A motivational model: non-verbal immediacy in the classroom
Un modelo de motivación: la inmediatez no verbal en el aula de clase
Issue
Section
Forgers: Research Articles
How to Cite
Bainbridge, A. (2022). A motivational model: non-verbal immediacy in the classroom. Escribanía, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.30554/escribania.v19i1.4319
Download Citation
Dimensions
How to Cite
Bainbridge, A. (2022). A motivational model: non-verbal immediacy in the classroom. Escribanía, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.30554/escribania.v19i1.4319
Download Citation
license
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Show authors biography
Instructors’ use of nonverbal immediacy behaviors has been routinely associated with students’ learning over the past 40 years; however, the explanation for why the relationship exists has been somewhat controversial. This paper reports the rationale and results of a study that used self-determination theory to explain why teacher use of nonverbal immediacy is positively associated with students’ motivation to learn. A revised model of instructional communication that focuses on students’ psychological needs and motivation as primary mediators of the immediacy-learning relationship is presented.
Article visits 663 | PDF visits 637
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
- 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.
- Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationships among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning.
- Communication Education, (39), 323-340. Doi:10.1080/03634529009378813
- Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
- 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
- Frymier, A. B. (1994). A model of immediacy in the classroom. Communication Quarterly, (42), 133-144.
- Doi:10.1080/01463379409369922
- Frymier, A. B. (2016). Students’ motivation to learn. In: P. L. Witt (Ed.), Communication and learning. Handbooks
- of Communication Science: Vol. 16. Communication and learning. (Pp. 377-396). Berlin, Germany: DeGruyter
- Mouton.
- Frymier, A. B., Goldman, Z. W. & Claus, C. J. (2019). Why nonverbal immediacy matters: A motivation explanation.
- Communication Quarterly, (67), 526-539. Doi: 10.1080/01463373.2019.1668442
- Frymier, A. B. & Houser, M. L. (2000). The teacher-student relationship as an interpersonal relationship. Communication
- Education, (49), 207-219.
- Goldman, Z. W., Goodboy, A. K. & Weber, K. (2017). College students’ psychological needs and intrinsic motivation
- to learn: An examination of self-determination theory. Communication Quarterly, (65), 167-191.
- Doi:10.1080/01463373.2016.1215338
- Goodboy, A. K., Bolkan, S. & Baker, J. P. (2018). Instructor misbehaviors impede students’ cognitive learning: testing
- the causal assumption. Communication Education, (67), 308–329.
- Doi:10.1080/03634523.2018.1465192
- Houser, M. L. & Frymier, A. B. (2009). The role of student characteristics and teacher behaviors in students’ learner
- empowerment. Communication Education, (58), 35-53. Doi:10.1080/03634520802237383
- Houser, M. L. & Hosek, A. M. (Eds.). (2018). Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational
- perspectives (2º Ed.). New York: Routledge.
- Hurt, H. T., Scott, M. D. & McCroskey, J. C. (1978). Communication in the classroom. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
- Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent messages. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
- Myers, S. A. & Knox, R. L. (2000). Perceived instructor argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness and student
- outcomes. Communication Research Reports, (17), 299–309.
- Available in: https://doi.org/10.1080/08824090009388777
- Richmond, V. P., Houser, M. L. & Hosek, A. M. (2018). Immediacy and the teacher-student relationship. In: M. L.
- Houser & A. M. Hosek (Eds.). Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives
- (2o Ed.). (Pp. 97-111). New York: Routledge.
- Richmond, V. P., McCroskey, J. C. & Johnson, A. D. (2003). Development of the nonverbal immediacy scale (NIS):
- Measures of self- and other-perceived nonverbal immediacy. Communication Quarterly, (51), 504-517.
- Rodríguez, 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.
- Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In:
- E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.). Handbook of self-determination research. (Pp. 3-33). Rochester, NY: University
- of Rochester Press.
- Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2009). Promoting self-determined school engagement. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield
- (Eds.). Handbook of motivation at school. (Pp. 171-195). New York, NY: Routledge.
- Scott, M. D. & Wheeless, L. R. (1977). Instructional communication theory and research: An overview. In: B. D.
- Ruben (Ed.). Communication yearbook 1. (Pp. 495-511). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
- 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
Social networks
Google Scholar profile
Author guide
Formats
Indexing
ISSN
ISSN: 0123-6938
E-ISSN: 2665-4873
