Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer–mediated conferencing environment

International Journal of Phytoremediation

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 8-26

  Gunawardena, Charlotte N ^a   Zittle, Frank J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85064781550     PISSN: 15226514     EISSN: 15497879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08923649709526970     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Baym, N. K., 1995. “ The emergence of community in computer–mediated communication ”. In Cybersociety, Edited by: Jones, S. G., 138–163. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2. Christophel, D., 1990. The relationship among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 39: 323–340.
3. Eastmond, D. V., 1993. Adult distance study through computer conferencing. Distance Education, 15(1): 129–151.
4. Gorham, J., 1988. The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student learning. Communication Education, 37(1): 40–53.
5. Gunawardena, C. N., 1995. Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2/3): 147–166.
6. Gunawardena, C. N., Campbell Gibson, C., Cochenour, J. J., Dean, T., Dillon, C. L., Hessmiller, R., Murphy, K., Rezabek, L. L., and Saba, F., Multiple perspectives on implementing inter–university computer conferencing. The proceedings of the distance learning research conference. pp. 101–117. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University, Dept. of Educational Human Resource Development.
7. Hackman, M. Z., and Walker, K. B., 1990. Instructional communication in the televised classroom: The effects of system design and teacher immediacy on student learning and satisfaction. Communication Education, 39(3): 196–209.
8. Harasim, L. M., 1993. “ Networlds: Networks as social space ”. In Global networks: Computers and international communication, Edited by: Harasim, L. M., 15–34. Cambridge: MIT Press.
9. Hiltz, S. R., 1994. The virtual classroom, Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
10. Johansen, R., Vallee, J., and Spangler, K., 1988. “ Teleconferencing: Electronic group communication ”. In Small group communication: A reader, 5th ed., Edited by: Cathcart, R. S., and Samover, L. A., 140–154. Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown.
11. Jones, S. G., 1995. “ Understanding community in the information age ”. In Cybersociety, Edited by: Jones, S. G., 10–35. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
12. Kearney, P., Plax, T., and Wendt–Wasco, N., 1985. Teacher immediacy for affective learning in divergent college classes. Communication Quarterly, 3(1): 61–74.
13. Kelley, D. H., and Gorham, J., 1988. Effects of immediacy on recall of information. Communication Education, 37(3): 198–207.
14. Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., and McGuire, T. W., 1984. Social psychological aspects of computer–mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39: 1123–34.
15. Murphy, K., Boyce, M., Cochenour, J., Dean, T., Dillon, C., Gibson, C., Gunawardena, C., and Rezabek, L., Computer–mediated communications in a collaborative learning environment: The GlobalEd Project. Proceedings of the ICDE World Conference in Distance Education. Edited by: Sewart, D., pp. 407–410. Birmingham, UK: Open University.
16. Rafaeli, S., 1990. “ Interaction with media: Parasocial interaction and real interaction ”. In Information and behavior, Edited by: Ruben, B. D., and Lievrouw, L. A., vol. 3, 125–181. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
17. Rafaeli, S., 1988. “ Interactivity: From new media to communication ”. In Advancing communication science: Sage annual review of communication research, Edited by: Hawkins, R. P., Pingree, S., and Weimann, J., vol. 16, 110–134. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
18. Rutter, D. R., 1987. Communicating by telephone, Oxford: Pergamon Press.
19. Short, J., Williams, E., and Christie, B., 1976. The social psychology of telecommunications, London: John Wiley & Sons.
20. Spears, R., and Lea, M., 1992. “ Social influence and the influence of the ‘social’ in computer–mediated communication ”. In Contexts of computer–mediated communication, Edited by: Lea, M., 30–65. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
21. Steinfield, C. W., 1986. “ Computer–mediated communication in an organizational setting: Explaining task–related and socioemotional uses ”. In Communication Yearbook, Edited by: McLaughlin, M. L., Vol. 9, 777–804. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
22. Walther, J. B., 1992. Interpersonal effects in computer–mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19(1): 52–90.