Immediacy and Learning Meta-Analysis 3
Review of Existing Research
Nonverbal Immediacy and Student Learning
Drawing from a body of nonverbal literature by Mehrabian and others, Andersen (1978)
created a teacher immediacy construct in order to examine such teacher behaviors as eye gaze,
smiles, nods, relaxed body posture, forward leans, movement, gestures, and vocal variety, in
relation to student learning. Results revealed a significant relationship between these teacher
nonverbal immediacy behaviors and students’ affective learning, but no measurable relationship
with cognitive learning as measured by test grades (Andersen 1978, 1979; Andersen, Norton, &
Nussbaum, 1981). A few early studies did link nonverbal immediacy to cognitive learning
performance (Jordan, 1989; Kelley & Gorham, 1988; McDowell, McDowell, & Hyerdahl, 1980),
but the first decade of immediacy research produced more consistent findings related to
nonverbal immediacy and affective learning, including both student attitudes and behavioral
predispositions (Andersen & Withrow, 1981; Kearney, Plax, & Wendt-Wasco, 1985; Plax,
Kearney, McCroskey, & Richmond, 1986; Sorenson, 1989). Overall, these studies reported a low
to moderate association between teacher nonverbal immediacy and greater liking for the teacher
and course, greater likelihood of engaging in the behaviors learned, and greater likelihood of
enrolling in another course of the same type.
Reported links between nonverbal immediacy and cognitive learning increased sharply
after Richmond, Gorham, and McCroskey (1987) introduced a measure of perceived student
learning known as "learning loss" (see Learning Measurement, below). Richmond and her
colleagues found a significant negative relationship between nonverbal immediacy and learning
loss, the difference between students’ perceived learning and predicted learning if they had the
"ideal" instructor. Communication researchers are not in agreement as to whether learning loss
Convention