1
Chapter 28: Communication Accommodation Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
Chapter 28
Communication Accommodation Theory
Chapter Outline
I. Introduction
• When two people speak, they sometimes mimic each other’s speech and behavior.
• Formerly known as Speech Accommodation Theory, Gile’s Communication
Accommodation Theory rests on the premise that when speakers interact, they modify their
speech, their vocal patterns, and their gestures to accommodate others.
o Giles and his colleagues believe that speakers have various reasons for being
accommodative to others.
o Some people wish to (1) evoke a listener’s approval, (2) achieve communication
efficiency, (3) assert a dominant position, and (4) maintain a positive social identity
(Giles, Mulac, Bradac, and Johnson, 1987; Hogg and Giles, 2012).
o However, people do not always achieve what they aim for.
• As the mobility model was being researched, Giles clarified and conceptualized
Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT).
o Much of the subsequent theory and research since then has remained sensitive to the
various communication accommodations undertaken in conversations among diverse
o This theory suggests that a person’s self-concept comprises personal identity (e.g.,
body characteristics, psychological behaviors) as well as a social identity (e.g.,
affiliation with a group) (Ellemers and Haslam, 2012).
2
Chapter 28: Communication Accommodation Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
o Researchers and theorists in Social Identity suggest that people are “motivated to join
the most attractive groups and/or give an advantage to the groups to which one
belongs (in-group)” (Worchel, Rothgerber, Day, Hart, and Butemeyer, 1998, p. 390).
o And when in-groups are identified, an individual decides the extent to which the
group is central to his or her identity.
o Social identity, then, is primarily based on the comparisons that people make
between in-groups (groups to which a person feels he or she belongs) and out-
groups (groups to which a person feels he or she does not belong).
• Giles felt that people accommodate not only to specific others, but also to those they
perceive as members of other groups. Thus, intergroup variables and goals influence the
communication process.
o Specifically, he argues that an individual’s speech style (accent, pitch, rate,
interruption patterns) can affect the impressions that others have of the individual.
o Giles and Smith (1979) also comment that the nature of the setting, the conversation
topic, and the type of person with whom one communicates will all intersect to
determine the speech manner one adopts in a given situation.
o Giles (2012) was influenced by the belief that when members of different groups
come together, they compare themselves. If their comparisons are favorable, a
positive social identity will result.
III. Assumptions of Communication Accommodation Theory
• The following are the assumptions of CAT:
o Speech and behavioral similarities and dissimilarities exist in all conversations.
o The manner in which people perceive the speech and behaviors of another will
determine how they evaluate a conversation.
o Language and behaviors impart information about social status and group belonging.
o Accommodation varies in its degree of appropriateness, and norms guide the
accommodation process.
• Whether in speech or behaviors, people bring their various fields of experiences into a
conversation (West and Turner, 2016). These varied experiences and backgrounds will
determine the extent to which one person will accommodate another.
o The more similar people’s attitudes and beliefs are to those of others, the more they
will be attracted to and accommodate those others.
• Communication Accommodation is a theory concerned with how people both perceive and
evaluate what takes place in a conversation (Dragojevich, Gasiorek, and Giles, 2016).
o Perception is the process of attending to and interpreting a message, whereas
evaluation is the process of judging a conversation.
▪ People first perceive what takes place in a conversation (e.g., the other person’s
Chapter 28: Communication Accommodation Theory
speaking abilities) before they decide how to behave in a conversation.
• Motivation is a key part of the perception and evaluation process in Communication
Accommodation Theory (Dragojevich et al., 2016).
• Yet, there are times when perceiving the words and behaviors of another leads to people’s
evaluation of the other person.
o People may greet someone, for instance, and engage in small talk, but then be
surprised when they hear that the other person recently got divorced.
• The language used in a conversation will likely reflect the individual with the higher social
status. Those wishing to identify with or to become part of another’s group will usually
accommodate.
• Norms are expectations of behaviors that individuals feel should or should not occur in a
conversation.
o It’s important to understand that while normative behavior may suggest one
accommodate, accommodation may not always be worthwhile and beneficial.
IV. Ways to Adapt
• It is important to acknowledge that accommodation is an optional process in which two
communicators decide to accommodate, one does, or neither does.
• People may either accommodate strategically (conscious) or they may be doing it
instinctively (unconscious).
A. Convergence: Merging Thoughts Ahead
• The first process associated with CAT is termed convergence. Giles, Nikolas Coupland,
and Justine Coupland (1991) define convergence as “a strategy whereby individuals
adapt to each other’s communicative behaviors” (p. 7).
Soliz, 2015; Giles, 2008).
o Attraction is a broad term that encompasses a number of other characteristics,
such as liking, charisma, and credibility.
o Giles and Smith (1979) believe that a number of factors affect people’s attraction
for others—for example, the possibility of future interactions with the listener, the
speaker’s ability to communicate, and the status differential between
communicators.
• Convergence may be based on stereotypical perceptions. As Giles and colleagues
(1987) conclude, “Convergence is often cognitively mediated by our stereotypes of how
socially categorized others will speak” (p. 18).
• Examining the cultural experiences of African Americans, Mark Orbe (1998) notes that
African Americans are often identified in stereotypical ways.
o He points out that indirect stereotyping exists; that is, stereotyping when
European Americans talk to their African American friends about what they
believe to be African American “subjects” (sports, music, etc.).
o When convergence is perceived as good, it can enhance the dialogue; when it is
perceived as bad, it can break down the communication process.
o There are other standards of evaluating convergence, including the norms of the
situation, the ability to pull it off effectively, and the value of a language to a
community.
