J & J (2005) - volition ( emotion and learning)

Hanna Jarvenjo & Sanna Jarvela (2005)

How students describe the sources of their emotional and motivational experiences during the learning process: A qualitative approach

Learning and Instruction 15, 465-480

Introduction

P466 ‘ In learning situations, individuals make personal appraisals of the situation’s meaning based on their former knowledge and experiences ( Fredrickson, 2001). ( from page 477 Emotional experiences arise when the students interpret the situation and begin to compare it to their former experiences, and to construct personal meanings (Fredrickson, 2001).These appraisals along with situational factors and the individual’s interpretations of them arouse emotions, which then need to be controlled, at least to some extent, to ensure meaningful goal directed behaviour’

‘Research on emotions has shown that students experience a rich variety of emotions in academic settings ( Schutz & De Cuir, 2002).

Schutz, D. H., & DeCuir, J. T. (2002). Inquiry on emotions in education. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 125e134.

Results show that academic emotions are significantly related to student motivation, learning strategies, cognitive resources, self-regulation and academic achievement (Pekrun, Goetz, Titz, & Perry, 2002)

Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated

learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational

Psychologist, 37(2), 91e105.

Also, not only do the emotions themselves vary, but also their sources. Learning situations instigate a variety of self-referenced, task-related and social emotions. However, even though there is a lot of research on the effects of emotional factors on classroom learning (see, e.g., Mayring & von Rhoeneck, 2003), there is hardly any research on these issues in technology-based classroom learning contexts.

Aim

1. The aim of this study was to identify the sources of emotional experiences in computer-supported inquiry learning. Specifically, we analysed the reasons the students give as sources of their emotional experiences

2. Another aim of the study was to analyze how the case students expressed and controlled their emotions in actual learning situations. by combining the interviews with the video data uur purpose was to illustrate the aspects of students’ behaviour that are not readily observable,

Framework – volition how is it used to strengthen motivation that in turn backs up goal-directed behaviours.

Learning context

Computer – supported inquiry projects in literature taking place over 12-24 lessons of 75 min duration based in a conventional Finnish classroom context. Students aged 12-15, 7 boys and 11 girls

Forum for knowledge construction discussion

Method

Interviews– students own attributions regarding the source of their emotions obtained through semi structured interviews

All 18 Students asked to describe their goals , learning strategies, interpretations of the learning environment and self-related beliefs and feelings during semi-structured interviews.

In the first phase of the data driven analysis, students’ different kinds of descriptions of their emotional expressions were identified. After several repeated coding sessions, five coding categories were formulated based on the dialectics of data and theory (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The categories were self, task, performance, context, and social (see Table 1).

Video data and case descriptions ( 2 students one boy and one girl

Process-orientated data collection. Working processes videotaped during ten lessons.

When the researcher was familiar with the data, she looked again at the videotapes with the transcriptions and wrote specific descriptions of the students’ emotional and motivational expressions and volitional behaviour. Finally, the descriptions of the two case students were made. Also, the case students’ interview data from the same project were used to complement the case descriptions

Findings

Interview data

Emotions attributed to

self (37%), context (32%), task(12%), performance(11%) social (8%)

What follows are some relevant extracts from the interview data – note p474 ‘students’ descriptions often included more than one source for their experienced emotions’

The self-category included descriptions of experiences that derive from the students’ former endeavours, their individual interests or general thoughts concerning the situation, as well as their personal motivational beliefs about themselves when confronted with the current learning context

Context in Example 7 in which the task requires writing and sharing the created theory in the learning environment and Student 7 does not understand how commenting on the other students’ work in the computer-supported learning environment helps him with his own project

The contextual element e the implemented inquiry learning model e emphasizes collaboration and sharing, and leads the student to situations where she has to share her ideas with other students. In any case, the main source for the student’s negative emotion is social instead of contextual, since she emphasizes the interaction with her classmates. The student feels anxious when the other students can read her notes in the computer-supported learning environment. The main source for the emotional experience is social although the situation was created by the inquiry model.

