TY - JOUR
T1 - “As good as your word”
T2 - face-threat mitigation and the use of instructor nonverbal cues on students’ perceptions of digital feedback
AU - Clark-Gordon, Cathlin V.
AU - Bowman, Nicholas D.
AU - Watts, Evan R.
AU - Banks, Jaime
AU - Knight, Jennifer M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 National Communication Association.
PY - 2018/4/3
Y1 - 2018/4/3
N2 - Research has established that students often consider the delivery of instructor feedback to be a face-threatening event. To minimize the potential negative effects of feedback, verbal and nonverbal face-threat mitigation (FTM) strategies are utilized by instructors. Advances in digital feedback systems, like online documents and learning management platforms, allow instructors to add nonverbal elements, such as profile pictures or emojis, to this feedback. Two mixed-method studies were employed to investigate the role of these nonverbal cues in digital feedback. Study 1 (N = 236) employed a 2 by 2 experiment (presence or absence of FTM tactics by presence or absence of instructor picture), showing that FTM strategies have substantial positive impact on feedback and instructor perceptions, and that the inclusion of instructor pictures with this feedback has no effect. Study 2 (N = 218) utilized a 2 by 2 experimental design (presence or absence of FTM tactics by presence or absence of matched-valence emojis). Results confirm main effects of FTM techniques (mitigation strategies lead to positive effects), but the addition of emojis had no perceptible influence. Implications for technology-driven instructional feedback are discussed.
AB - Research has established that students often consider the delivery of instructor feedback to be a face-threatening event. To minimize the potential negative effects of feedback, verbal and nonverbal face-threat mitigation (FTM) strategies are utilized by instructors. Advances in digital feedback systems, like online documents and learning management platforms, allow instructors to add nonverbal elements, such as profile pictures or emojis, to this feedback. Two mixed-method studies were employed to investigate the role of these nonverbal cues in digital feedback. Study 1 (N = 236) employed a 2 by 2 experiment (presence or absence of FTM tactics by presence or absence of instructor picture), showing that FTM strategies have substantial positive impact on feedback and instructor perceptions, and that the inclusion of instructor pictures with this feedback has no effect. Study 2 (N = 218) utilized a 2 by 2 experimental design (presence or absence of FTM tactics by presence or absence of matched-valence emojis). Results confirm main effects of FTM techniques (mitigation strategies lead to positive effects), but the addition of emojis had no perceptible influence. Implications for technology-driven instructional feedback are discussed.
KW - Digital feedback
KW - face-threat mitigation
KW - feedback intervention
KW - media richness
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041501915&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041501915&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/03634523.2018.1428759
DO - 10.1080/03634523.2018.1428759
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85041501915
SN - 0363-4523
VL - 67
SP - 206
EP - 225
JO - Communication Education
JF - Communication Education
IS - 2
ER -