Students' silent messages: Can teacher verbal and nonverbal immediacy moderate student use of text messaging in class?

Communication Education

Volumn 59, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 475-496

  Wei, Fang Yi Flora ^a   Wang, Y Ken ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Automaticity; Classroom violation; Learning motivation; Mobile text messaging; Student engagement; Teacher immediacy; Uses and gratifications

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956977500     PISSN: 03634523     EISSN: 14795795     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2010.496092     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Ainley, M. (2006). Connecting with learning: Motivation, affect, and cognition in interest processes. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 391-405.
2. Andersen, J. F. (1979). Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teaching effectiveness. In D. Nimmo (Ed.), Communication yearbook 3 (pp. 543-559). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
3. Allen, M., Witt, P. L., & Wheeless, L. R. (2006). The role of teacher immediacy as a motivational factor in student learning: Using meta-analysis to test a causal model. Communication Education, 55, 21-31.
4. Bargh, J. A. (1996). Automaticity in social psychology. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 169-183). New York: Guilford Press.
5. Baringer, D. K., & McCroskey, J. C. (2000). Immediacy in the classroom: Student immediacy. Communication Education, 49, 178-186.
6. Booth-Butterfield, S., Mosher, N., & Mollish, D. (1992). Teacher immediacy and student involvement: A dual process analysis. Communication Research Reports, 9, 13-21.
7. Bowman, L. L., Levine, L. E., White, B. M., & Gendron, M. (2010). Can students really multitask? An experimental study of instant messaging while reading. Computer & Education, 54, 927-931.
8. Brophy, J. (1987). Synthesis of research on strategies for motivating students to learn. Educational Leadership, 45, 40-48.
9. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press
10. Burroughs, N. F. (2007). A reinvestigation of the relationships of teacher nonverbal immediacy and student compliance-resistance with learning. Communication Education, 56, 453-475.
11. Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation model with EQS, basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Byrne, B. M., & Crombie, G. (2003). Modeling and testing change: An introduction to the latent growth curve mode. Understanding Statistics, 2, 177-203.
13. Campbell, S. W. (2006). Perceptions of mobile phones in college classrooms: Ring, cheating, and classroom policies. Communication Education, 55, 280-294.
14. Chesebro, 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.
15. 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, 82-90.
16. Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationships among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 39, 323-340.
17. Christophel, D. M., & Gorham, J. (1995). A test retest analysis of student motivation, teacher immediacy, and perceived sources of motivation and demotivation in college classes. Communication Education, 44, 292-306.
18. Comstock, J., Rowell, E., & Bowers, J. W. (1995). Food for thought: Teacher nonverbal immediacy, student learning, and curvilinearity. Communication Education, 44, 251-266.
19. Covington, M. V. (1983). Motivated cognitions. In S. G. Paris, G. M. Olson, & H. W. Stevenson (Eds.), Learning and motivation in the classroom (pp. 139-164). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Deumert, A., & Masinyana, S. O. (2008). Mobile language choices*The use of English and isiXhosa in text messages (SMS): Evidence from a bilingual South African sample. English World-Wide,29,117-147.
21. Diamanduros, T., Jenkins, S. J., & Downs, E. (2007). Analysis of technology ownership and selective use among undergraduates. College Student Journal, 41, 970-976.
22. Donner, J. (2008). The rules of beeping: Exchanging messages via intentional "missed calls" on mobile phone. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 1-22.
23. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.
24. Frymier, A. B. (1994). A model of immediacy in classroom. Communication Quarterly, 42, 133-144.
25. Gilroy, M. (2004). Invasion of the classroom cell phones. Education Digest, 69(6), 56-60.
26. Gorham, J. (1988). The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and studentlearning. Communication Education, 37, 40-53.
27. Haggan, M. (2007). Text messaging in Kuwait. Is the medium the message? Multilingua, 26, 427-449
28. Harley, D., Winn, S., Pemberton, S., & Wilcox, P. (2007). Using texting to support students' transition to university. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44, 229-241.
29. Hess, J. A., Smythe, M. J., & Communication 451. (2001). Is teacher immediacy actually related to student cognitive learning? Communication Studies, 52, 197-219.
30. Horstmanshof, L., & Power, M. R. (2005). Mobile phones, SMS, and relationships: Issues of access, control, and privacy. Australian Journal of Communication, 32, 33-52.
31. Igarashi, T., Takai, J., & Yoshida, T. (2005). Gender differences in social network development via mobile phone text messages: A longitudinal study. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22, 691-713.
32. Ishii, K. (2006). Implications of mobility: The uses of personal communication media in everyday life. Journal of Communication, 56, 346-365.
33. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communication: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 19-32). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
34. Katz, E., Gurevitch, M., & Haas, H. (1973). On the use of the mass media for important things. American Sociological Review, 38, 164-181.
35. Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., Smith, V. R., & Sorensen, G. (1988). Effects of teacher immediacy and strategy type on college student resistance to on-task demands. Communication Education,37,54-67.
36. Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., & Wendt-Wasco, N. J. (1985). Teacher immediacy for affective learning in divergent college classes. Communication Quarterly, 33, 61-74.