Combining interview data with video data

In the descriptions that follow the focus is on the expression of the emotions and how control of these emotional experiences varied in the different phases of the learning project and between the case students.

Despite the fact that for both these students 38% ( Ville) and 37%(Anna) of emotions were attributed to self, Anna talked about her emotional experiences in the interviews approximately as much as Ville, and her answers included emotional descriptions in all categories, compared to Ville’s, who did not have any performance descriptions there were some contrasts when it came to looking at the video data.

Ville ( male student) ‘ he expresses his non-task orientation and frustration by shaking his head and talking to himself e.g. non, non, no . “he lays his head on his desk and mumbles to himself

Anna ( female student) ‘almost never expresses her feelings by talking or using gestures

Conclusions

‘The cases of Anna and Ville illustrate the importance of volitional control. Anna had good self-regulation skills and she managed to control her emotional reactions and action towards the goal during the whole project. The analyses of the interviews and video data showed that she was able to highlight the motivational aspects of the task, as can be seen in Example 14, and she also seemed to be able to maintain focus and effort toward the goals despite distractions.

Ville’s working improved after he managed to control his emotions. When the goal became clearer, he was able to better regulate his actions. At the end of the project he seemed to take more responsibility for his own learning, and even if he still expressed his emotions and got distracted from time to time, he managed to return to work after the distractions much more easily.

‘Anna and Ville’s cases demonstrate how emotions can be controlled during the learning process. As Ville showed during the first part of the project, if the emotions overcome the control efforts, learning and cognitive actions become impossible. Cognitive actions may also indicate emotional control, as can be seen in Ville’s Example 14, where writing the computer notes is used as both a cognitive strategy and for controlling the emotional state.’

Learning through discussion

In this study there were surprisingly few responses in the social-category, even though the pedagogical model and computer-supported learning environment emphasized collaboration and knowledge sharing. It seems that social sources for emotional experiences are difficult to investigate and identify from the data, even though students seem to recognize the social aspects of the learning situation. It could be that emotions caused by social sources are so private that students do not want to disclose them.

affective 2010 Jones

Ann Jones (2010)

Affective issues in learning technologies: emotional responses to technology and technology’s role in supporting socio-emotional skills

Journal of Interactive media in education

http://jime.open.ac.uk/2010/09

Considers the topic of affective issues in learning technologies by looking back at two projects ( Cicero in 1980 and Bubble dialogue in 1990s) and making comparisons between findings then and more recent work.

Note article also talks about anxiety

Definition of affect

Based on Oates & Nudy (1996) encompases , emotion, mood, attitude and value

Case study 1 -1980 – Cicero

students ( Brain and Behaviour) booked sessions at Regional centre. 4 interactive sessions available

Methods

questionnaires before, during, and after specifically looking at reactions, expectations, attitude.

37% used it – unprompted response from several that they found it to be fun

58% intended to do so.

Follow up interviews at Residential school as to why it was not used

P6 ‘in informal interviews, students were prepared to reveal more about their fears that they expressed in questionniares’

Findings

Barriers

· Scared

· Embarrassed about using it in front of others

· Iy or 2 y reports of a bad computer experience.

These findings were fed back into the construction of the final questionnaire when it was confirmed. ( KRO then don’t want to repeat this when students are working with others)

Students made a cost/ benefit analysis of perceived need which in turn depended on how well it was integrated into the course , the decision depending on the influence of affective factors ie fear, lack of confidence, embarrassment.

Led to a model of barriers that operated at three stages

· Access to hardware,

· access to the program,

· access to the course.

