A further test of immediacy-learning models: A cross-cultural investigation

Journal of Intercultural Communication Research

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 1-13

  Zhang, Qin ^a   Oetzel, John G ^b   Gao, Xiaofang ^c   Wilcox, Richard G ^d   Takai, Jiro ^e  

^a FAIRFIELD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

^c CENTRAL CHINA NORMAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^d Hochschule fur Wirtschaft und Umwelt Nurtingen Geislingen   (Germany)

^e NAGOYA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Cross Cultural Test; Immediacy; Immediacy Learning Models; Learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 85007113791     PISSN: 17475759     EISSN: 17475767     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17475750701265209     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Ajzen, I, and Fishbein, M. 1980. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior, Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
2. Allen, M, Witt, PL, and Wheeless, LR. 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.
3. Andersen, JF. 1979. Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teacher effectiveness. Communication Yearbook, 3:543–559.
4. Bandura, A. 1977. Social learning theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
5. Bloom, BS. 1956. Taxonomy of educational objectives:Handbook I. The cognitive domain, New York:David McKay.
6. Bloom, BS. 1976. Human characteristics and school learning, New York:McGraw-Hill.
7. Brophy, J. 1983. Conceptualizing student motivation. The Educational Psychologist, 18:200–215.
8. Brophy, J. 1987. “ On motivating students ”. In Talks to teachers:A festschrift for N. L. Gage, Edited by:Berliner, D, and Rosenshine, B. 201–245. New York:Random House.
9. Christensen, LJ, and Menzel, KE. 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.
10. Christophel, D, and 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.
11. Christophel, DM. 1990. The relationships among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 39:323–340.
12. Comstock, J, Rowell, E, and Bowers, JW. 1995. Food for thought:teacher nonverbal immediacy, student learning, and curvilinearity. Communication Education, 44:251–266.
13. Frymier, AB. 1994. A model of immediacy in the classroom. Communication Quarterly, 42:133–144.
14. Gorham, J. 1988. The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student learning. Communication Education, 37:40–53.
15. Gudykunst, WB. 2000. “ Methodological issues in conducting theory-based cross-cultural research ”. In Culturally speaking:Managing rapport through talk across cultures, Edited by:Spencer-Oatley, H. 293–315. London:Continuum International.
16. Hess, JA, and Smythe, MJ. 2001. Is teacher immediacy actually related to student cognitive learning?. Communication Studies, 52:197–219.
17. Krathwohl, DR, Bloom, BS, and Masia, BB. 1964. Taxonomy of education objectives:Handbook II. Affective domain, New York:David McKay.
18. McCroskey, JC, Fayer, JM, Richmond, VP, Sallinen, A, and Barraclough, RA. 1996. A multi-cultural examination of the relationship between nonverbal immediacy and affective learning. Communication Quarterly, 44:297–307.
19. McCroskey, JC, Sallinen, A, Fayer, JM, Richmond, VP, and Barraclough, RA. 1996. Nonverbal immediacy and cognitive learning:A cross-cultural investigation. Communication Education, 4:200–211.
20. Mehrabian, A. 1967. Orientation behaviors and nonverbal attitude communication. Journal of Communication, 17:324–332.
21. Mehrabian, A. 1969. Attitudes inferred from non-immediacy of verbal communications. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6:294–295.
22. Mehrabian, A. 1972. Nonverbal communication, Chicago:Aldine-Atherton.
23. Mottet, TP, and Beebe, SA. 2006. “ Foundations of instructional communication ”. In Handbook of instructional communication:Rhetorical and relational perspectives, Edited by:Mottet, TP, Richmond, VP, and McCroskey, JC. 3–32. Boston:Allyn & Bacon.
24. Myers, SA, Zhong, M, and Guan, S. 1998. Instructor immediacy in the Chinese college classroom. Communication Studies, 49:240–254.
25. Neuliep, JW. 1997. A cross-cultural comparison of teacher immediacy in American and Japanese college classrooms. Communication Research, 24:431–451.
26. Powell, RG, and Harville, B. 1990. The effects of teacher immediacy and clarity on instructional outcomes:An intercultural assessment. Communication Education, 39:369–379.
27. Richmond, VP. 1990. Communication in the classroom:Power and motivation. Communication Education, 39:181–195.
28. Richmond, VP, Gorham, JS, and McCroskey, JC. 1987. The relationship between selected immediacy behaviors and cognitive learning. Communication Yearbook, 10:574–590.
29. Richmond, VP, Lane, DR, and McCroskey, JC. 2006. “ Teacher immediacy and the teacher–student relationship ”. In Handbook of instructional communication:Rhetorical and relational perspectives, Edited by:Mottet, TP, Richmond, VP, and McCroskey, JC. 167–194. Boston:Allyn & Bacon.
30. Roach, KD, and Byrne, PR. 2001. A cross-cultural comparison of instructor communication in American and German classrooms. Communication Education, 50:1–14.
31. Roach, KD, Cornett-DeVito, MM, and DeVito, R. 2005. A cross-cultural comparison of instructor communication in American and French classrooms. Communication Quarterly, 53:87–107.
32. Rodríguez, JI, Plax, TG, and 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.
33. Rogers, EM. 1999. Georg Simmel's concept of the stranger and intercultural communication research. Communication Theory, 9:58–74.
34. Sanders, JA, and Wiseman, RL. 1990. The effects of verbal and nonverbal teacher immediacy on perceived cognitive, affective, and behavioral learning in the multicultural classroom. Communication Education, 39:341–353.
35. Villagran, MM, and Lucke, JF. 2005. Translating communication measures for use in non-English-speaking populations. Communication Research Reports, 22:247–251.
36. Witt, PL, Wheeless, LR, and Allen, M. 2004. A meta-analytical review of the relationship between teacher immediacy and student learning. Communication Monographs, 71:184–207.
37. Wlodkowski, RJ. 1978. Motivation and teaching:A practical guide, Washington DC:National Education Association.
38. Wlodkowski, RJ. 1985. Enhancing adult motivation to learn:A guide to improving instruction and increasing learner achievement, San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
39. Zhang, Q, and Oetzel, JG. 2006a. Constructing and validating a teacher immediacy scale:A Chinese perspective. Communication Education, 55:218–241.
40. Zhang, Q, and Oetzel, JG. 2006b. A cross-cultural test of immediacy-learning models in Chinese classrooms. Communication Education, 55:313–330.
41. Zhang, Q, Oetzel, JG, Gao, X, Wilcox, RG, and Takai, J. 2007. Teacher immediacy scales:Testing for validity across cultures. Communication Education, 56:228–248.