A little 😀 goes a long way: examining the limits of immediacy cues on students’ perceptions of instructor credibility, immediacy, liking, and clarity

ABSTRACT

This paper examines how textisms, defined as cues that facilitate interaction in text-dominant communication (e.g., emojis), as a type of immediacy cue, may increase perceived immediacy in instructor–student mediated out-of-class communication (e.g., a welcome email). Using an experiment manipulating cue number and placement and instructor gender, we examined how emojis impacted participants’ (N = 443) impressions of instructors’ closeness, credibility, liking, and clarity. Results suggest that using emojis in instructor–student communication is best done sparingly and strategically, but if done this way, emojis can be potentially useful. These findings have implications for current instructors; limitations and future directions are also discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• textisms
• perceived immediacy
• immediacy cues
• emojis
• student–instructor communication

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Kyle R. Vareberg, Zhenyang Luo, David Westerman, Melissa Bartels, and Peter Lindmark, “For a good class, email: Technologically-mediated out-of-class communication and instructional outcomes,” The Internet and Higher Education 47 (2020): 100761.

2 Stephanie E. Kelly and David K. Westerman, “New Technologies and Distributed Learning Systems,” In Communication and Learning, ed. Paul L. Witt (Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyten, 2016), 455–79.

3 Vareberg et al., “Technologically-mediated out-of-class communication,” 100761.

4 Albert Mehrabian, “Methods & Designs: Some Referents and Measures of Nonverbal Behavior,” Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation 1 (1969): 203–7.

5 Aubrie Adams et al., “Communication Accommodation in Text Messages: Exploring Liking, Power, and Sex as Predictors of Textisms,” The Journal of Social Psychology 158 (2018): 474–90.

6 Kyle R. Vareberg and David K. Westerman, “To :) or to :), that is the question: A study of students' initial impressions of instructors' paralinguistic cues,” Education and Information Technologies 25 (2020): 4501–16.

7 Vareberg et al., “Technologically-mediated out-of-class communication,” 100761; Stephanie Kelly, “Examining the Role of Perceived Immediacy as a Mediator: Revisiting the Relationships Among Immediate Behaviors, Liking, and Disclosure” (Ph.D. diss., The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 2012).

8 Jon F. Nussbaum and Michael D. Scott, “Student Learning as a Relational Outcome of Teacher-Student Interaction,” Communication Yearbook 4 (1980): 553–64.

9 Aubrie S. Adams, “Student Perceptions of Teacher Emoticon Usage: The Effect on Teacher Credibility and Liking” (Master’s thesis, Sacramento State, 2013); Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16.

10 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501-16.

11 Kyle R Vareberg, Olivia Vogt, and Maranda Berndt, “Putting your best face forward: How instructor emoji use influences students' impressions of credibility, immediacy, and liking,” Education and Information Technologies (2022).

12 Bree McEwan, Christopher J. Carpenter, and David Westerman, “On replication in communication science,” Communication Studies 69 (2018): 235–41. Renee Kaufmann and Nick Tatum, “Do We Know What We Think We Know? On the Importance of Replication in Instructional Communication Research,” Communication Education 66 (2017): 479–81.

13 Joseph B. Walther, “Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interactions: A Relational Perspective,” Communication Research 19 (1992): 52–90.

14 Walther, “Interpersonal Effects,” 52–90.

15 Joseph B. Walther, Tracy Loh, and Laura Granka, “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 (2005): 36–65.

16 Joseph B. Walther, “Nonverbal Dynamics in Computer-Mediated Communication, or :(And the Net :(‘s with You, :) and you :) Alone.” In The SAGE Handbook of Nonverbal Communication (2006): 467.

17 Walther, “Interpersonal Effects,” 52–90; Joseph B. Walther and Kyle P. D’Addario, “The Impacts of Emoticons on Message Interpretations in Computer-Mediated Communication,” Social Science Computer Review 19 (2001): 324–347.

18 Adams et al., “Communication Accommodation,” 474.

19 Flora-Jean Forbes and Erin Michelle Buchanan, “‘Textisms’: The Comfort of the Recipient,” Psychology of Popular Media Culture 8 (2019): 358–364.

