Running head: MYERS-BRIGGS AND MICHAEL SCOTT
Communication Senior Seminar Capstone Research Report:
Myers-Briggs and Michael Scott
Jacob English
Messiah College
MYERS-BRIGGS AND MICHAEL SCOTT
English 1
Introduction & Literature Review
“Would I rather be feared or loved? Easy, both. I want people to be afraid of how much
they love me” (Season 2 Episode 6). This is one of the many “words of wisdom” from Dunder
Mifflin’s Regional Manager, Michael Scott. NBC’s The Office is known as one of the most
noteworthy shows to be on television. The Office was created by Ricky Gervais and Stephen
Merchant as a remake of the 2001 BBC series. The mockumentary style sitcom (fictional
documentary) takes place in a paper distribution company in Scranton Pennsylvania. Steve
Carrel plays Michael Scott, an ignorant and bizarre boss who strives to have a strong relationship
with his co-workers and finds himself getting into ridiculous situations. The Office impacts
American society through the fact that it lead to the creation of similar shows (Parks and
Recreation & Modern Family), and because it acts as a commentary on social norms.
The show holds a great deal of unique qualities which has contributed to its success. One
of these qualities is the incorporation of expectancy violations as a method for humor. However,
over discourse and discussion it has been found that some people do not like this aspect of the
show. The goal of this study explain why some people like the expectancy violations and why
others do not.
Expectancy Violations Theory was proposed by Judee Burgoon (Griffin, 2012). It is an
objective theory under the Socio-psychological tradition. To begin, Burgoon suggests that every
person has their own level of expectancies. “As a core construct of the theory, expectancy is
defined as an enduring pattern of anticipated verbal and nonverbal behaviors” (Kim, 2014,
p.140). These expectancies come from the context of the situation, the type of relationship that
we have with the other person, and the communicator characteristics of the other as well.
According to Elizabeth Cohen (2010), “Deviations from these expectations create expectancy
violations.” Once a violation occurs, the violated has to interpret the valence of the violation and
the reward valence of how to react. In other words, one must determine whether the violation is
positive or negative while also determining whether maintaining that relationship with the
violator holds more positive or negative consequences (Griffin, 2012).
The Office depicts the effect of expectancy violations through the use of comedy vérité.
This is connected to the concept of cinema vérité which is referring to the power that the camera
can have to cause people to behave in an atypical manner (Mills, 2004). The documentary style
of sitcom allows the characters to interact with the camera. Interviews are the most obvious, but
they also interact with the camera as they are being observed. This style additionally allows nonverbals to be a lot more obvious. Many times Jim Halpert looks at the camera anytime something
inappropriate or ridiculous happens. This new style of using the camera is what contributes to the
shows humor by depicting characters during times they are aware of being filmed and times they
are not aware (Mills, 2004). However, this does not explain why some viewers may not like this
aspect of the show.
Studies identified different reactions to given expectancy violations. However, these
differences are more focused on kind of relationship that is shared with another person, rather
than an individual’s reaction. One experiment describes participants being placed in friend and
stranger dyads to conduct discussions. Throughout discussion, one member would either increase
or decrease immediacy. Researchers found when members decreased immediacy, both strangers
and friends were seen as less interested. However, when immediacy was increased, only friends
were seen as positive where the strangers were seen as violating nonverbal expectancies
MYERS-BRIGGS AND MICHAEL SCOTT
English 2
(Burgoon and Hale, 1988). This is evidence that the type of relationship is an important factor
when considering how one responds to expectancy violations.
Likewise, Cohen’s study on expectancy violations in relationships with friends and media
figures continues to support an emphasis on types of relationships in regards to how people
respond to expectancy violations (2010). To clarify, these media figures are real people
displayed on the media such as athletes, celebrities, and actors/actresses. Cohen argued, “each
relationship is founded on different expectations, a violation in one relationship will not
necessarily be considered offensive in another” (Cohen, 2010, p. 99). In the study, Participants
rated how they would react to different violations depending on whether it was committed by a
friend or a media figure. Examples of violations included, “I notice that this person is
disrespectful or insulting to people that they don’t feel personally attached to,” and “This person
begins making offensive or inappropriate comments” (Cohen, 2010, p. 103). Results found that
that less tolerance was expressed to media figures who committed a violation over friends who
committed the same violation. This continues to show the importance of a relationship in regards
to responses of expectancy violations.
