All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

A Meta-Analytical Review of the Relationship between Teacher Immediacy and Student Learning
Unformatted Document Text:  Immediacy and Learning Meta-Analysis 4 should be interpreted as cognitive learning, affective learning, or simply perceived learning (Chesebro & McCroskey, 2000; Comstock, Rowell, & Bowers, 1995; Hess & Smythe, 2001; McCroskey, Sallinen, Fayer, Richmond, & Barraclough, 1996; Witt & Wheeless, 2001). Nevertheless, the learning loss measure has been widely used in immediacy research, sometimes as the only learning instrument (Christensen & Menzel, 1998; Menzel & Carrel, 1999) and more often in conjunction with measures of affective learning (e.g., Baker, 2001; Farren, 1992; Folwell, 1995; Frymier, 1994; Gorham & Christophel, 1990; McAlister, 2001; McDowell & McDowell, 1990; Mottet & Beebe, 2001; Neuliep, 1995, 1997; Richmond, 1990; Rodriguez, Plax, & Kearney, 1996). Because nonverbal immediacy cues, like other nonverbal behaviors, are highly inferential and vary culturally and contextually (Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey, 1988), researchers have compared immediacy and learning among different cultural, ethnic, and national groups (Hinkle, 1998; McCroskey, Fayer, Richmond, Sallinen, & Barraclough, 1996a; McCroskey, Sallinen, Fayer, Richmond, & Barraclough, 1996b; Mortenson, 1994; Myers, Zhong, & Guan, 1998; Neuliep, 1995, 1997; Roach & Byrne, 2001; Sanders & Wiseman, 1990; Thompson, 1992). Collectively, findings from these studies generally indicate a positive relationship between nonverbal teacher immediacy and students’ affective and perceived learning. Differences in magnitudes of the effects, however, have been observed across cultural groups, both within the U.S. and outside. Other researchers have examined the effects of nonverbal immediacy in various distributed learning environments (Hackman & Walker, 1990; McAlister, 2001; Peterson, 1994), where "reducing the distance" between teacher and students becomes a primary communication goal. Because of the growing popularity of Web-based instruction, some of these studies extended the measurement of immediacy to include verbal behaviors as discussed below.

Authors: Witt, Paul., Wheeless, Lawrence. and Allen, Mike.
first   previous   Page 4 of 41   next   last



background image
Immediacy and Learning Meta-Analysis 4
should be interpreted as cognitive learning, affective learning, or simply perceived learning
(Chesebro & McCroskey, 2000; Comstock, Rowell, & Bowers, 1995; Hess & Smythe, 2001;
McCroskey, Sallinen, Fayer, Richmond, & Barraclough, 1996; Witt & Wheeless, 2001).
Nevertheless, the learning loss measure has been widely used in immediacy research, sometimes
as the only learning instrument (Christensen & Menzel, 1998; Menzel & Carrel, 1999) and more
often in conjunction with measures of affective learning (e.g., Baker, 2001; Farren, 1992;
Folwell, 1995; Frymier, 1994; Gorham & Christophel, 1990; McAlister, 2001; McDowell &
McDowell, 1990; Mottet & Beebe, 2001; Neuliep, 1995, 1997; Richmond, 1990; Rodriguez,
Plax, & Kearney, 1996).
Because nonverbal immediacy cues, like other nonverbal behaviors, are highly inferential
and vary culturally and contextually (Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey, 1988), researchers have
compared immediacy and learning among different cultural, ethnic, and national groups (Hinkle,
1998; McCroskey, Fayer, Richmond, Sallinen, & Barraclough, 1996a; McCroskey, Sallinen,
Fayer, Richmond, & Barraclough, 1996b; Mortenson, 1994; Myers, Zhong, & Guan, 1998;
Neuliep, 1995, 1997; Roach & Byrne, 2001; Sanders & Wiseman, 1990; Thompson, 1992).
Collectively, findings from these studies generally indicate a positive relationship between
nonverbal teacher immediacy and students’ affective and perceived learning. Differences in
magnitudes of the effects, however, have been observed across cultural groups, both within the
U.S. and outside. Other researchers have examined the effects of nonverbal immediacy in
various distributed learning environments (Hackman & Walker, 1990; McAlister, 2001;
Peterson, 1994), where "reducing the distance" between teacher and students becomes a primary
communication goal. Because of the growing popularity of Web-based instruction, some of these
studies extended the measurement of immediacy to include verbal behaviors as discussed below.


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 4 of 41   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.