20 Walther, “Interpersonal Effects,” 52–90.

21 Adams et al., “Communication Accommodation,” 474–90; Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16; Valeria A. Pfeifer, Emma L. Armstrong, and Vicky Tzuyin Lai, “Do all Facial Emojis Communicate Emotion? The Impact of Facial Emojis on Perceived Sender Emotion and Text Processing,” Computers in Human Behavior 126 (2022); Yael Sidi, Ella Glikson, and Arik Cheshin, “Do You Get What I Mean?!? The Undesirable Outcomes of (Ab)Using Paralinguistic Cues in Computer-Mediated Communication,” Frontiers in Psychology 12 (2021): 658844.

22 Adams et al., “Communication Accommodation,” 474–90; Walther and D’Addario, “Impacts of Emoticons,” 324–47.

23 Linda K. Kaye, Helen J. Wall, and Stephanie A. Malone, “‘Turn That Frown Upside-Down’: A Contextual Account of Emoticon Usage on Different Virtual Platforms,” Computers in Human Behavior 60 (2016): 465.

24 S. E. Asch, “Forming Impressions of Personality,” The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 41 (1946): 284.

25 Sanne Nauts et al., “Forming Impressions of Personality: A Replication and Review of Asch’s (1946) Evidence for a Primacy-Of-Warmth Effect In Impression Formation,” Social Psychology 45 (2014): 153–63.

26 Richard G. Kohlan, “A Comparison of Faculty Evaluations Early and Late in the Course,” The Journal of Higher Education 44 (1973): 587–95.

27 Jason Teven and James Katt, “Instructor Credibility.” In Communication and Learning, ed. Paul L. Witt (Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyten, 2016), 202.

28 Lisa T. Fall, Stephanie Kelly, and Scott Christen, “Revisiting the Impact of Instructional Immediacy: A Differentiation Between Military and Civilians,” The Quarterly Review of Distance Education 12 (2011): 199–206.

29 Sandra L. Faulkner et al., “‘Treat Me Like a Person, Rather Than Another Number’: University Student Perceptions of Inclusive Classroom Practices,” Communication Education 70 (2021): 92–111.

30 Vareberg et al., “Technologically-mediated out-of-class communication,” 100761.

31 Angela M. Legg and Janie H. Wilson, “E-Mail from Professor Enhances Student Motivation and Attitudes,” Teaching of Psychology 36 (2009): 205–11.

32 Vareberg et al., “Technologically-mediated out-of-class communication,” 100761.

33 Landra Rezabek and John Cochenour, “Visual Cues in Computer-Mediated Communication: Supplementing Text with Emoticons,” Journal of Visual Literacy 18 (1998): 201–15.

34 Gretchen McCulloch, Because Internet (New York: Riverhead Books, 2019); Marila Prada et al., “Motives, Frequency and Attitudes Toward Emoji and Emoticon Use,” Telematics and Infomatics 35 (2018): 1925–34.

35 Kaye et al., “Turn That Frown,” 463–7.

36 Kaye et al., “Turn That Frown,” 463–7; Pfeifer et al., 2022; Ying Tang and Khe Foon Hew, “Emoticon, Emoji, and Sticker Use in Computer-Mediated Communication: A Review of Theories and Research Findings,” International Journal of Communication 13 (2019): 2457–83.

37 Vareberg et al., “Technologically-mediated out-of-class communication,” 100761; Fall et al., “Revising Instructional Immediacy,” 199–206; Stephen A. Furlich, “Exploring Instructor Verbal Immediacy Behaviors and Student Motivation with Institution Type Through Self-Determination Theory,” Kentucky Journal of Communication 33 (2014): 52–65.

38 Adams, “Student Perceptions”; Jamie Comstock, Elisa Rowell, and John W. Bowers, “Food for Thought: Teacher Immediacy, Student Learning and Curvilinearity,” Communication Education 44 (1995): 251–66.

39 Bernardo P. Cavalheiro et al., “Evaluating the Adequacy of Emoji Use in Positive and Negative Messages from Close and Distant Senders,” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 25 (2022): 194–9.

40 Louis Escouflaire, “Signaling Irony, Displaying Politeness, Replacing Words: The Eight Linguistic Functions of Emoji in Computer-Mediated Discourse,” Linguistic Investigations 44 (2021): 204–35.

41 DeAnne Priddis, “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 Annual Conference, Kansas City, MO, April 3–7, 2013.

42 Judee Burgoon and Joseph B. Walther, “Nonverbal Expectancies and the Evaluative Consequences of Violations,” Human Communication Research 17 (1990): 232–65.