While many argue the type of relationship is important to how others respond to
expectancy violations, there is also evidence that personality type could be another factor. Susan
Opt and Donald Loffredo (2000) conducted research on a similar topic. They questioned if
personality type affected communication apprehension through the use of the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator (MTBI). This method determines whether people perceive by sense or intuition,
and whether people judge by thinking or feeling. It additionally identifies if people are
introverted or extraverted as well as whether perceiving or judging is the dominant processes in
guiding individual’s behavior. Opt and Loffredo used a self-scorable MTBI form for participants
to fill out. They additional used a Personal Report of Communication Apprehension form.
Communication apprehension is the level of anxiety or uncomfortableness someone feels in
different situations. Opt and Loffredo found that Introverts and Feelers scored significantly
higher on communication apprehension compared to Extroverts and Thinkers (Opt & Loffredo,
2000). This research can potentially be applied to expectancy violations because people
experience communication apprehension when expectancy violations are committed.
Given the research above, the mockumentary style of the Office successfully depicts a
wide variety non-verbal behavior which allows expectancy violations to become prevalent for
the use of comedic effect. However, prior discourse and discussion claims this method for
comedy is the reason why some like the show and why others dislike it. This suggests that
individuals are responding to the expectancy violations differently which determines whether
they like the show or not. Previous research on expectancy violations has been limited how
people react to violations depending on the relationship as opposed to personality causing a gap
in the research. However, Opt and Loffredo’s study provides some support for a possible
connection between personality types and responses to expectancy violations. In order to close
the gap, this study aims to answer, “How do different personality types respond to the
expectancy violations incorporated in the Office?”
MYERS-BRIGGS AND MICHAEL SCOTT
English 3
Methods
Participants
Participants were recruited by the means of cluster sampling. Participants were
undergraduate students at Messiah College who were enrolled in Communication courses of
various levels. A wide range of constituencies was reached from general education courses and
also upper level courses. Students were introduced the research topic and asked to sign up for one
of three evening sessions to take a survey. A total of 40 students participated in the survey,
consisting of 22 females and 18 males. Every participant was informed of the possible benefits of
taking the survey which consisted of them gaining experience on how different personality types
interact and react to others. They were also informed of the consequences which was the possibility
of feeling awkward or uncomfortable. Each participant took part in the survey voluntarily and
signed an informed consent form.
Procedure
This study used quantitative methods in order explore the research question presented
above. A self-administered questionnaire was developed to discover if a relationship exists
between personality type and responses to expectancy violations in the Office. The process
consisted of participants taking an online Myers-Briggs personality test, watching a short video
clip of the Office through the use of Netflix, and then answering a few questions in response to the
video. This study chose to use 16personalities.com for the online personality test because it
provided a test that was brief but also accurate and consistent. Because of the complicated process,
in person surveys were more preferable than online surveys. The study took place in a computer
lab in one of the academic buildings.
Participants recorded the results of their personality test on the survey (i.e. INTJ), they
were shown a brief video clip from the Office. The clip selected was a scene from Season 3 Episode
22, “Women’s Appreciation.” In the scene, one of the female employees, Phyllis, walked into the
office and expressed that a man flashed her. The manager, Michael Scott, then walks in and begins
to make a joke out of the situation. Another employee walks in, Toby, and discourages Michael
from making jokes. Michael then responds defensively to Toby and accuses him of being the
flasher. He then shouts, “Let’s see your penis!” leaving an awkward silence in the office. The scene
is a perfect example of the expectancy violations incorporated into the show. This particular scene
is not on YouTube, which explains the requirement for Netflix.
After watching the clip, participants responded to a few questions. These questions
included:
1. On a scale of 1-10, 1 being not very uncomfortable and 10 being very uncomfortable,
how uncomfortable did you feel after watching this scene?
2. On a scale of 1-10, 1 being not very entertaining and 10 being very entertaining, how
entertaining did you find the scene to be?
3. On a scale of 1-10, 1 being not at all humorous and 10 being very humorous, how
humorous did you find the expectancy violations in this scene to be?
These questions aimed to measure responses to the expectancy violations incorporated in
the scene, predicting that the more uncomfortable someone felt the less entertaining they would
MYERS-BRIGGS AND MICHAEL SCOTT
English 4
find the scene to be. This suggests an existing negative correlation between response to expectancy
violation and liking of the show. Participants were also asked questions to describe their familiarity
and current opinion of the Office in order to explore the type relationship they had with the show.
After collecting the data, it was inputted onto Survey Monkey, an online survey program. This
simplified the analysis process and allowed results to be compared easily. Based off of the research
in the literature review, this study predicted:
1. Extroverts over Introverts will respond more positively to the expectancy violations in
the Office and be more liking to find the show entertaining.
