer & McNulty (2011) have participants evaluate an ostensible male or female candidate for a job as a university professor who either violated or did not violate the stereotype that men are not particularly nurturing. They find that consistent with predictions, participants evaluate a hypothetical male professor who is described as particularly nurturing more favorably than they evaluate an equivalent female professor (Meltzer & McNulty, 2011). This discovery suggests that negative stereotypes do not always lead to less favorable evaluations; rather, negative stereotypes that are violated by unambiguous information can lead to more favorable evaluations through contrast effects (Meltzer & McNulty, …show more content…
They ask college students for their opinion on cell phone use in relation to romantic relationships and record their responses (Miller-Ott & Kelly, 2015). They find that particular romantic contexts evoke higher levels of attentiveness, however, participants did not object to the presence of phones, but did define as expectancy violations with too much usage of them and some types of usage (Miller-Ott & Kelly, 2015).
Sidelinger & Bolen (2015) use the frame of expectancy violations theory to examine instructors’ compulsive communication and determine whether or not a talkaholic teacher is a misbehaving instructor. They have 86 participants report to a female instructor and 81 report to a male instructor (Sidelinger & Bolen, 2015). Results indicate that nonverbal immediacy fully mediates the negative associations between instructors’ compulsive communication and students’ affect for the instructor and course (Sidelinger & Bolen,