43 Adams, “Student Perceptions.”

44 Prada et al., “Motives, Frequency and Attitudes,” 1925–34.

45 Nussbaum and Scott, “Student Learning,” 553–64.

46 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16.

47 Vareberg et al., “Instructor emoji use.”

48 McEwan et al., “On replication,” 235–41.

49 Kelly and Westerman, “New Technologies,” 455–79; Kelly, “Role of Perceived Immediacy.”

50 Vareberg et al., “Technologically-mediated out-of-class communication,” 100761.

51 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16.

52 Adams, “Student Perceptions”; Comstock et al., “Food for Thought,” 251–66; Patrick B. O’Sullivan et al., “Mediated Immediacy: A Language of Affiliation in a Technological Age,” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 23 (2004): 464–90.

53 Scott A. Myers et al., “Using Rhetorical/Relational Goal Theory to Examine College Students’ Impressions of Their Instructors,” Communication Research Reports 35 (2018): 131–40.

54 Amber N. Finn et al., “A Meta-Analytical Review of Teacher Credibility and its Associations with Teacher Behaviors and Student Outcomes,” Communication Education 58 (2009): 516–37.

55 Teven and Katt, “Instructor Credibility,” 183–210.

56 James C. McCroskey and Thomas J. Young, “Ethos and Credibility: The Construct and its Measurement After Three Decades,” Central States Speech Journal 32 (1981): 24–34.

57 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16; Vareberg et al., “Instructor emoji use.”

58 Teven and Katt, “Instructor Credibility,” 183–210.

59 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16; Vareberg et al., “Instructor emoji use.”

60 Adams, “Student Perceptions.”

61 Teven and Katt, “Instructor Credibility,” 183–210.

62 Tang and Hew, “Emoticon, Emoji, and Sticker Use,” 2457–83; Jessica Fitts Willoughby and Shuang Liu, “Do Pictures Help Tell the Story? An Experimental Test of Narrative Ad Emojis in a Health Text Message Intervention,” Computers in Human Behavior 79 (2018): 75–82.

63 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16.

64 Adams, “Student Perceptions.”

65 Teven and Katt, “Instructor Credibility,” 183–210.

66 Finn et al., “Meta-Analytical Review,” 516–37.

67 Richard S. Bello, Frances E. Brandau, and Dena Horne, “The Enhancement of Verbal Immediacy in Online University Classes: A Student-Generated Taxonomy,” International Journal of Communication 14 (2020): 1970–86.

68 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16; Vareberg et al., “Instructor emoji use.”

69 Adams, “Student Perceptions.”

70 Ann Bainbridge Frymier and Marian L. Houser, “The Teacher-Student Relationship as an Interpersonal Relationship,” Communication Education 49 (2000): 207–19.

71 Ann Bainbridge Frymier, “The Use of Affinity-Seeking in Producing Liking and Learning in the Classroom,” Journal of Applied Communication Research 22 (1994): 87–105; Ann Bainbridge Frymier, “Students’ Motivation to Learn.” In Communication & Learning (2016): 377–96; Myers et al., “Using Rhetorical/Relational Goals Theory,” 131–40.

72 Stephanie Tom Tong and Joseph B. Walther, “The Confirmation and Disconfirmation of Expectancies in Computer-Mediated Communication,” Communication Research 42 (2015): 186–212.

73 Adams et al., “Communication Accommodation,” 474–90.

74 O’Sullivan et al., “Mediated Immediacy,” 464–90.

75 Vareberg et al., “Instructor emoji use.”

76 Nussbaum and Scott, “Student Learning,” 553–64; Malcolm R. Parks, “Ideology in Interpersonal Communication: Off the Couch and Into the World,” Communication Yearbook 5 (1982): 79–107.

77 Scott Titsworth and Joseph P. Mazer, “Teacher Clarity: An Analysis of Current Research and Future Directions,” Communication & Learning (2016): 112.

78 Joseph L. Chesebro and James C. McCroskey, “The Development of the Teacher Clarity Short Inventory (TCSI) to Measure Clear Teaching in the Classroom,” Communication Research Reports 15 (1998): 262–6.

79 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16.

