Uncovering Hidden Media Framings in Generic Communication Competence Assessments: Is the Face-To-Face Context the Default Framing?

References

• Achterhof, R., Kirtley, O. J., Schneider, M., Hagemann, N., Hermans, K. S., Hiekkaranta, A. P., Lecei, A., Lafit, G., & Myin-Germeys, I. (2022). Adolescents’ real-time social and affective experiences of online and face-to-face interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 129, 107159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107159
   Google Scholar
• Arroyo, A., & Segrin, C. (2011). The relationship between self-and other-perceptions of communication competence and friendship quality. Communication Studies, 62(5), 547–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2011.580037
   Google Scholar
• Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R. E. (2011). “ … and how about now?”: Effects of item redundancy on contextualized self‐reports of personality. Journal of Personality, 79(5), 1081–1112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00716.x
   Google Scholar
• Bakke, E. (2010). A model and measure of mobile communication competence. Human Communication Research, 36(3), 348–371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01379.x
   Google Scholar
• Baym, N. K., Zhang, Y. B., & Lin, M. C. (2004). Social interactions across media: Interpersonal communication on the internet, telephone and face-to-face. New Media & Society, 6(3), 299–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444804041438
   Google Scholar
• Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
   Google Scholar
• Bouchillon, B. C. (2021). Supplementing access to social capital over time: Computer-mediated communication competence for social-resource development. Social Science Computer Review, 39(6), 1056–1074. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319895500
   Google Scholar
• Bouchillon, B. C. (2022). Social networking for interpersonal life: A competence-based approach to the rich get richer hypothesis. Social Science Computer Review, 40(2), 309–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439320909506
   Google Scholar
• Brown, S. A., Fuller, R. M., & Vician, C. (2004). Who’s afraid of the virtual world? Anxiety and computer-mediated communication. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 5(2), 79–107. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00046
   Google Scholar
• Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments. University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cantor, N., Mischel, W., & Schwartz, J. C. (1982). A prototype analysis of psychological situations. Cognitive Psychology, 14(1), 45–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(82)90004-4
   Google Scholar
• Carlson, J. R., & Zmud, R. W. (1999). Channel expansion theory and the experiential nature of media richness perceptions. Academy of Management Journal, 42(2), 153–170. https://doi.org/10.2307/257090
   Google Scholar
• Chua, Y. P., & Chua, Y. P. (2017). Do computer-mediated communication skill, knowledge and motivation mediate the relationships between personality traits and attitude toward Facebook? Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.034
   Google Scholar
• Cole, D. A., Ciesla, J. A., & Steiger, J. H. (2007). The insidious effects of failing to include design-driven correlated residuals in latent-variable covariance structure analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(4), 381–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.12.4.381
   Google Scholar
• Crayen, C., Geiser, C., Scheithauer, H., & Eid, M. (2011). Evaluating interventions with multimethod data: A structural equation modeling approach. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 18(4), 497–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2011.607068
   Google Scholar
• Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957
   Google Scholar
• Cupach, W. R., & Spitzberg, B. H. (1983). Trait versus state: A comparison of dispositional and situational measures of interpersonal communication competence. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 47(4), 364–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570318309374131
   Google Scholar
• Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species. John Murray.
