Communication correlates of teacher clarity in the college classroom

Students' Motives for Communicating with their Instructors: Considering Instructor Socio-communicative Style, Student Socio-communicative Orientation, and Student Gender

“…Generally, assertive and responsive instructors are considered to be nonverbally immediate (Thomas et al, 1994;Wanzer & Frymier, 1999), clear (Sidelinger & McCroskey, 1997), and credible (Martin, Chesebro, & Mottet, 1997). Responsive instructors are also viewed as being sensitive and understanding (Kearney, 1984), being verbally receptive to students (Robinson, 1993), and contributing to perceived student learning (Robinson, 1993;Wanzer & Frymier, 1999).…”

The relationship between college student information‐seeking behaviors and perceived instructor verbal behaviors

“…Student efforts to seek information may not be rewarded or welcome when instructors signify that they are not open to student use of direct information-seeking tactics. Indeed, a negative relationship between perceived instructor clarity, verbal immediacy, and verbal receptivity and instructor responsiveness has been obtained in several studies (Robinson, 1993;Sidelinger & McCroskey, 1997;Thomas, Richmond, & McCroskey, 1994). As such, a negative relationship should exist between student use of the monitoring information-seeking strategies and perceived instructor clarity, verbal immediacy, and verbal receptivity.…”

“…When instructors are perceived as being clear, students report lower levels of state receiver apprehension (Chesebro & McCroskey, 1998 as well as greater recall of course content (Chesebro, 2000) and increased state motivation (Chesebro & McCroskey, 2000). Clear instructors are also perceived to be nonverbally immediate, assertive, and responsive (Sidelinger & McCroskey, 1997).…”

“…Elements of clarity, immediacy, and receptivity are also considered to be effective teaching behaviors (Kramer & Pier, 1999). Second, all three instructor behaviors are correlated with both student affective and cognitive learning (Chesebro, 2000;Christophel, 1990;Gorham & Christophel, 1990;Robinson, 1993;Sidelinger & McCroskey, 1997;Thweatt & Toale, 2000). Generally, when instructors are clear, immediate, and receptive, students report higher levels of affect toward the instructor and the course as well as an increase in cognitive learning.…”

“I Collected Money, not a Bribe”: Strategic Ambiguity and the Dynamics of Corruption in Contemporary Nigeria

“…Clarity and openness are characteristics espoused by several scholars from the field of communication as the basis of effective communication [41,42]. However, Eisenberg [19], by contrast, argues that effective communication is not always determined by clarity.…”