Expectancy violations of instructor communication as predictors of motivation and learning: A comparison of traditional and nontraditional students

Communication Quarterly

Volumn 54, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 331-349

  Houser, Marian L ^a  

^a TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Affinity seeking; Clarity; Cognitive learning; Expectancy violation theory; Grade orientation; Immediacy; Learner orientation; Nontraditional students; Predictive expectations; Prescriptive expectations; State motivation; Traditional students

Indexed keywords

EID: 60649098659     PISSN: 01463373     EISSN: 17464102     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01463370600878248     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Burgoon, J. K., (1978). A communication model of personal space violations: Explication and an initial test. Human Communication Research, 4, 129-142.
2. Burgoon, J. K., (1995). Cross-cultural and intercultural applications of expectancy violation theory. In R. L., Wiseman (Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (pp. 194-214). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
3. Burgoon, J. K., & Hale, J. L., (1988). Nonverbal expectancy violations: Model elaboration and application to immediacy behaviors. Communication Monographs, 55, 58-79.
4. Burgoon, J. K., & LePoire, B. A., (1993). Effects of communication expectancies, actual communication, and expectancy disconfirmation on evaluations of communicators and their communication behavior. Human Communication Research, 20, 67-96.
5. Burgoon, J. K., Newton, D. A., Walther, J. B., & Baesler, E. J., (1989). Nonverbal expectancy violations and conversational involvement. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 13, 97-120.
6. Chesbro, J. L., (2003). Effects of teacher clarity and nonverbal immediacy on student learning, receiver apprehension, and affect. Communication Education, 2 (2), 135-147.
7. Chesbro, J. L., & McCroskey, J. C., (2001). The relationship of teacher clarity and immediacy with student state receiver apprehension, affect, and cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50, 59-68.
8. Christensen, L. J., & Menzel, K. E., (1998). The linear relationship between student reports of teacher immediacy behaviors and perceptions of state motivation, and of cognitive, affective, and behavioral learning. Communication Education, 47, 80-90.
9. Christophel, D. M., (1990). The linear relationship between student reports of teacher immediacy behaviors and perceptions of state motivation, and of cognitive, affective, and behavioral learning. Communication Education, 44, 292-306.
10. Civikly, J. M., (1992). Clarity: Teachers and students making sense of instruction. Communication Education, 41, 138-152.
11. Donaldson, J. F., Flannery, D., & Ross-Gordon, J., (1993). A triangulated study comparing adult college students' perceptions of effective teaching with those of traditional students. Continuing Higher Education Review, 57, 147-165.
12. Frymier, A. B., (1994). A model of immediacy in the classroom. Communication Quarterly, 41, 133-143.
13. Frymier, A. B., & Houser, M. L., (1999). The revised learning indicators scale. Communication Studies, 50 (1), 1-12.
14. Frymier, A. B., Houser, M. L., & Shulman, G. M., (1995, May). A measure of affinity-seeking: An alternative to the Bell and Daly typology. Paper presented at the Eastern Communication Association Convention, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
15. Frymier, A. B., Shulman, G. M., & Houser, M. L., (1996). The development of a learner empowerment measure. Communication Education, 45, 181-190.
16. Frymier, A. B., & Weser, B., (2001). The role of student predispositions on student expectations for instructor communication behavior. Communication Education, 50, 314-326.
17. Gorham, J., (1988). The relationship between verbal immediacy behavior and student learning. Communication Education, 41, 388-399.
18. Gorham, J., (1999). Diversity in classroom dynamics. In A. L., Vangelisti, J. A., Daly, & G. W., Friedrich (Eds.), Teaching communication: Theory, research and methods (, 2nd ed., pp. 257-268). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19. Hale, J. L., & Burgoon, J. K., (1984). Models of reactions to changes in nonverbal immediacy. Journal of Nonverbal Behaviors, 8, 287-314.
20. Hickson III, M., Powell, L., Turner, J., & Neiva, E., (2002). The somatic markers as a “short cut” to verbal immediacy. Communication Research Reports, 19 (4), 389-398.