   Google Scholar
• Davison, H. K., & Bing, M. N. (2009). Content validity does matter for the criterion-related validity of personality tests. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2(4), 501–503. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2009.01182.x
   Google Scholar
• Dennis, A. R., Fuller, R. M., & Valacich, J. S. (2008). Media, tasks, and communication processes: A theory of media synchronicity. MIS Quarterly, 32(3), 575–600. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148857
   Google Scholar
• Derks, D., Bos, A. E., & Von Grumbkow, J. (2008). Emoticons and online message interpretation. Social Science Computer Review, 26(3), 379–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439307311611
   Google Scholar
• DeRosa, D. M., Hantula, D. A., Kock, N., & D’Arcy, J. (2004). Trust and leadership in virtual teamwork: A media naturalness perspective. Human Resource Management, 43(2–3), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20016
   Google Scholar
• Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105(3), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12046
   Google Scholar
• D’Urso, S. C., & Rains, S. A. (2008). Examining the scope of channel expansion: A test of channel expansion theory with new and traditional communication media. Management Communication Quarterly, 21(4), 486–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318907313712
   Google Scholar
• Feeney, J. A., & Noller, P. (2012). Perspectives on studying family communication: Multiple methods and multiple sources. In A. L. Vangelisti (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of family communication (pp. 29–46). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Firth, J., Torous, J., Stubbs, B., Firth, J. A., Steiner, G. Z., Smith, L., Alvarez‐jimenez, M., Gleeson, J., Vancampfort, D., Armitage, C. J., & Sarris, J. (2019). The “online brain”: How the Internet may be changing our cognition. World Psychiatry, 18(2), 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20617
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. A. (1921). On the ’probable error’ of a coefficient of correlation deduced from a small sample. Metron, 1, 1–32.
   Google Scholar
• Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2001). Internet use in the contemporary media environment. Human Communication Research, 27(1), 153–181. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/27.1.153
   Google Scholar
• Fortunati, L. (2005). Is body-to-body communication still the prototype? The Information Society, 21(1), 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240590895919
   Google Scholar
• Gawlick-Grendell, L. A., & Woltz, D. J. (1994). Meaning dominance norms for 120 homographs. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 26(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204557
   Google Scholar
• Gee, N. R., & Harris, S. L. (2010). Homograph norms: An alternative approach to determining meaning dominance. Behavior Research Methods, 42(4), 976–986. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.4.976
   Google Scholar
• Geiser, C., Eid, M., Nussbeck, F. W., Courvoisier, D. S., & Cole, D. A. (2010). Analyzing true change in longitudinal multitrait-multimethod studies: Application of a multimethod change model to depression and anxiety in children. Developmental Psychology, 46(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017888
   Google Scholar
• Hall, J. A., Pennington, N., Merolla, A. J., & Vitak, J. (2023). Which mediated social interactions satisfy the need to belong? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 28(1), zmac026. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmac026
   Google Scholar
• Hantula, D. A., Kock, N., D’Arcy, J. P., & DeRosa, D. M. (2011). Media compensation theory: A Darwinian perspective on adaptation to electronic communication and collaboration. In G. Saad (Ed.), Evolutionary psychology in the business sciences (pp. 339–363). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92784-6_13
   Google Scholar
• Hwang, Y. (2011). Is communication competence still good for interpersonal media?: Mobile phone and instant messenger. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 924–934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.018
   Google Scholar
• Infante, D. A. (1987). Enhancing the prediction of response to a communication situation from communication traits. Communication Quarterly, 35(4), 308–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463378709369696
   Google Scholar
• Jobe, J. B. (2003). Cognitive psychology and self-reports: Models and methods. Quality of Life Research, 12(3), 219–227. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023279029852
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, J. A. (2014). Measuring thirty facets of the Five Factor Model with a 120-item public domain inventory: Development of the IPIP-NEO-120. Journal of Research in Personality, 51, 78–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.05.003
   Google Scholar
• Kalman, Y. M., & Gergle, D. (2014). Letter repetitions in computer-mediated communication: A unique link between spoken and online language. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 187–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.047
   Google Scholar
• Keyton, J. (2015). Outcomes and the criterion problem in communication competence research. In A. F. Hannawa & B. H. Spitzberg (Eds.), Communication competence (pp. 585–604). de Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110317459-024
   Google Scholar
• Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kock, N. (2004). The psychobiological model: Towards a new theory of computer-mediated communication based on Darwinian evolution. Organization Science, 15(3), 327–348. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0071
   Google Scholar
• Kock, N. (2005). Media richness or media naturalness? The evolution of our biological communication apparatus and its influence on our behavior toward e-communication tools. Ieee Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(2), 117–130. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2005.849649
   Google Scholar
• Krosnick, J. A. (1999). Survey research. Annual Review of Psychology, 50(1), 537–567. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.537
   Google Scholar
• Lievens, F., De Corte, W., & Schollaert, E. (2008). A closer look at the frame-of-reference effect in personality scale scores and validity. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 268–279. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.268
   Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2017). Assessing the size of model misfit in structural equation models. Psychometrika, 82(3), 533–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-016-9552-7
   Google Scholar
• McCroskey, J. C., Beatty, M. J., Kearney, P., & Plax, T. G. (1985). The content validity of the PRCA‐24 as a measure of communication apprehension across communication contexts. Communication Quarterly, 33(3), 165–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463378509369595
   Google Scholar
• Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 437–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028085
   Google Scholar
• Miczo, N., Segrin, C., & Allspach, L. E. (2001). Relationship between nonverbal sensitivity, encoding, and relational satisfaction. Communication Reports, 14(1), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934210109367735
   Google Scholar
• Newson, M., Zhao, Y., Zein, M. E., Sulik, J., Dezecache, G., Deroy, O., & Tunçgenç, B. (2021). Digital contact does not promote wellbeing, but face-to-face contact does: A cross-national survey during the COVID-19 pandemic. New Media & Society, 14614448211062164. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211062164
   Google Scholar
• Nguyen, M. H., Gruber, J., Fuchs, J., Marler, W., Hunsaker, A., & Hargittai, E. (2020). Changes in digital communication during the COVID-19 Global Pandemic: Implications for digital inequality and future research. Social Media + Society, 6(3), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120948255
   Google Scholar
• Nguyen, M. H., Gruber, J., Marler, W., Hunsaker, A., Fuchs, J., & Hargittai, E. (2022). Staying connected while physically apart: Digital communication when face-to-face interactions are limited. New Media & Society, 24(9), 2046–2067. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820985442
   Google Scholar
• Norton, R. W., & Pettegrew, L. S. (1979). Attentiveness as a style of communication: A structural analysis. Communications Monographs, 46(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637757909375987
   Google Scholar
• Patulny, R., & Seaman, C. (2017). ‘I’ll just text you’: Is face-to-face social contact declining in a mediated world? Journal of Sociology, 53(2), 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783316674358
   Google Scholar
• Penley, L. E., Alexander, E. R., Jernigan, I. E., & Henwood, C. I. (1991). Communication abilities of managers: The relationship to performance. Journal of Management, 17(1), 57–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700105
   Google Scholar
• Rapkin, B. D., & Schwartz, C. E. (2004). Toward a theoretical model of quality-of-life appraisal: Implications of findings from studies of response shift. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 2(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-2-14
   Google Scholar
• Riggio, R. E., & Taylor, S. J. (2000). Personality and communication skills as predictors of hospice nurse performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 15(2), 351–359. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007832320795
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, B. W. (2009). Back to the future: Personality and assessment and personality development. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(2), 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.015
   Google Scholar
• Robie, C., Risavy, S. D., Holtrop, D., & Born, M. P. (2017). Fully contextualized, frequency-based personality measurement: A replication and extension. Journal of Research in Personality, 70, 56–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2017.05.005
   Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld, L. B., Grant, C. H., III, & McCroskey, J. C. (1995). Communication apprehension and self‐perceived communication competence of academically gifted students. Communication Education, 44(1), 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529509378999
   Google Scholar
• Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, R. B., Graham, E. E., & Mignerey, J. T. (1990). A longitudinal study of college students’ communication competence. Communication Education, 39(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529009378783
   Google Scholar
• Schroeders, U., & Gnambs, T. (2020). Degrees of freedom in multigroup confirmatory factor analyses: Are models of measurement invariance testing correctly specified? European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 36(1), 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000500
   Google Scholar
• Schulze, J., Schultze, M., West, S. G., & Krumm, S. (2017). The knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics required for face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication: Similar or distinct constructs? Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(3), 283–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-016-9465-6
