Disposition versus situation: Neurocommunlcology and the influence of trait apprehension versus situational factors on state public speaking anxiety

Communication Research Reports

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 273-283

  Keaten, James A ^a   Kelly, Lynne ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN COLORADO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HARTFORD   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84961325674     PISSN: 08824096     EISSN: 17464099     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08824090409359989     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Ayres, J., 1990. Situational factors and audience anxiety. Communication Education, 39: 283–291.
2. Ayres, J., 1997. A component theory of communication apprehension, Ruston, WA: Communication Ventures.
3. Ayres, J., and Heuett, B., 1997. An investigation into the relationship between visual imagery and public speaking apprehension. Communication Reports, 10: 87–94.
4. Beatty, M. J., 1988a. Impact of ambiguity reduction about performance expectations on audience anxiety. Communication Education, 37: 208–213.
5. Beatty, M. J., 1988b. Situational and predispositional correlates of public speaking anxiety. Communication Education, 37: 202–217.
6. Beatty, M. J., and McCroskey, J. C., 2000a. A few comments about communibiology and the nature/nurture question. Communication Education, 49: 25–28.
7. Beatty, M. J., and McCroskey, J. C., 2000b. Theory, scientific evidence, and the communibiological paradigm: Reflections of misguided criticism. Communication Education, 49: 36–44.
8. Beatty, M. J., McCroskey, J. C., and Heisel, A. D., 1998. Communication apprehension as temperamental expression: A communibiological paradigm. Communication Monographs, 65: 197–219.
9. Booth‐Butterfield, M., and Booth‐Butterfield, S., 1986. Effects of evaluation, task structure, trait‐CA, and reticence on state‐CA and behavioral disruption in dyadic settings. Communication Monographs, 53: 144–159.
10. Condit, C. M., 2000a. Culture and biology in human communication: Toward a multi‐causal model. Communication Education, 49: 7–24.
11. Condit, C. M., 2000b. Toward new “sciences”; of human behavior. Communication Education, 49: 29–24.
12. Daly, J. A., and Buss, A. H., 1984. “ The transitory causes of audience anxiety ”. In Avoiding communication: Shyness, reticence, and communication apprehension, Edited by: Daly, J. A., and McCroskey, J. C., 67–80. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
13. Keaten, J., 2001. Neurocommunicology: A Model and Implications for Communication Fear, ERIC Document Reproduction Services ED 459–482
14. Keaten, J., and Kelly, L., 2000. Reticence: An affirmation and revision. Communication Education, 49: 165–177.
15. Keaten, J., Kelly, L., and Borden, J., Associative neural networks of “public speaking”;: An initial test of neurocommunicology and communication fear. Paper presented at the annual convention of the National Communication Association. New Orleans, LA. November.
16. Keaten, J. A., Kelly, L., and Finch, C., Effects of the Penn State Reticence Program on beliefs about communication and fear of negative evaluation. Paper presented at the annual convention of the National Communication Association. Chicago, IL. November.
17. Keaten, J., Kelly, L., and Finch, C., 2000. Effects of the Penn State Reticence Program in changing beliefs associated with reticence. Communication Education, 49: 134–145.
18. Leary, M.R., and Koawalski, R. M., 1995. Social anxiety, New York: Guilford Press.
19. McCroskey, J. C., 1997. “ Willingness to communicate, communication apprehension, and self‐perceived communication competence: Conceptualizations and perspectives ”. In Avoiding communication: Shyness, reticence, and communication apprehension, Edited by: Daly, J. A., McCroskey, J. C., Ayres, J., Hopf, T., and Ayres, D. M., 75–108. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
20. McCroskey, J. C., and Beatty, M. J., 2000. The communibiological perspective: Implications for communication in instruction. Communication Education, 49: 1–6.