80 Joseph P. Mazer, “Associations Among Teacher Communication Behaviors, Student Interest, and Engagement: A Validity Test,” Communication Education 62 (2013): 86–96; Myers et al., “Using Rhetorical/Relational Goals Theory,” 131–40; Titsworth and Mazer, 2016; Scott Titsworth et al., “Two Meta-Analyses Exploring the Relationship Between Teacher Clarity and Student Learning,” Communication Education 64 (2015): 385–418.

81 Vareberg et al., “Instructor emoji use.”; Sidi et al., “Undesirable Outcomes,” 658844.

82 Ann Bainbridge Frymier, Zachary W. Goldman, and Christopher J. Claus, “Why Nonverbal Immediacy Matters: A Motivation Explanation,” Communication Quarterly 67 (2019): 526–39; Zachary W. Goldman et al., “What Do College Students Want? A Prioritization of Instructional Behaviors and Characteristics,” Communication Education 66 (2017): 280–98.

83 John A. Centra and Noreen B. Gaubatz, “Is There Gender Bias in Student Evaluations of Teaching?,” The Journal of Higher Education 71 (2000): 17–33.

84 Marjorie A. Jaasma and Randall J. Koper, “Out-Of-Class Communication Between Female and Male Students and Faculty,” Women’s Studies in Communication 25 (2002): 119–37; Qing Li, “Computer-Mediated Communication: A Meta-Analysis of Male and Female Attitudes and Behaviors,” International Journal of E-Learning 5 (2006): 525–70.

85 Majorie Keeshan Nadler and Lawrence B. Nadler, “The Roles of Sex, Empathy, and Credibility in Out-Of-Class Communication Between Faculty and Students,” Women’s Studies in Communication 24 (2001): 241–61.

86 Robert L. Duran, Lynne Kelly, and James A. Keaten, “College Faculty Use and Perceptions of Electronic Mail to Communicate with Students,” Communication Quarterly 53 (2005): 159–76.

87 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16.

88 Prada et al., “Motives, Frequency and Attitudes,” 1925–34.

89 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16; Vareberg et al., “Instructor emoji use.”

90 Ibid.

91 O’Sullivan et al., “Mediated Immediacy,” 464–90.

92 James C. McCroskey and Jason Teven, “Goodwill: A Reexamination of the Construct and its Measurement,” Communication Monographs 66 (1999): 90–103.

93 Frymier, “Use of Affinity Seeking,” 87–105.

94 Brian H. Spitzberg, “Preliminary Development of a Model and Measure of Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) Competence,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11 (2006): 629–66.

95 Kelly, “Role of Perceived Immediacy.”

96 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16; Vareberg et al., “Instructor emoji use.”

97 Ibid.

98 Kaye et al., “Turn That Frown,” 463–7; Tang and Hew, “Emoticon, Emoji, and Sticker Use,” 2457–83.

99 Burgoon and Walther, “Nonverbal Expectancies,” 232–65.

100 Kaye et al., “Turn That Frown,” 463–7.

101 Prada et al., “Motives, Frequency and Attitudes,” 1925–34.

102 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16; Vareberg et al., “Instructor emoji use.”

103 Ibid.

104 Myers et al., “Using Rhetorical/Relational Goals Theory,” 131–40.

105 Cavalheiro, “Adequacy of Emoji Use,” 194–9; Walther, “Interpersonal Effects,” 52–90.

106 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16.

107 Centra and Gaubatz, “Gender Bias,” 17–33; Nadler and Nadler, “Roles of Sex,” 241–61.

108 Vareberg and Westerman, “Students' initial impressions,” 4501–16.

109 Vareberg et al., “Instructor emoji use.”

110 Sherwyn P. Morreale, Janice Thorpe, and Joshua N. Westwick, “Online Teaching: Challenge or Opportunity for Communication Education Scholars?” Communication Education 70 (2021): 117–9.

111 Vareberg et al., “Technologically-mediated out-of-class communication,” 100761; Kelly, “Role of Perceived Immediacy.”

112 Adams, “Student Perceptions”; Comstock et al., “Food for Thought,” 251–66.

113 Morreale et al., “Online Teaching,” 117–9.

114 Patricia Kearney et al., “College Teacher Misbehaviors: What Students Don’t Like About What Teachers Say and Do,” Communication Quarterly 39 (1991): 309–24.

115 Elisabeth Beyersmann, Signy Wegener, and Nenagh Kemp, “That’s Good News ☹: Semantic Congruency Effects in Emoji Processing,” Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications (2022).

116 McCulloch, Because Internet.