Immediacy and Learning Meta-Analysis 22
Another method that can be used to compare the magnitude of the findings for perceived
learning, cognitive learning, and affective learning is the Binomial Effect Size Display or BESD
(Rosenthal, 1984). The display in Table 3 illustrates that the relative size of the increase in
immediacy associated with learning increases is primarily related to increases in perceived
learning (441%) and affective learning (344%). These increases are much larger than the
associated increase in cognitive learning (27%). Essentially, the teacher perceived as higher in
immediacy generates much higher levels of perceived and affective learning. However, the
corresponding increase in cognitive learning is much smaller in magnitude. These findings
indicate that students feel better towards the material and instructor and believe that they have
learned more than is indicated by their scores on more objective assessments of actual
knowledge gained. The meta-analysis does show increased levels of knowledge in relation to
teacher immediacy, but those gains are much more modest in magnitude than other measures of
content less targeted as the acquisition of particular knowledge.
Finally, when comparing results across the three types of immediacy and three types of
learning, one notes the striking similarity between immediacy’s effects on perceived learning and
affective learning, and the marked difference between these and immediacy’s effects on cognitive
learning. A synthesis of the first 23 years of immediacy and learning research appears to lend
credence, then, to the view of many instructional communication scholars—that even though
students like more highly immediate teachers and think they learn more from their courses,
actual cognitive learning is not affected as much as they think it is. Future research will no doubt
confirm or correct this viewpoint.
Convention