But p6 ‘ doesn’t point up inter-relatedness of the different barriers’

Comparisons with now

Kirkwood and Price (2008) assessment important for take up p 7 ‘ influences what gets studied and how it gets studied’

Confidence and access remain as issues

Case- study 2 Bubble dialogue -1990s nb one of the themes is about handling conflict

P15 ‘ The powerful aspects of bubble dialogue are

Cartoon like graphics, role play, identification, thought/specch distiction, layers of mediation

‘ can express difficult emotions without having to ‘own’ them by ascribing them to the characters that they role play’

2 levels of mediation

children involved didn’t talk directly to a person but interact through a computer, also the child is a character

YM's talk about designing and using a course with goole apps

Why use Google apps

Flexibility as a VLE ( if VLE available not fit for purpose)

Translation functionality

Apps as shared documents ? whether or not these are places to collaborate

can scaffold - same applies (KRO had issue whether IM had done too much scaffolding ie scaffolded before he knew what ZPD was in terms of the individuals in his student cohort)

KRO? - can you scaffold a wiki as easily as you can a google doc?

demanding for students - new pedagogy, new technology, new subjects matter. KRO- should have asked him what he intended by new pedagogy as he did admit at question time that most of the activity took place on the LH of the CF. Does more content ( teacher inclinatyion) lead to less discussion

contrived - assessment tasks, including participation, presence, personal diaries. KRO forum threads

Lowenthal social presence review

Lowenthal, P.R. (2010)

The evolution and influence of social presence theory on online learning

Kidd, T.T. (ed). Online education and adult learning: New Frontiers for teaching practices. Hershey, PA:IGI Global

Need to link paper numbering with book numbering

Social presence - conceptualized in many ways, social interaction, immediacy, intimacy, emotion and or connectedness

History

1. (telecommunications) Short et al, 1976 – social presence – defined as degree of salience (p4 ‘ i.e. the quality or state of being there’) ‘ to explain the effect telecommunications media can have on communication. In particular that communication is strengthened by the addition of visual information but as research progressed they decided that this depended on the situation/ application ie without visual for some situations with exchanges that involved exchanges of intimate information.

Communications media differ in the amount of salience they offer and these differences play an important role in how people interact ( KRO underestimated the agency of the users )

Williams (1978b) found that physical presence may be even more important for people communicating than visual information. – deficit theory

2. Cueless theory (Rutter) (CMC) Eyes or total physical presence? Also ideas of psychological distance – deficit theory

3. Media Richness theory (Daft, Lengel, Trevino) (CMC) – where p11 ‘richness defined as the potential information –carrying capacity of the data. ‘ e.g. a wink is high in information, it is rich. F-f highest, a spreadsheet lowest ‘ a medium’s capacity for immediate feedback, the number of cues and channels utilized, personalization, and language variety’ p 560 of their article , all influence the degree of media richness – deficit theory

4. SIT (CMC)– started conversation, specifically in the context of CMC, around cues being filtered in . Walther 1992 p12 ‘ argued that human social nature is the same in CMC and f-to-f . Given enough time, he believed that people will find ways to compensate ‘

5. research in educational context online learning ( cf media, organization, communication studies) Gunawardena, Garrison, Anderson and Archer p13 ‘ began reconceptualising social presence theory – moving away from technologigal deterministic conceptualizations of mediated communication’

(KRO -missed out Keisler)

(KRO heading) move from a focus on the medium to a focus on peoples’ actions.

Herring (2007) much of the meaning and significance of CMC depends on its surrounding discourse.

Berge & Collins, 1995) the absence of social cues will interfere with T & L

Lombard & Ditton (1997) p14 ‘identified six interrelated ( and cross disciplinary) but distinct ways people understand presence

Presence as social richness

Presence as realism

Presence as transportation

Presence as immersion

Presence as social actor within medium

Presence as medium as social actor

Definitions of social presence in learning contexts

· Gunawardena (1995, p151) ‘the degree to which a person is perceived as a ‘real’ person in mediated communication

· Garrison et al (2000, p94) ‘ the ability of participants in a community of inquiry to project themselves socially and emotionally as real people’ – measured by student & teacher ability to project themselves as real i.e. the process. i.e.content analysis of online discussion using the frame of affective, interactive and cohesive messages