   Google Scholar
• Schulze, J., West, S. G., Freudenstein, J. P., Schäpers, P., Mussel, P., Eid, M., & Krumm, S. (2021). Hidden framings and hidden asymmetries in the measurement of personality––A combined lens‐model and frame‐of‐reference perspective. Journal of Personality, 89(2), 357–375. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12586
   Google Scholar
• Schweizer, K. (2010). Some guidelines concerning the modeling of traits and abilities in test construction. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26(1), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000001
   Google Scholar
• Simpson, G. B. (1981). Meaning dominance and semantic context in the processing of lexical ambiguity. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20(1), 120–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90356-X
   Google Scholar
• Simpson, G. B. (1984). Lexical ambiguity and its role in models of word recognition. Psychological Bulletin, 96(2), 316–340. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.96.2.316
   Google Scholar
• Spano, S., & Zimmermann, S. (1995). Interpersonal communication competence in context: Assessing performance in the selection interview. Communication Reports, 8(1), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934219509367603
   Google Scholar
• Spitzberg, B. H. (1991). An examination of trait measures of interpersonal competence. Communication Reports, 4(1), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934219109367517
   Google Scholar
• Spitzberg, B. H. (2006). Preliminary development of a model and measure of computer-mediated communication (CMC) competence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 629–666. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00030.x
   Google Scholar
• Spitzberg, B. H. (2015). Assessing the state of assessment: Communication competence. In A. F. Hannawa & B. H. Spitzberg (Eds.), Communication competence (pp. 559–584). de Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110317459-023
   Google Scholar
• Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (1984). Interpersonal communication competence. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Spitzberg, B. H., & Hecht, M. L. (1984). A component model of relational competence. Human Communication Research, 10(4), 575–599. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1984.tb00033.x
   Google Scholar
• Tourangeau, R., & Rasinski, K. A. (1988). Cognitive processes underlying context effects in attitude measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 299–314. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.299
   Google Scholar
• Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Schnyder, I., & Niggli, A. (2006). Predicting homework effort: Support for a domain-specific, multilevel homework model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 438–456. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.2.438
   Google Scholar
• Twenge, J. M., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2020). Declines in non‐digital social interaction among Americans, 2003–2017. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 50(6), 363–367. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12665
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Google Scholar
• Walther, J. B. (2011). Theories of computer-mediated communication and interpersonal relations. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), The handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 443–479). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, Y. A., & Rhemtulla, M. (2021). Power analysis for parameter estimation in structural equation modeling: A discussion and tutorial. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 4(1), 2515245920918253. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920918253
   Google Scholar
• West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation models with non-normal variables: Problems and remedies. In R. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Issues and applications (pp. 56–75). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• West, S. G., Taylor, A. B., & Wu, W. (2012). Model fit and model selection in structural equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp. 209–231). Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Wiemann, J. M., & Backlund, P. (1980). Current theory and research in communicative competence. Review of Educational Research, 50(1), 185–199. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543050001185
   Google Scholar
• Wittmann, W. W. (1988). Multivariate reliability theory. Principles of symmetry and successful validation strategies. In J. R. Nesselroade & R. B. Cattell (Eds.), Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology (pp. 505–560). Plenum. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0893-5_16
   Google Scholar
• Wright, K. B., Rosenberg, J., Egbert, N., Ploeger, N. A., Bernard, D. R., & King, S. (2013). Communication competence, social support, and depression among college students: A model of Facebook and face-to-face support network influence. Journal of Health Communication, 18(1), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2012.688250
   Google Scholar
• Xu, M. K., Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Ho, I. T., Morin, A. J., & Abduljabbar, A. S. (2013). The internal/external frame of reference of academic self-concept: Extension to a foreign language and the role of language of instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 489–503. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031333
   Google Scholar
• Ziegler, M. (2011). Applicant faking: A look into the black box. The Industrial and Organizational Psychologist, 49(1), 29–36.
   Google Scholar