2. Thinkers over Feelers will respond more positively to the expectancy violations in the
Office and be more likely to find the show entertaining.
3. Extroverted Thinkers over Introverted Feelers will respond more positively to the
expectancy violations in the Office and be more likely to find the show entertaining.
Results
After collecting the data, responses were placed into four categories based off of the
personality test scores: Introverted Thinkers (IT’s), Extroverted Thinkers (ET’s), Extroverted
Feelers (EF’s), and Introverted Feelers (IF’s). Results consisted of 3 IT’s, 6 ET’s, 23 EF’s, and 8
IF’s. This study found 7 males and 2 females to be Thinkers and 12 males and 19 females to be
Feelers. This sample size clearly contained imbalances in personality types which impacts the
remaining results. Taking note of this, the predictions presented above have a slight chance of
being supported by the results, but not near significant.
After participants watched the video clip from the Office, they provided responses stating
how they felt about the scene and the expectancy violations in the scene. Referencing the charts
below, there are several pieces of data to make note of. When asked, “How uncomfortable did
you feel after watching this scene?” IF’s scored the highest in uncomfortableness with a mean of
5.38. ET’s scored the highest mean (8.33) when asked, “How entertaining did you find the scene
to be?” Additionally, Thinkers scored higher means than Feelers when asked, “How humorous
did you find the expectancy violations to be?” However, even though these results slightly
support the predictions, the scores are not different enough to fully support them. All of the
means are fairly close together and the standard deviations are too large to support significant
differences.
Furthermore, ET’s scored the second highest mean in uncomfortableness (Chart A), and
IF’s scored the second highest mean in entertainment rating (Chart B). Since they both scored
high in uncomfortableness and entertainment rating/liking, this suggests that there is not a
correlation between uncomfortableness and liking. Chart D displays a scatter plot comparing the
responses of these two questions and clearly there is no pattern or correlation between them. This
implies there may be another factor which affects entertainment rating/liking.
Participants additionally answered, “On a scale of 1-10, 1 being very unfamiliar and 10
being very familiar, how familiar are you with NBC’s the Office?” and “On a scale of 1-10, 1
being not very entertaining and 10 being very entertaining, how entertaining do you find NBC’s
the Office to be?” The responses to these two questions were compared on a scatter plot (Chart
E), which revealed pattern resembling a positive correlation. Results also found a positive
correlative pattern between familiarity and the entertainment rating of the scene used for the
MYERS-BRIGGS AND MICHAEL SCOTT
English 5
study as well (Chart F). These findings continue to provide evidence for responses to expectancy
violations to be dependent on the type of relationship.
Chart A. How uncomfortable did you feel after watching this scene?
Basic Statistics
Minimum
Maximum
Median
Mean
Standard Deviation
Q3: IT'S (A)
1.00
7.00
1.00
3.00
2.83
1.00
10.00
5.50
5.17
3.34
1.00
10.00
3.00
4.04
2.42
1.00
8.00
5.50
5.38
2.45
Q3: ET'S (B)
Q3: EF'S (C)
Q3: IF'S (D)
Chart B. How entertaining did you find the scene to be?
Basic Statistics
Minimum
Maximum
Median
Mean
Standard Deviation
Q3: IT'S (A)
3.00
9.00
9.00
7.00
2.83
5.00
10.00
8.50
8.33
1.70
3.00
10.00
8.00
7.30
2.16
6.00
10.00
8.00
8.25
1.09
Q3: ET'S (B)
Q3: EF'S (C)
Q3: IF'S (D)
MYERS-BRIGGS AND MICHAEL SCOTT
English 6
Chart C. How humorous did you find the expectancy violations to be?
Basic Statistics
Minimum
Maximum
Median
Mean
Standard Deviation
Q3: IT'S (A)
3.00
10.00
10.00
7.67
3.30
5.00
10.00
8.50
8.17
1.77
1.00
10.00
7.00
6.26
2.52
3.00
10.00
7.50
7.25
2.17
Q3: ET'S (B)
Q3: EF'S (C)
Q3: IF'S (D)
Chart D.
Uncomfortableness and Entertainment Rating
Entertainment Rating
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
2
4
6
Uncomfortableness
8
10
12
MYERS-BRIGGS AND MICHAEL SCOTT
English 7
Chart E.
Entertainment and Familiarity
12
10
Entertaining
8
6
4
2
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Familiarity
Chart F.