37. Kelley, D. H., & Gorham, J. (1988). Effects of immediacy on recall of information. Communication Education, 37, 198-207.
38. LaRose, R., & Eastin, M. S. (2004). A social cognitive theory of internet uses and gratifications: Toward a new model of media attendance. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48, 358-377.
39. Lenhart, A., Madden, M., & Hitlin, P. (2005). Teens and technology: Youth are leading the transition to a fully wired and mobile nation. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http:// www.pewinternet.org/ /media//Files/Reports/2005/PIP_Teens_Tech_July2005web.pdf
40. Leung, L. (2007). Unwillingness-to-communicate and college students' motives in SMS mobile messaging. Telematics & Informatics, 24, 115-129.
41. Leung, L., & Wei, R. (2000). More than just talk on the move: A uses-and-gratification study of the cellular phone. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 308-320.
42. Lin, A. M. Y., & Tong, A. H. M. (2007). Text-messaging cultures of college girls in Hong Kong: SMS as resources for achieving intimacy and gift exchange with multiple functions. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 21, 303-315.
43. Ling, R., & Baron, N. S. (2007). Text messaging and IM: Linguistic comparison of American college data. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26, 291-298.
44. Lo, O. W. -Y., & Leung, L. (2009). Effects of gratification-opportunities and gratifications-obtained on preferences of instant messaging and e-mail among college students. Telematics and Informatics, 26, 156-166.
45. Mahatanankoon, P., & O'Sullivan, P. (2008). Attitude toward mobile text messaging: An expectancy-based perspective. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 973-992.
46. McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1992). Increasing teacher influence through immediacy. In V. P. Richmond & J. C. McCroskey (Eds.), Power in the classroom: Communication, control, and concern (pp. 101 119). Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.
47. Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent message. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
48. Mehrabian, A. (1972). Nonverbal communication. Chicago: Aldine.
49. Mehrabian, A. (1981). Silent messages: Implicit communication of emotions and attitudes (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
50. Moore, A., Masterson, J. T., Christophel, D. M., & Shea, K. A. (1996). College teacher immediacy and student ratings of instruction. Communication Education, 43, 29-39.
51. Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (2007). Mplus users' guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthen & Muthen
52. Norris, D. T. (2007). Sales communications in a mobile world: Using the latest technology and retaining the personal touch. Business Communication Quarterly, 70, 492-498.
53. Nworie, J., & Haughton, N. (2008). The unintended consequences of the application of technology in teaching and learning environments. TechTrends, 52(5), 52-58.
54. Palmgreen, P., Wenner, L. A., & Rayburn, J. D., II. (1980). Relations between gratifications sought and obtained: A study of television news. Communication Research, 7, 161-192.
55. Perry, S. D., & Lee, K. C. (2007). Mobile phone text messaging overuse among developing world university students. Communicatio: South African Journal of Communication Theory and Research, 33(2), 63-79.
56. 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.
57. Reeve, J. (1997). Understanding motivation and emotion (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College.
58. Richmond, V. P. (1990). Communication in the classroom: Power and motivation. CommunicationEducation, 39, 181-195.
59. Richmond, V. P., McCroskey, J. C., Kearney, P., & Plax, T. G. (1987). Power in the classroom VII: Linking behavior alternation techniques to cognitive learning. Communication Education, 36, 1-12.
60. Rocca, K. (2007). Immediacy in the classroom: Research and practical implications. Retrieved January 18,2010, from http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/affective/immediacy.html
61. Rodriguez, J. I., Plax, T. G., & Kearney, P. (1996). Clarifying the relationship between teacher nonverbal immediacy and student cognitive learning: Affective learning as the central causal mediator. Communication Education, 45, 293-305.
62. Rubin, A. M. (2002). The uses-and-gratifications perspective of media effects. In J. Bryant &D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 525-548). Mahwah,NJ: Erlbaum
63. Rubin, R. B., Palmgreen, P., & Sypher, H. E. (2004). Communication research measures: A sourcebook. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
64. Rubin, R. B., Perse, E. M., & Barbato, C. A. (1988). Conceptualization and measurement of interpersonal communication motives. Human Communication Research, 14, 602-628.
65. Schneider, W., & Fisk, A. D. (1982). Degree of consistent training: Improvements in search performance and automatic process development. Perception and Psycholophysics, 31,160-168.
66. Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127-190.
67. Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a large motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 765-781.
68. Thomas-Maddox, C. (2003). Creating perceptions of closeness in the classroom: Exploring the concept of nonverbal immediacy. Communication Teacher, 17, 3-15.
69. Titsworth, B. S. (2001). Immediate and delayed effects of interest cues and engagement cues on students' affective learning. Communication Studies, 52, 169-179.
70. Waldeck, J. H., Kearney, P., & Plax, T. G. (2000). Instructional and developmental communication theory and research in the 1990s: Extending the agenda for the 21st century. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Communication yearbook 24 (pp. 207-229). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
71. Wei, R., & Lo, V. (2006). Staying connected while on the move: Cell phone use and socialconnectedness. New Media & Society, 8, 53-72.
72. Witt, P. L., Wheeless, L. R., & Allen, M. (2004). A meta-analytical review of the relationship between teacher immediacy and student learning. Communication Monographs, 71, 184 207.