Students' Silent Messages: Can Teacher Verbal and Nonverbal Immediacy Moderate Student Use of Text Messaging in Class?

This study investigated the relationship between teacher immediacy and college students' use of text messaging in class. Using a cross-sectional survey sample (N=228), structural equation model analyses showed that students' learning motivation does not mediate the potential effects of teacher immediacy and students' use of text messaging in class. The finding also suggested that college students' use of text messaging in class was related positively to their daily texting usage, meaning that mobile texting is a recurring behavior (i.e., a habit) that may occur despite a high level of teacher immediacy behavior.

[1]  Jennifer H. Waldeck,et al.  Instructional and Developmental Communication Theory and Research in the 1990s: Extending the Agenda for the 21st Century , 2001 .

[2]  Patrick O'Sullivan,et al.  Attitude Toward Mobile Text Messaging: An Expectancy-Based Perspective , 2008, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[3]  Lawrence R. Wheeless,et al.  A meta‐analytical review of the relationship between teacher immediacy and student learning , 2004 .

[4]  V. Richmond.  Communication in the classroom: Power and motivation , 1990 .

[5]  Daniel T. Norris.  Sales Communications in a Mobile World: Using the Latest Technology and Retaining the Personal Touch , 2007 .

[6]  James C. McCroskey,et al.  The relationship of teacher clarity and immediacy with student state receiver apprehension, affect, and cognitive learning , 2001 .

[7]  Louis Leung,et al.  Unwillingness-to-communicate and college students' motives in SMS mobile messaging , 2007, Telematics Informatics.

[8]  J. F. Andersen.  Teacher Immediacy as a Predictor of Teaching Effectiveness , 1979 .

[9]  J. Bargh.  Automaticity in social psychology. , 1996 .

[10]  Ana Deumert,et al.  Mobile language choices — The use of English and isiXhosa in text messages (SMS): Evidence from a bilingual South African sample , 2008 .

[11]  T. Kindermann,et al.  Engagement and Disaffection in the Classroom: Part of a Larger Motivational Dynamic? , 2008 .

[12]  Diane M. Christophel.  The relationships among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning , 1990 .

[13]  J. Comstock,et al.  Food for thought: Teacher nonverbal immediacy, student learning, and curvilinearity , 1995 .

[14]  Phil Wood.  Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research , 2008 .

[15]  Nancy F. Burroughs.  A Reinvestigation of the Relationship of Teacher Nonverbal Immediacy and Student Compliance-Resistance with Learning , 2007 .

[16]  J. Brophy.  Synthesis of Research on Strategies for Motivating Students to Learn. , 1987 .

[17]  James C. McCroskey,et al.  Immediacy in the classroom: Student immediacy , 2000 .

[18]  Diane M. Christophel,et al.  College teacher immediacy and student ratings of instruction , 1996 .

[19]  Mary Ainley,et al.  Connecting with Learning: Motivation, Affect and Cognition in Interest Processes , 2006 .

[20]  E. Katz,et al.  On the use of the mass media for important things. , 1973 .

[21]  Noela Haughton,et al.  Good Intentions and Unanticipated Effects: The Unintended Consequences of the Application of Technology in Teaching and Learning Environments , 2008 .

[22]  Mike Allen,et al.  The Role of Teacher Immediacy as a Motivational Factor in Student Learning: Using Meta-Analysis to Test a Causal Model , 2006 .

[23]  H. Sypher,et al.  Communication Research Measures: A Sourcebook , 1994 .

[24]  Angel M. Y. Lin,et al.  Text-messaging Cultures of College Girls in Hong Kong: SMS as Resources for Achieving Intimacy and Gift-exchange with Multiple Functions , 2007 .

[25]  Jonathan Donner,et al.  The Rules of Beeping: Exchanging Messages Via Intentional "Missed Calls" on Mobile Phones , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[26]  A. D. Fisk,et al.  Degree of consistent training: Improvements in search performance and automatic process development , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[27]  Diane M. Christophel,et al.  A test‐retest analysis of student motivation, teacher immediacy, and perceived sources of motivation and demotivation in college classes , 1995 .

