Students' motivation to learn

Communication and Learning

Volumn , Issue , 2016, Pages 377-396

  Frymier, Ann Bainbridge ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

Author keywords

Affinity seeking; Clarity; Confirmation; Expectancy value theory; Immediacy; Motivation; Motivation model of instructional communication; Self determination theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 85139787077     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (50)

1. 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. doi:10.1080/03634520500343368
2. Andersen, J. F. (1979). Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teaching effectiveness. In B. D. Ruben (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 3 (pp. 543-559). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
3. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing. New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
4. Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64, 359-372. doi:10.1037/h0043445
5. Bandura, A. (1963). Social learning and personality development. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
6. Bell, R. A., & Daly, J. A. (1984). The affinity-seeking function of communication. Communication Monographs, 51, 91-115. doi:10.1080/03637758409390188
7. Brophy, J. (1987). On motivating students. In D. C. Berliner & B. V. Rosenshine (Eds.), Talks to teachers (pp. 201-245). New York, NY: Random House.
8. Chesebro, J. L., & McCroskey, J. C. (1998). The relationship between teacher clarity and immediacy and students experiences of state receiver apprehension when listening to teachers. Communication Quarterly, 46, 446-455. doi:10.1080/03634520109379232
9. 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. doi:10.1080/03634520109379232
10. Chesebro, J. L., & Wanzer, M. B. (2006). Instructional message variables. In T. P. Mottet, V. P. Richmond, & J. C. McCroskey (Eds.), Handbook ofinstructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives (pp. 89-116). Boston, MA: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon.
11. Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationships among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 39, 323-340. doi:10.1080/03634529009378813
12. Cissna, K. N., & Sieburg, E. (1981). Patterns of interactional confirmation and disconfirmation. In C. Wilder-Mott & J. H. Weakland (Eds.), Rigor and imagination: Essays from the legacyof Gregory Bateson (pp. 253-282). New York, NY: Praeger.
13. Claxton, G. (2015). Intelligence in the flesh: Why your mind needs your body much more than it thinks. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
14. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
15. Eccles, J. (2005). Subjective task value and the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook ofcompetence and motivation (pp. 105-121). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
16. Ellis, K. (2000). Perceived teacher confirmation: The development and validation of an instrument and two studies of the relationship to cognitive and affective learning. Human Communication Research, 26, 264-291. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2000.tb00758.x
17. Ellis, K. (2004). The impact of perceived teacher confirmation on receiver apprehension, motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 53, 1-20. doi:10.10/0363452032000135742
18. Frymier, A. B. (1993). The relationship among communication apprehension, immediacy and motivation to study. Communication Reports, 6, 8-17. doi:10.1080/08934219309367556
19. Frymier, A. B. (1994a). A model of immediacy in the classroom. Communication Quarterly, 42, 133-144. doi:10.1080/01463379409369922
20. Frymier, A. B. (1994b). The use of affinity-seeking in producing liking and learning in the classroom. Journal ofApplied Communication Research, 22, 87-105. doi:10.1080/00909889409365391
21. Frymier, A. B., & Shulman, G. M. (1995). "What's in it for me?": Increasing content relevance to enhance students' motivation. Communication Education, 44, 40-50. doi:10.1080/03634529509378996
22. Frymier, A. B., & Thompson, C. A. (1992). Perceived teacher affinity-seeking in relation to perceived teacher credibility. Communication Education, 41, 388-399. doi:10.1080/03634529209378900
23. Goldman, Z. W., Goodboy, A. K., & Weber, K. (2015, November). The measurement of college students' psychological needs and intrinsic motivation to learn. Paper presented at the annual convention of National Communication Association, Las Vegas, NV.
24. Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior: An introduction to behavior theory. New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
25. Hurt, H. T., Scott, M. D., & McCroskey, J. C. (1978). Communication in the classroom. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
26. Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. M. Reogeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories: An overview oftheir current status (pp. 383-434). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27. Keller, J. M. (1987a). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of instructional Development, 10, 2-10. doi:10.1007/BF02905780
28. Keller, J. M. (1987b). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn. Performance and instruction, 26, 1-7. doi:10.1002/pfi.4160260802
29. Kelley, D. H., & Gorham, J. (1988). Effects of immediacy on recall of information. Communication Education, 37, 198-207. doi:10.1080/03634528809378719
30. Kerssen-Griep, J., Hess, J. A., & Trees, A. R. (2003). Sustaining the desire to learn: Dimensions of perceived instructional facework related to student involvement and motivation to learn. Western Journal ofCommunication, 67, 357-381. doi:10.1080/10570310309374779
31. Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook ii: Affective domain. New York, NY: McKay.
32. Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
33. McCroskey, J. C., Fayer, J. M., Richmond, V. P., Sallinen, A., & Barraclough, R. A. (1996). Nonverbal immediacy and cognitive learning: A cross-cultural investigation. Communication Education, 45, 200-211. doi:10.1080/03634529609379049
34. McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (2006). Understanding the audience: Students' communication traits. In T. P. Mottet, V. P. Richmond, & J. C. McCroskey (Eds.), Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives (pp. 51-66). Boston, MA: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon.
35. McCroskey, J. C., Sallinen, A., Fayer, J. M., Richmond, V. P., & Barraclough, R. A. (1996). A multicultural examination of the relationship between nonverbal immediacy and affective learning. Communication Quarterly, 44, 297-307. doi:10.1080/01463379609370019
36. Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent messages. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
37. Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in personality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
38. Myers, S. A., Goodboy, A. K., & Members of COMM 600 (2014). College student learning, motivation, and satisfaction as a function of effective instructor communication behaviors. Southern Communication Journal, 79, 14-26. doi:10.1080/1041794X.2013.815266
39. Naftulin, D. H., Ware, J. E., & Donnelly, F. A. (1973). The Doctor Fox lecture: A paradigm of educational seduction. Journal of Medical Education, 48, 630-635.
40. Perry, R. P., Abrami, P. C., & Leventhal, L. (1979). Educational seduction: The effect of instructor expressiveness and lecture content on student ratings and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 107-116. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.71.1.107
41. Preiss, R. W., & Wheeless, L. R. (2014). Perspectives on instructional communication's historical path to the future. Communication Education, 63, 308-328. doi:10.1080/03634523.2014.910605
42. Richmond, V. P. (1990). Communication in the classroom: Power and motivation. Communication Education, 39, 182-195. doi:10.1080/03634529009378801
43. Richmond, V. P., Lane, D. R., & McCroskey, J. C. (2006). Teacher immediacy and the teacher-student relationship. In T. P. Mottet, V. P. Richmond, & J. C. McCroskey (Eds.), Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives (pp. 167-193). Boston, MA: Pearson.
44. 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. doi:10.1080/03634529609379059
45. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2009). Promoting self-determined school engagement. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook ofmotivation at school (pp. 171-195). New York, NY: Routledge.
46. Skinner, B. F. (1974). About behaviorism. New York, NY: Random House.
47. Wigfield, A., Tonks, S., & Klauda, S. L. (2009). Expectancy-value theory. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook ofmotivation at school (pp. 55-75). New York, NY: Routledge.
48. Witt, P. L., Wheeless, L. R., & Allen, M. (2006). The relationship between teacher immediacy and student learning: A meta-analysis. In B. M. Gayle, R. W. Preiss, N. Burrell, & M. Allen (Eds.), Classroom communication and instructional processes: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 149-168). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
49. Zhang, Q., & Oetzel, J. G. (2006). A cross-cultural test of immediacy-learning models in Chinese classrooms. Communication Education, 55, 313-330. doi:10.1080/03634520600748599
50. Zhang, Q., & Zhang, J. (2005). Teacher clarity: Effects on classroom communication apprehension, student motivation, and learning in Chinese college classrooms. Journal ofIntercultural Communication Research, 34, 255-266.