21. Houser, M. L., (2003, November). Are we violating their expectations? Instructor communication expectations of traditional and nontraditional students. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Communication Association, Miami, Florida.
22. Houser, M. L., (2004a). We don't need the same things! Recognizing differential expectations of instructor communication behavior for nontraditional and traditional students. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 52, 11-24.
23. Houser, M. L., (2004b). Understanding instructional communication needs of nontraditional students. Communication Teacher, 18 (3), 78-81.
24. Houser, M. L., (2005). Are we violating their expectations? Instructor communication expectations of traditional and nontraditional students. Communication Quarterly, 53, 213-228.
25. Jaasma, M. A., & Koper, R. J., (1999). The relationship of student-faculty out-of-class communication to instructor immediacy and trust and to student motivation. Communication Education, 48, 41-47.
26. Jacobs, K. W., (1992). Psychometric properties of the learning-orientation grade-orientation II scale. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75, 367-370.
27. Kim, K. A., (2002). ERIC review: Exploring the meaning of nontraditional at the community college. Community College Review, 30 (1), 74-89.
28. Knowles, M. S., (1978). The adult learner: A neglected species., 2nd ed. Houston, Tex.: Gulf Publishing Co.
29. Krueger, R. A., (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research., 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
30. Landrum, R. E., McAdams, J. M., & Hood, J., (2000). Motivational differences among traditional and nontraditional students enrolled in metropolitan universities. Metropolitan Universities, 11, 87-92.
31. Messman, S. J., & Jones-Corley, J., (2001). Effects of communication environment, immediacy, and communication apprehension on cognitive and affective learning. Communication Monographs, 68, 184-200.
32. Miglietti, C. L., & Strange, C., (1998). Learning styles, classroom environment preferences, teaching styles, and remedial course outcomes for underprepared adults at a two-year college. Community College Review, 1, 1-20.
33. Milton, O., Pollio, H. R., & Eison, J. A., (1986). Making sense of college grades. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
34. Morgan, D. L., (1998). The focus group guidebook. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
35. Myers, S. A., & Knox, R. L., (2001). The relationship between college student information-seeking behaviors and perceived instructor verbal behaviors. Communication Education, 50 (4), 343-356.
36. Plax, T. G., Kearney, P., McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P., (1986). Power in the classroom VI: Verbal control strategies, nonverbal immediacy, and affective learning. Communication Education, 35, 43-55.
37. Pollio, H. R., & Beck, H. P., (2000). Perceptions of learning and grade orientation in, and by, contemporary college students and faculty. The Journal of Higher Education, 71, 84-102.
38. Polson, C. J., (1993). Teaching adult students. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED395136. Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS.
39. Richardson, T. R., & Lane, K. E., (1993). Andragogical concepts for teachers of adults. Catalyst for Change, 22, 16-18.
40. Richmond, V. P., (1990). Communication in the classroom: Power and motivation. Communication Education, 39, 191-195.
41. Richmond, V. P., Gorham, J., & McCroskey, J. C., (1987). The relationship between selected immediacy behaviors and cognitive learning. In M., McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication yearbook, 10 (pp. 574-590). Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.
42. Roach, K. D., & Byrne, P. R., (2001). A cross-cultural comparison of instructor communication in American and German classrooms. Communication Education, 50, 1-14.
43. Ross, R., & Stokes, C. S., (1994, November). Implications and strategies for instruction of the nontraditional student in the conventional basic speech communication course. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Chicago, Illinois.
44. Simonds, C. J., (1997). Classroom understanding: An expanded notion of teacher clarity. Communication Research Reports, 14, 1-10.
45. SPSS Base 10.0 Applications Guide. (1999). Chicago, Ill.: SPSS, Inc.
46. U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Profile of undergraduates in U.S. postsecondary education institutions: 1999-2000. NCES Publication No. 2002-168.
47. Witt, P. L., & Wheeless, L. R., (2001). An experimental study of teachers' verbal and nonverbal immediacy and students' affective and cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50 (4), 327-342.