[28]  J. Gorham,et al.  Effects of immediacy on recall of information , 1988 .

[29]  Ann Bainbridge Frymier.  A model of immediacy in the classroom , 1994 .

[30]  Patricia Kearney,et al.  Clarifying the relationship between teacher nonverbal immediacy and student cognitive learning: Affective learning as the central causal mediator , 1996 .

[31]  Marilyn Gilroy.  Invasion of the Classroom Cell Phones. , 2004 .

[32]  J. Gorham.  The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student learning , 1988 .

[33]  R. Schalock.  Conceptualization and measurement , 1996 .

[34]  Stephen D. Perry,et al.  Mobile phone text messaging overuse among developing world university students , 2007 .

[35]  A. Mehrabian.  Silent Messages: Implicit Communication of Emotions and Attitudes , 1971 .

[36]  P. Kearney,et al.  Teacher immediacy for affective learning in divergent college classes , 1985 .

[37]  B. Titsworth,et al.  Immediate and delayed effects of interest cues and engagement cues on students' affective learning , 2001 .

[38]  Kenichi Ishii.  Implications of Mobility: The Uses of Personal Communication Media in Everyday Life , 2006 .

[39]  Jennifer A. Fredricks,et al.  School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence , 2004 .

[40]  Stephen J. Jenkins,et al.  Analysis of Technology Ownership and Selective Use among Undergraduates. , 2007 .

[41]  Naomi S. Baron,et al.  Text Messaging and IM , 2007 .

[42]  Dave Harley,et al.  Using texting to support students’ transition to university , 2007 .

[43]  Jon A. Hess,et al.  Is teacher immediacy actually related to student cognitive learning? , 2001 .

[44]  Tasuku Igarashi,et al.  Gender differences in social network development via mobile phone text messages: A longitudinal study , 2005 .

[45]  Virginia P. Richmond,et al.  Power in the classroom VI: Verbal control strategies, nonverbal immediacy and affective learning , 1986 .

[46]  Ran Wei,et al.  Staying connected while on the move , 2006, New Media Soc..

[47]  Louis Leung,et al.  Effects of gratification-opportunities and gratifications-obtained on preferences of instant messaging and e-mail among college students , 2009, Telematics Informatics.

[48]  B. Byrne,et al.  Modeling and Testing Change: An Introduction to the Latent Growth Curve Model , 2003 .

[49]  Madeline Haggan.  Text messaging in Kuwait. Is the medium the message? , 2007 .

[50]  R. Rubin,et al.  Conceptualization and Measurement of Interpersonal Communication Motives , 1988 .

[51]  Laura J. Christensen,et al.  The Linear Relationship between Student Reports of Teacher Immediacy Behaviors and Perceptions of State Motivation, and of Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Learning. , 1998 .

[52]  Louis Leung,et al.  More Than Just Talk on the Move: Uses and Gratifications of the Cellular Phone , 2000 .

[53]  Scott W. Campbell.  Perceptions of Mobile Phones in College Classrooms: Ringing, Cheating, and Classroom Policies , 2006 .

[54]  Philip Palmgreen,et al.  Relations Between Gratifications Sought and Obtained , 1980 .

[55]  Michael S. Gendron,et al.  Can students really multitask? An experimental study of instant messaging while reading , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[56]  Mary R. Power,et al.  Mobile phones, SMS, and relationships: issues of access, control and privacy , 2005 .

[57]  Virginia P. Richmond,et al.  Power in the classroom VII: Linking behavior alteration techniques to cognitive learning , 1987 .

[58]  S. Booth-Butterfield,et al.  Teacher immediacy and student involvement: A dual process analysis , 1992 .

[59]  Patricia Kearney,et al.  Effects of Teacher Immediacy and Strategy Type on College Student Resistance. , 1986 .

[60]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. , 1977 .

[61]  B. Byrne.  Structural equation modeling with EQS : basic concepts, applications, and programming , 2000 .

[62]  R. LaRose,et al.  A Social Cognitive Theory of Internet Uses and Gratifications: Toward a New Model of Media Attendance , 2004 .

[63]  A. Rubin.  The uses-and-gratifications perspective of media effects. , 2002 .