Top

Education and Information Technologies

Published in:

20-04-2020

To: -) or to ☺, that is the question: a study of students’ initial impressions of instructors’ paralinguistic cues

Authors: Kyle R. Vareberg, David Westerman

Published in: Education and Information Technologies | Issue 5/2020

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

This paper explores the use of paralinguistics, defined as cues which facilitate interaction and communication without the use of specific words (e.g., emoticons, emojis) in instructor-student technologically-mediated out-of-class communication (TMOCC). Using an experiment manipulating cue use and instructor sex in initial emails, we examined how respondents’ (N = 236) impressions of instructors’ credibility and immediacy are influenced by these paralinguistics. Results suggest instructors who use paralinguistics may be perceived as more immediate and caring but less competent; perceived trustworthiness was unaffected by paralinguistic use. Instructor sex did not generate significant differences in students’ impressions. These findings have implications for current instructors when engaging in TMOCC with students; limitations and future directions are also discussed.

previous article Design framework of adaptive intelligent tutoring systems

next article Developing intercultural communicative competence by the means of telecollaboration

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

Adams, A. S. (2013). Student perceptions of teacher emoticon usage: The effect on teacher credibility and liking (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from ScholarWorks of Sacramento State (No. 1924).

Alton, L. (2017, May). Phone calls, texts or email? Here’s how millennials prefer to communicate. Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/larryalton/2017/05/11/how-do-millennials-prefer-to-communicate/#2586731a6d6f.

Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290.CrossRef

Bai, Q., Dan, Q., Mu, Z., & Yang, M. (2019). A systematic review of emoji: Current research and future perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2221. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02221.CrossRef

Banfield, S. R., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (2006). The effect of teacher misbehaviors on teacher credibility and affect for the teacher. Communication Education, 55(1), 63–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520500343400.CrossRef

Beattie, A. J. (2017). Interpersonal impressions of emoji use in computer-mediated decision making (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from ScholarWorks of Western Michigan University (No. 931).

Burgoon, J. K. (1993). Interpersonal expectations, expectancy violations, and emotional communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 12(1 & 2), 30–48.CrossRef

Butterworth, S. E., Giuliano, T. A., White, J., Cantu, L., & Fraser, K. C. (2019). Sender gender influences emoji interpretation in text messages. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 784. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00784.CrossRef

Byron, K., & Baldridge, D. C. (2007). E-mail recipients’ impressions of senders’ likability: The interactive effect of nonverbal cues and recipients’ personality. Journal of Business Communication, 44(2), 137–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943606297902.CrossRef

Carr, C. T., Hayes, R. A., & Sumner, E. M. (2018). Predicting a threshold of perceived Facebook post success via likes and reactions: A test of explanatory mechanisms. Communication Research Reports, 35(2), 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2017.1409618.CrossRef

Centra, J. A., & Gaubatz, N. B. (2000). Is there a gender bias in student evaluations of teaching? The Journal of Higher Education, 71(1), 17–33.CrossRef

Chromey, K., Duchsherer, A., Pruett, J., & Vareberg, K. (2016). Double-edge sword: Social media use in the classroom. Educational Media International, 53(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2016.1189259.

Churches, O., Nicholls, M., Thiessen, M., Kohler, M., & Keage, H. (2014). Emoticons in mind: An event-related potential study. Social Neuroscience, 9(2), 196–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2013.873737.CrossRef

Clark-Gordon, C. V., Bowman, N. D., Watts, E. R., Banks, J., & Knight, J. M. (2018). “As good as your word”: Face-threat mitigation and the use of instructor nonverbal cues on students’ perceptions of digital feedback. Communication Education, 67(2), 206–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2018.1428759.CrossRef

Dobransky, N. D., & Frymier, A. B. (2004). Developing teacher-student relationships through out of class communication. Communication Quarterly, 52(3), 211–223.CrossRef

Doiron, J. A. G. (2018). Emojis: Visual communication in higher education. PUPIL: International Journal of Teaching, Education, and Learning, 2(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijtel.2018.22.0111.CrossRef

Dresner, E., & Herring, S. C. (2010). Functions of the nonverbal in CMC: Emoticons and illocutionary force. Communication Theory, 20, 249–268. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2010.01362.x.CrossRef

Duran, R. L., Kelly, L., & Keaten, J. A. (2005). College faculty use and perceptions of electronic mail to communicate with students. Communication Quarterly, 53(2), 159–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370500090118.CrossRef

Finn, A. N., & Ledbetter, A. M. (2013). Teacher power mediates the effects of technology policies on teacher credibility. Communication Education, 62(1), 26–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2012.725132.CrossRef

Finn, A. N., Schrodt, P., Witt, P. L., Elledge, N., Jernberg, K. A., & Larson, L. M. (2009). A meta-analytical review of teacher credibility and its associations with teacher behaviors and student outcomes. Communication Education, 58(4), 516–537. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520903131154.CrossRef