· Tu and McIssac (2002, p149) ‘the degree of feeling, perceptionm, and reaction of being connected by CMC to another intellectual entity through a text-based encounter’

· Picciano (2002, p22) ‘a student’s sense of being in and belonging in a course and the ability to interact with other students and the instructor’’ measured students sense of belonging to a community’ i.e an outcome

Definitions share a focus on the ‘realness’ of other people and on being there

Measurement

Challenge of the method p19,20. – get Swan (2003), Swan and Shih(2005) ******* multi faceted approach

Gunawadena, & Tu tend to focus on people’s attititudes (bipolar attitude scale, option to choose 1 of 5 categories from across the scale) as a measure whilst Garrisong and Rourke focused on their behaviour.

References

Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R., Garrison, G. R., Philip, I., Richardson, J. C.,Shea, P., & Swan, K. P. (2008). The community of inquiry framework: Development,validation, and directions for further research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of

the American Education Research Association, New York, NY.

Argyle, M., & Cook, M. (1976). Gaze and mutual gaze. London: Cambridge University.

Argyle, M., & Dean, J. (1965). Eye contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry, 28, 289-304.

Baym, N. K., Zhang, Y. B., & Lin, M-C. (2004). Social interaction across media: Interpersonal communication on the Internet, telephone, and face-to-face. New Media & Society, 6(3),

Benbunan-Fich, R., Hiltz, S. R., & Harasim, L. (2005). The online interaction learning model: Anintegrated theoretical framework for learning networks. In S. R. Hiltz & R. Goldman (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous learning networks (pp. 19-37).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Berge, Z., & Collins, M. (1995). Computer-mediated communication and the online classroom: Overview and perspectives (Vol. 1). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Biocca, F. (1997). The cyborg's dilemma: Progressive embodiment in virtual environments. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2). Retrieved from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue2/biocca2.html

Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Burgoon, J. K. (2003). Toward a more robust theory and measure of socialpresence: Review and suggested criteria. Presence: Teleoperators & Virutal Environments,12(5), 456-480.

Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2002). The social life of information. Boston: Harvard Busines Press.

Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (191-233). Homewood, IL: JAI Press.

Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571.

Daft, R. L., Lengel, R. H., & Trevino, L. K. (1987). Message equivocality, media selection, and manager performance: Implications for information systems. MIS Quarterly, 11(3), 355-366.

Danchak, M. M., Walther, J. B., & Swan, K. P. (2001, November). Presence in mediated instruction: Bandwidth, behavior, and expectancy violations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Asynchronous Learning Networks, Orlando, FL.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Grubb, A., & Hines, M. (2000). Tearing down barriers and building communities: Pedagogicalstrategies for the web-based environment. In R. A. Cole (Ed.), Issues in Web-based pedagogy: A critical primer (pp. 365-380). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2/3), 147-166.

Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. The American Journal of Distance Education,11(3), 8-26.

Henninger, M., & Viswanathan, V. (2004). Social presence in online tutoring: What we know and what we should know. In P. Gerjets, P. A. Kirschner, J. Elen, & R. Joiner (Eds.), Proceedingsof the first joint meeting of the EARLI SIGs Instructional Design and Learning and Instruction with Computers (CD-ROM). Tuebingen: Knowledge Media Research Center.

Herring, S. C. (2007). A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse. Language@Internet, 4(1). Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.de/articles/2007

/761/Faceted_Classification_Scheme_for_CMD.pdf

Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1993). The network nation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hostetter, C., & Busch, M. (2006). Measuring up online: The relationship between social presence and student learning satisfaction. Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(2), 1-12.

Hughes, M., Ventura, S., & Dando, M. (2007). Assessing social presence in online discussion groups: A replication study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(1), 17-29.

Kiesler, S. (1986). The hidden messages in computer networks. Harvard Business Review, 64(3), 46-54, 58-60.

Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39(10), 1123-1134.