Familiarity and Liking of the Scene
12
Entertainment Rating
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
2
4
6
Familiarity
8
10
12
MYERS-BRIGGS AND MICHAEL SCOTT
English 8
Discussion
The results of this study revealed a minute amount support of an existing relationship
between personality type and responses to expectancy violations in the Office. While ET’s scored
highest on entertainment rating, IF’s scored highest on uncomfortableness, and Thinkers scored
highest on humorous rating, the scores did not show signs of significant differences to make any
implications of an existing relationship. This could be attributed to several limiting factors of the
study. The sample size was small and unbalanced. Only 3 IT’s compared to 23 EF’s participated
in the study, so not enough responses were collected from IT’s as well as the other two
personality types. With a larger sample size, perhaps the data would have been more balanced.
Furthermore, a larger sample size would be more revealing of a possible relationship between
personality type and responses to expectancy violations in the Office. The larger the sample size,
the more accurate it is to the general population and significant differences in data become
clearer as well.
Another limiting factor was the decision to use Quantitative methods. Quantitative
involves a great amount of trial and error with numerical data. If the results fully supported the
predictions, this method would have been a fantastic choice. However, because this study did not
produce the predicted results, it leaves one wondering what other factors could be involved. All
that is left to do is guess why and try again.
Results exhibited no relationship between uncomfortableness and entertainment
rating/liking. Some responses stated that they felt very uncomfortable (10) but also found the
scene to be very entertaining (10). This implies that viewers may respond to the expectancy
violations in the show differently but even if they feel uncomfortable in response to the
violations, it does not automatically imply that they do not think the show is funny. So this leads
one to believe there are other factors impacting whether someone likes or dislikes the Office.
One suggested factor that affects the liking or disliking of the Office is familiarity. Survey
results confirmed a positive correlation between familiarity and general entertainment rating as
well as entertainment rating to the specific scene. As one becomes more familiar with the Office,
the more entertaining they find it. Viewers become accustomed to characters on the show and
form “relationships” with them.
The implications of this correlation supports prior research conducted in the literature
review above. Studies by Cohen (2010), and Burgoon & Hale (1988), argue that people respond
to expectancy violations base off of the type of relationship they have with a given person.
Cohen claimed that more leniency is shown to friends committing expectancy violations over
media figures because of the strength of the relationship. Burgoon and Hale state that expectancy
violations are view more positively when committed by a friend as opposed to a stranger. The
same can be argued with the Office. If someone is more familiar with the show they are more
likely to have a stronger “relationship” with the characters and be more likely to see the
expectancy violations as positive or show more leniency toward them. Furthermore, people who
are less familiar would not be as lenient and attribute a negative valence to the violations. As a
result, they do not give the show a second look.
There are several suggestions for continual exploration of this topic. First, a larger and
more balanced sample size should be the primary priority if this study was to be done again.
Perhaps it would be more revealing of a relationship between personality type and responses to
expectancy violations in the Office. On the contrary, qualitative methods may provide more
information if someone wanted to take a different approach. Perhaps focus groups or interviews
MYERS-BRIGGS AND MICHAEL SCOTT
English 9
could expose information that is missing. Finally, there is a lot that can be explored with the
relationship to familiarity and liking. For example, one could test reactions to the expectancy
violations in the Office before and after prolonged exposure to the show and compare the results
to find further support for the relationship.
In conclusion, this study opens the door for future research to be done on expectancy
violations and how different personality types respond to them in real life. Through the
continuance of research, people will have the ability to gain a greater understanding of how
others interact and communicate, so that they themselves may improve their communication
skills.
MYERS-BRIGGS AND MICHAEL SCOTT
English 10
References
16Personalities - Free personality test, type descriptions ... (2015). Retrieved May 4, 2015, from
http://www.16personalities.com/
Burgoon, J., & Hale, J. (1988). Nonverbal Expectancy Violations: Model Elaboration And
Application To Immediacy Behaviors. Communication Monographs, 55, 58-79.
Cohen, E. (2010). Expectancy Violations In Relationships With Friends And Media Figures.
Communication Research Reports, 27(2), 97-111.
Griffin, E. (2012). A first look at communication theory (6th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Mills, B. (2004). Comedy Verite: Contemporary Sitcom Form. Screen, 45(1), 63-78.
Netflix - Watch TV Shows Online, Watch Movies Online. (2015). Retrieved May 4, 2015.
Opt, S., & Loffredo, D. (2000). Rethinking Communication Apprehension: A Myers-Briggs
Perspective. The Journal of Psychology, 134(5), 556-570.
SurveyMonkey. (2015). Retrieved May 4, 2015, from
https://www.surveymonkey.com/user/sign-in/