Fusani, D. S. (1994). “Extra-class” communication: Frequency, immediacy, self-disclosure, and satisfaction in student-faculty interaction outside the classroom. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 22, 232–255.CrossRef

Gesselman, A. N., Ta, V. P., & Garcia, J. R. (2019). Worth a thousand interpersonal words: Emoji as affective signals for relationship-oriented digital communication. PLoSONE, 14(8), e0221297. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221297.CrossRef

Gigliotti, R. J. (1987). Are they getting what they expect? Teaching Sociology, 15(4), 365–375.CrossRef

Goldman, Z. W., Goodboy, A. K., & Bolkan, S. (2016). A meta-analytical review of students’ out-of-class communication and learning effects. Communication Quarterly, 64, 476–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2015.1103293.CrossRef

Goldman, Z. W., Cranmer, G. A., Sollitto, M., Labelle, S., & Lancaster, A. L. (2017). What do college students want? A prioritization of instructional behaviors and characteristics. Communication Education, 66(3), 280–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2016.1265135.CrossRef

Harnish, R. J., & Bridges, K. R. (2011). Effect of syllabus tone: Students’ perceptions of instructor and course. Social Psychology of Education, 14, 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-011-9152-4.CrossRef

Hassini, E. (2006). Student-instructor communication: The role of email. Computers & Education, 47, 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.08.014.CrossRef

Hayes, R. A., Carr, C. T., & Wohn, D. Y. (2016). One click, many meanings: Interpreting paralinguistic digital affordances in social media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 60(1), 171–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2015.1127248.

Hayes, R. A., Wesselmann, E. D., & Carr, C. T. (2018). When nobody “likes” you: Perceived ostracism through paralinguistic digital affordances within social media. Social Media + Society, 4(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118800309.CrossRef

Hoffman, E. M. (2014). Faculty and student relationships: Context matters. College Teaching, 62, 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2013.817379.CrossRef

Jaasma, M. A., & Koper, R. J. (2002). Out-of-class communication between female and male students and faculty: The relationship to student perceptions of instructor immediacy. Women's Studies in Communication, 25(1), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.2002.10162443.CrossRef

Kelly, S. E. (2012). Examining the role of perceived immediacy as a mediator: Revisiting the relationships among immediate behaviors, liking, and disclosure (unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Tennessee Knoxville, Knoxville, TN.

Kelly, S., & Westerman, C. Y. K. (2014). Immediacy as an influence on supervisor-subordinate communication. Communication Research Reports, 31(3), 252–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2014.924335.CrossRef

Kohlan, R. G. (1973). A comparison of faculty evaluations early and late in the course. The Journal of Higher Education, 44(8), 587–595.CrossRef

Ledbetter, A. M., & Finn, A. N. (2018). Perceived teacher credibility and students’ affect as a function of instructors’ use of PowerPoint and email. Communication Education, 67(1), 31–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2017.1385821.CrossRef

Ledbetter, A. M., & Larson, K. A. (2008). Nonverbal cues in e-mail supportive communication. Information, Communication & Society, 11(8), 1089–1110. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180802109022.CrossRef

Legg, A. M., & Wilson, J. H. (2009). E-mail from professor enhances student motivation and attitudes. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 205–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280902960034.CrossRef

Li, Q. (2006). Computer-mediated communication: A meta-analysis of male and female attitudes and behaviors. International Journal on E-Learning, 5(4), 525–570.

McCroskey, J. C., & Teven, J. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Communication Monographs, 66, 90–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759909376464.CrossRef

McCroskey, J. C., & Young, T. J. (1981). Ethos and credibility: The construct and its measurement after three decades. Central States Speech Journal, 32, 24–34.CrossRef

McCulloch, G. (2019). Because Internet. New York City, NY: Riverhead Books.

Mehrabian, A. (1969). Methods & designs: Some referents and measures of nonverbal behavior. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 1(6), 203–207.CrossRef

Nadler, M. K., & Nadler, L. B. (2001). The roles of sex, empathy, and credibility in out-of-class communication between faculty and students. Women's Studies in Communication, 24(2), 241–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.2001.10162436.CrossRef

O’Sullivan, P. B., Hunt, S. K., & Lippert, L. R. (2004). Mediated immediacy: A language of affiliation in a technological age. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23(4), 464–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X04269588.CrossRef

Pogue, L. L., & Ah Yun, K. (2006). The effect of teacher nonverbal immediacy and credibility on student motivation and affective learning. Communication Education, 55(3), 331–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520600748623.CrossRef

Prada, M., Rodrigues, D. L., Carrido, M. V., Lopes, D., Cavalheiro, B., & Gaspar, R. (2018). Motives, frequency and attitudes toward emoji and emoticon use. Telematics and Infomatics, 35, 1925–1934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.06.005.CrossRef

Priddis, D. (2013). Adding personality to the college online classroom: A comparative study between students and educators regarding the use of emoticons. Paper presented at central states communication association, Kansas City, KS.