B. Divergence: Vive la Différence
• Giles (1980) believes speakers sometimes accentuate the verbal and nonverbal
differences between themselves and others.
o Divergence differs greatly from convergence in that it is a dissociation process.
▪ Instead of showing how two speakers are alike in speech rate, gestures, or
posture, divergence is when there are no attempts to demonstrate similarities
between speakers.
▪ Divergence is not the same as inattentiveness. When people diverge, they
have simply chosen to dissociate themselves from the communicator and the
conversation.
• The reasons for divergence vary, including asserting “one’s own identity, making a
statement or fulfill/fulfilling personal preferences” (Yoneoka, 2011).
o Divergence is a way for members of various cultural communities to maintain
between the communicators and when there are distinct role differences in the
conversation (e.g., physician–patient) (Street, 1991; Street and Giles, 1982).
o Divergence can also occur because the other in the conversation is viewed to be a
“member of undesirable groups, considered to hold noxious attitudes, or display a
deplorable appearance” (Street and Giles, 1982, p. 195).
C. Overaccommodation: Miscommunicating with a Purpose
• Overaccommodation is a term attributed to the behavior of people who, although
acting from good intentions, are perceived, instead, as patronizing or demeaning.
5
Chapter 28: Communication Accommodation Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
• It can exist in three forms: sensory overaccommodation, dependency
overaccommodation, and intergroup overaccommodation (Zuengler, 1991).
o Sensory overaccommodation occurs when a speaker overly adapts to another
who is perceived as limited in some way.
Hamilton (1991) felt that she had underestimated the level of competence of
an Alzheimer’s patient and found herself overaccommodating.
o Dependency overaccommodation occurs when a speaker places the listener in a
lower-status role, and the listener is made to appear dependent on the speaker.
▪ Here, the listener also believes that the speaker controls the conversation to
demonstrate higher status.
▪ This can be seen by examining the treatment of a number of immigrant
populations in the United States.
o Intergroup overaccommodation involves speakers lumping listeners into a
particular group, failing to treat each person as an individual.
▪ At the heart of this overaccommodation is stereotyping, and there can be
far-reaching consequences to this perceptual bias—ranging from
discrimination to matters of life and death (Dragojevich, Giles, and Watson,
2012).
▪ Although maintaining racial and ethnic identity is critical, individual
identity is equally important.
V. Integration, Critique, and Closing
• Communication Accommodation Theory focuses on the role of conversations in an
individual’s life and how people’s communication influences those dialogues.
o The cultural backgrounds and expectations of the communicators remain important
sources as one tries to understand the theory.
o Further, over the several decades of investigation, the research has consistently
followed a quantitative approach.
A. Scope
• The boundaries of the theory are rather expansive.
• The theory first focused on speech but later incorporated nonverbal communication.
• Giles (2008) underscores the broad scope of Communication Accommodation Theory
6
Chapter 28: Communication Accommodation Theory
by stating that over the years, it “began to take propositional forms that became
increasingly more complex and, arguably, more demanding on readers” (p. 166).
• The changing nature of culture in Western society suggests that a theory of this nature
may need to be extensive in order to understand multiple populations, particularly those
who have recently migrated to the United States.
B. Logical Consistency
• Some scholars contend that a few of the central features of the theory warrant further
examination.
• Judee Burgoon, Leesa Dillman, and Lesa Stern (1993), for example, question the
convergence–divergence frame advanced by Giles.
o They challenge the notion that people’s accommodation can be explained by just
these two practices.
o Giles and his colleagues (Dragojevic et al., 2016) have responded to some of these
issues.
o They assert that there are “complex accommodative dilemmas” (p. 5) which are
often unpredictable, thus accepting the complexity of conversations that often take
place between people.
• One might also question whether the theory relies too heavily on a rational way of
communicating.
o That is, although the theory acknowledges conflict between communicators, it
also rests on a reasonable standard of conflict.
o Giles (Gallois, Ogay, and Giles, 2005) does not ignore this perception and
believes a great deal of work is still to be done before the process of
accommodation can be fully understood.
C. Heurism
• Giles and his colleagues have conceptualized a theory rich in heuristic value. The theory
has been incorporated in a number of different studies.
o For instance, accommodation has been studied with populations that until this
theory, were rarely researched, including law enforcement, patient–providers,
native and nonnative speakers, immigrant women, gay men, and the elderly.
• There is no doubt that the theory is heuristic and has lasting scholarly value in the
communication field.
Classroom Activities
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
1. The Pros and Cons of Accommodation
Objective: To encourage students to critically analyze the potential benefits and costs of
various communication accommodation strategies (e.g., convergence, divergence, and
overaccommodation)
Materials: “The Pros and Cons of Accommodation” worksheet (see below)
b. Divide students into groups to discuss the pros and cons they identified.
c. Lead a class discussion focusing on the following questions:
• What factors should we consider in determining whether to engage in the
various forms of communication accommodation?
• Have you ever faced a situation in which you or someone else employed one of
these accommodation strategies? What was the outcome?
“The Pros and Cons of Accommodation”
Worksheet
Directions: In the columns below, list at least three pros and three cons of employing each
of the communication accommodation strategies.
Pros
Cons
Convergence
Divergence
Overaccommodation
2. Accommodation Situations
8
Chapter 28: Communication Accommodation Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
Objective: To encourage students to identify personal experiences with communication
accommodation and to consider how communication accommodation could be useful in
future relationships
Materials: None
Directions: