Immediacy is defined by psychological availability. Immediacy behaviors by instructors may include verbal and nonverbal communications of availability to students. Most of the following references address immediacy as a powerful tool for teachers to enhance the classroom climate. Teacher immediacy has been related to student motivation, learning, and perception of the learning process. In addition, students have a more positive attitude toward instructors who exhibit immediacy behaviors. I have also included some references on immediacy methodology and tests of the validity of this construct. Because humor often helps to convey immediacy, I did not place these references in a separate category. For those interested in humor, the title usually indicates that humor is addressed. A few other categories are represented, and I am waiting for articles from a review of enhancing the classroom climate by improving relationships among students.

References

Professor Immediacy

• Allen, J. L., & Shaw, D. H. (1990). Teachers' communication behaviors and supervisors' evaluation of instruction in elementary and secondary classrooms. Communication Education, 39, 308-322.

• Andersen, J. F. (1979). Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teaching effectiveness. In B. Ruben (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 3 (pp. 543-559). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.

• Andersen, P. A., Guerrero, L. K., Buller, D. B., & Jorgensen, P. F. (1998) An empirical comparison of three theories of nonverbal immediacy exchange. Human Communications Research, 24 (4), 501-535.

• Andersen, J. F., Andersen, P. A., & Jensen, A. D. (1979). The measurement of nonverbal immediacy. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 7, 153-180.

• Andersen, J. F., Norton, R. W., & Nussbaum, J. F. (1981). Three investigations exploring relationships between perceived teacher communication behaviors and student learning. Communication Education, 30, 377-392.

• Bradac, J. J., Bowers, J. W., & Courtwright, J. A. (1979). Three language variables in communication research: Intensity, immediacy, and diversity. State of the Art, 5 (3), 257-269.

• Bryant, J., Comisky, P. W., Crane, J. S., & Zillmann, D. (1980). Relationship between college teachers' use of humor in the classroom and students' evaluations of their teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72 (4), 511-519

• Buller, D. B., & Aune, R. K. (1992). The effects of speech rate similarity on compliance: Application of communication accommodation theory. Western Journal of Communication, 56, 37-53.

• Burgoon, J. K., & Hale, J. L. (1988). Nonverbal expectancy violations: Model elaboration and application to immediacy behaviors. Communication Monographs, 55, 58-79.

• Christensen, L. J., & Menzel, K. E. (1998). The linear relationship between student reports of teacher immediacy behaviors and perceptions of state motivation, and of cognitive, affective, and behavioral learning. Communication Education, 47, 82-90.

• Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationship among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 39, 323-340.

• Christophel, D. M., & Gorham, J. (1995). A test-retest analysis of student motivation, teacher immediacy, and perceived sources of motivation and demotivation in college classes. Communication Education, 44, 292-306.

• Coker, D. A., & Burgoon, J. K. (1987). The nature of conversational involvement and nonverbal encoding patterns. Human Communication Research, 13 (4), 463-494.

• Collier, M. J., & Powell, R. (1990). Ethnicity, instructional communication and classroom systems. Communication Quarterly, 38 (4), 334-349.

• Comisky, P., Crane, J., & Zillmann, D. (1980). Relationship between college teachers' use of humor in the classroom and students' evaluations of their teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72 (4), 511-519.

• Comstock, J., Rowell, E., & Bowers, J. W. (1995). Food for thought: Teacher nonverbal immediacy, student learning, and curvilinearity. Communication Education, 44, 251-266.

• Endlich, E. (1993). Teaching the psychology of humor. Teaching of Psychology, 20 (3), 181-183.

• Frymier, A. B. (1993). The relationships among communication apprehension, immediacy and motivation to study. Communication Reports, 6 (1), 8-17.

• Frymier, A. B. & Thompson, C. A. (1995). Using student reports to measure immediacy: Is it a valid methodology? Communication Research Reports, 12 (1), 85-93.

• Frymier, A. B. (1994). A model of immediacy in the classroom. Communication Quarterly, 42 (2), 133-144.

• Frymier, A. B. (1993). The impact of teacher immediacy on students'motivation: Is it the same for all students? Communication Quarterly, 41 (4), 454-464.

• Garlick, R. (1994). Male and female responses to ambiguous instructor behaviors. Sex Roles, 30 (1/2), 135-158.

• Gorham, J. (1988). The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student learning. Communication Education, 37, 40-53.

• Gorham, J., & Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationship of teachers' use of humor in the classroom to immediacy and student learning. Communication Education, 39, 46-62.

• Gorham, J., & Zakahi, W. R. (1990). A comparison of teacher and student perceptions of immediacy and learning: Monitoring process and product. Communication Education, 39, 354- 368.

• Jaasma, M. A., & Koper, R. J. (1999). The relationship of student-faculty out-of-class communication to instructor immediacy and trust and to student motivation. Communication Education, 48, 41-47.

• Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., & Wendt-Wasco, N. J. (1985). Teacher immediacy for affective learning in divergent college classes. Communication Quarterly, 33 (1), 61-74.

• Keiper, R. W., & Evans, H. M. (1994). "Act well your part" Teachers and the Performing Arts. The Clearing House, 68 (1), 22-24.

• Kelly, D. H., & Gorham, J. (1988). Effects of immediacy on recall of information. Communication Education, 37, 198-207.

• Korobkin, D. (1988). Humor in the classroom: Considerations and strategies. College Teaching, 36 (4), 154-158.