Rees, J. (2014, June). Office hours are obsolete. Chronicle Vitae. Retrieved from https://chroniclevitae.com/news/534-office-hours-are-obsolete

Rezabek, L. L., & Cochenour, J. J. (1998). Visual cues in computer-mediated communication: Supplementing text with emoticons. Journal of Visual Literacy, 18(2), 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/23796529.1998.11674539.CrossRef

Sidelinger, R. J., & Bolen, D. M. (2016). Instructor credibility as a mediator of instructors’ compulsive communication and student communication satisfaction in the college classroom. Communication Research Reports, 33(1), 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2015.1117438.CrossRef

Sumner, E. M., Hayes, R. A., Carr, C. T., & Wohn, D. Y. (2020). Assessing the cognitive and communicative properties of Facebook reactions and likes as lightweight feedback cues. First Monday, 25(2). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v25i2.9624.

Supiano, B. (2018, August). How one email from you could help students succeed. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-One-Email-From-You-Could/244223

Tang, T., & Hew, K. F. (2019). Emoticon, emoji, and stick use in computer-mediated communication: A review of theories and research findings. International Journal of Communication, 13, 2457–2483.

Teven, J. J. (2007). Teacher caring and classroom behavior: Relationships with student affect and perceptions of teacher competence and trustworthiness. Communication Quarterly, 55(4), 443–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370701658077.CrossRef

Teven, J., & Katt, J. (2016). Instructor credibility. In P. L. Witt (Ed.), Communication and learning (pp. 183–210). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, Inc..

Thweatt, K. S., & McCroskey, J. C. (1998). The impact of teacher immediacy and misbehaviors on teacher credibility. Communication Education, 47(4), 348–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529809379141.CrossRef

Vareberg, K. R., Luo, Z., Westerman, D. K., Bartels, M., & Lindmark, P. (2018). For a good class, email: Technologically-mediated out-of-class communication and instructional outcomes, National Communication Association, Salt Lake City, UT.

Waldeck, J. H., & LaBelle, S. (2016). Theoretical and methodological approaches to instructional communication. In P. L. Witt (Ed.), Communication and learning (pp. 67–102). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, Inc..

Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19(1), 52–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365092019001003.CrossRef

Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001.CrossRef

Walther, J. B., & D’Addario, K. P. (2001). The impacts of emoticons on message interpretations in computer-mediated communication. Social Science Computer Review, 19(3), 324–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/089443930101900307.CrossRef

Walther, J. B., & Parks, M. R. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 529–563). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Walther, J. B., Anderson, J. F., & Park, D. W. (1994). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A meta-analysis of social and anti-social communication. Communication Research, 21(4), 460–487. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365094021004002.CrossRef

Walther, J. B., Loh, T., & Granka, L. (2005). Let me count the ways: The interchange of verbal and nonverbal cues in computer-mediated and face-to-face affinity. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 24(1), 36–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X04273036.CrossRef

Willoughby, J. F., & Liu, S. (2018). Do pictures help tell the story? An experimental test of narrative and emojis in a health text message intervention. Computers in Human Behavior, 79, 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.031.CrossRef

Young, S., Kelsey, D., & Lancaster, A. (2011). Predicted outcome value of e-mail communication: Factors that foster professional relational development between students and teachers. Communication Education, 60(4), 371–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2011.563388.CrossRef

Young, S. L., Pulido, M. D., & Brooks, C. F. (2018). Reasons for student engagement in extra-class communication. Communication Research Reports, 35(2), 172–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2017.1383234.CrossRef

Zhang, Q., & Oetzel, J. G. (2006). A cross-cultural test of immediacy-learning models in Chinese classrooms. Communication Education, 55(3), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520600748599.CrossRef

Zhang, Q., & Witt, P. L. (2016). Instructor immediacy. In P. L. Witt (Ed.), Communication and learning (pp. 157–181). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, Inc..

Zhou, R., Hentschel, J., & Kumar, N. (2017). Goodbye text, hello emoji: Mobile communication on WeChat in China. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI 17, 748–759.

Title: To: -) or to ☺, that is the question: a study of students’ initial impressions of instructors’ paralinguistic cues
Authors: Kyle R. Vareberg
David Westerman
Publication date: 20-04-2020
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Education and Information Technologies / Issue 5/2020
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10181-9

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 5/2020

Decision support model to help language teachers grouping adult learners in a classroom

Teachers’ digital literacy and digital activity as digital divide components among basic schools in Ghana

Students’ interaction patterns in different online learning activities and their relationship with motivation, self-regulated learning strategy and learning performance

Determinants of learning management systems adoption in Nigeria: A hybrid SEM and artificial neural network approach

Editorial for EAIT issue 5, 2020

Effect of coding and robotic education on pre-school children’s skills of scientific process

Premium Partner