• McCroskey, J. C., Sallinen, A., Fayer, J. M., Richmond, V. P., & Barraclough, R. A. (1996). Nonverbal immediacy and cognitive learning: A cross-cultural investigation. Communication Education, 45, 200-211.

• McCroskey, J. C., Richmond, V. P., Sallinen, A., Fayer, J. M., & Barraclough, R. A. (1995). A cross-cultural and multi-behavioral analysis of the relationship between nonverbal immediacy and teacher evaluation. Communication Education, 44, 281-291.

• McCroskey, J. C., Fayer, J. M., Richmond, V. P., Sallinen, A., & Barraclough, R. A. (1996). A multi-cultural examination of the relationship between nonverbal immediacy and affective learning. Communication Quarterly, 44 (3), 297-307.

• Mehrabian, A. (1969). Methods and Designs: Some referents and measures of nonverbal behavior. Research Method and Instruction, 1 (6), 203-207.

• Menzel, K. E., & Carrell, L. J. (1999). The impact of gender and immediacy on willingness to talk and perceived learning. Communication Education, 48, 31-40.

• Moore, A., Masterson, J. T., Christophel, D. M., & Shea, K. A. (1996). College teacher immediacy and student ratings of instruction. Communication Education, 45, 29-39.

• Neuliep, J. W. (1991). An examination of the content of high school teachers' humor in the classroom and the development of an inductively derived taxonomy of classroom humor. Communication Education, 40, 343-355.

• Neuliep, J. W. (1997). A cross-cultural comparison of teacher immediacy in American and Japanese college classrooms. Communication Research, 24 (4), 431-449.

• O'Mara, J., Allen, J. L., Long, K. M., & Judd, B. (1996). Communication apprehension, nonverbal immediacy, and negative expectations for learning. Communication Research Reports, 13 (1), 109-128.

• Plax, T. G., Kearney, P., McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1986). Power in the classroom VI: Verbal control strategies, nonverbal immediacy, and affective learning. Communication Education, 35, 43-55.

• Powell, R. G., & Harville, B. (1990). The effects of teacher immediacy and clarity on instructional outcomes: An intercultural assessment. Communication Education, 39, 369-379.

• Rifkind, L. J., & Harper, L. F. (1993). Competent verbal and nonverbal cross gender immediacy behaviors. CUPA Journal, 2, 47-54.

• Robinson, R. Y., & Richmond, V. P. (1995). Validity of the verbal immediacy scale. Communication Research Reports, 12 (1), 80-84.

• Rodriguez, 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.

• Sabers, D. S., Cushing, K. S., & Berliner, D. C. (1991). Differences among teachers in a task characterized by simultaneity, multidimensionality, and immediacy. American Educational Research Journal, 28 (1), 63-88.

• Sanders, J. A., & Wiseman, R. L. (1990). The effects of verbal and nonverbal teacher immediacy on perceived cognitive, affective, and behavioral learning in the multicultural classroom. Communication Education, 39, 341-353.

• Schacht, S., & Stewart, B. J. (1990). What's funny about statistics? A technique for reducing student anxiety. Teaching Sociology, 18, 52-56.

• Skow, L., & Whitaker, T. (1996). It's what you say and what you do! Nonverbal immediacy behaviors: A key to effective communication. NASSP Bulletin, 80 (584), 90-95.

• Stokes, J., Fuehrer, A., & Childs, L. (1983). Group members' self-disclosures relation to perceived cohesion. Small Group Behavior, 14 (1), 63-76.

• Townsend, M. A. R., Mahoney, P., & Allen, L. G. (1983). Student perceptions of verbal and cartoon humor in the test situation. Educational Research Quarterly, 7 (4), 17-23.

• Townsend, M. A. R., & Mahoney, P. (1981). Humor and anxiety: Effects on class test performance. Psychology in the Schools, 18, 228-234.

• Wanzer, M. B., & Frymier, A. B. (1999). The relationship between student perceptions of instructor humor and students' reports of learning. Communication Education, 48, 48-62.

Immediacy via Interactive-Television Courses

• Freitas, F. A., Myers, S. A., & Avtgis, T. A. (1998). Student perceptions of instructor immediacy in conventional and distributed learning classrooms. Communication Education, 47, 366-372.

• Hackman, M. Z., &Walker, K. B. (1990). Instructional communication in the televised classroom: The effects of system design and teacher immediacy on student learning and satisfaction. Communication Education, 39, 196-206.

Immediacy and Student Compliance

• Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., & Burroughs, N. F. (1991). An attributional analysis of college students' resistance decisions. Communication Education, 40, 325-342.

• Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., Smith, V. R., & Sorensen, G. (1988). Effects of teacher immediacy and strategy type on college student resistance to on-task demands. Communication Education, 37, 54-67.

Immediacy and Professors' Job Satisfaction

• Cegala, D. J. (1989). A study of selected linguistic components of involvement in interaction. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53, 311-326.

• Graham, E. E., West, R., & Schaller, K. A. (1992). The association between the relational teaching approach and teacher job satisfaction. Communication Reports, 5 (1), 11-22.

Content Relevance, Immediacy, and Student Motivation

• Frymier, A. B. & Shulman, G. M. (1995). "What's in it for me?": Increasing content relevance to enhance students' motivation. Communication Education, 44, 40-50.

Brief Peace & Conflict Resolution Annotated Bibliography

Peace and Conflict Resolution Links

Promoting Peaceful Classrooms Home Page