Kemp, N. J., & Rutter, D. R. (1986). Social interaction in blind people: An experimental analysis. Human Relations, 39(3), 195-210.

Kramer, A. D. I., Oh, L. M., & Fussell, S. R. (2006). Using linguistic features to measure presence in computer-mediated communication. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 913-916). New York: ACM Press.

Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53(9), 1017-1031.

Laffey, L., Lin, G. Y., & Lin, Y. (2006). Assessing social ability in online learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(2), 163-177.

Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2). Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue2/lombard.html

Morahan-Martin, J., & Schumacher, P. (2003). Loneliness and social uses of the Internet. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 659-671.

Nie, N. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the Internet: Reconciling conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientists, 45(3), 420-435.

Picciano, A. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 21-40.

Read, S. J., & Miller, L. C. (1995). Stories are fundamental to meaning and memory: For social creatures, could it be otherwise? In R. S. Wyer (Ed.), Knowledge and memory: The real story (pp. 139-152). Hillsday, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students' perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 68-88.

Robinson, P. (2000). Where is every-body? In R. A. Cole (Ed.), Issues in Web-based pedagogy: A critical primer (pp. 111-123). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14. Retrieved from http://cade.athabascau.ca/vol14.2/rourke_et_al.html

Rovai, A. P. (2002). Building a sense of community at a distance. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3(1). Retrieved from

http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/79/153

Russo, T., & Benson, S. (2005). Learning with invisible others: Perceptions of online presence and their relationship to cognitive and affective learning. Educational Technology & Society, 8(1), 54-62.

Rutter, D. R. (1984). Looking and Seeing: The Role of Visual Communication in SocialInteraction. London: John Wiley.

Rutter, D. R. (1989). The role of cluelessness in social interaction: An examination of teaching by telephone. In D. Roger & P. Bull (Eds.), Conversation (pp. 294-312). Philadelphia, PA:

Multilingual Matters.

Rutter, D. R., Pennington, D. C., Dewey, M. E., & Swain, J. (1984). Eye-contact as a chance product of individual looking: Implications for the intimacy model of argyle and dean. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 8(4), 250-258.

Short, J. A. (1974). Effects of medium of communication on experimental negotiation. Human Relations, 27(3), 225-234.

Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons.

Swan, K. (2003). Developing social presence in online course discussions. In S. Naidu (Ed.), Learning and teaching with technology: Principles and practices (pp. 147-164). London: Kogan Page.

Swan, K., & Shih, L. F. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115-136.

Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93-135.

Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer mediated communication: Social interaction and the Internet. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Tu, C.-H. (2000). On-line learning migration: From social learning theory to social presence theory in a CMC environment. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 2, 27-37.

Tu, C.-H. (2002a). The impacts of text-based CMC on online social presence. The Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 1(2). Retrieved from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/PDF/1.2.6.pdf

Tu, C.-H. (2002b). The measurement of social presence in an online learning environment.International Journal on E-Learning, 1(2), 34-45.

Tu, C.-H., & Corry, M. (2004). Online discussion durations impact online social presence. In C. Crawford. et al. (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2004 (pp. 3073-3077). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Tu, C.-H., & McIsaac, M. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131-150.

van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006). The network society: Social aspects of new media (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Vrasidas, C., & Glass, G. V. (2002). A conceptual framework for studying distance education. In C. Vrasidas & G. V. Glass (Eds.), Distance education and distributed learning (pp. 31-55). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52-90.

Walther, J. B. (1994). Anticipated ongoing interaction versus channel effects on relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 20, 473-501

Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3-43.

Walther, J. B., Anderson, J. F., & Park, D. W. (1994). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A meta-analysis of social and antisocial communication. Communication

Research, 21(4), 460-487.

Walther, J. B., & Parks, M. R. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 529-563). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wise, A., Chang, J., Duffy, T., & Del Valle, R. (2004). The effects of teacher social presence on student satisfaction, engagement, and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 247-271.

I-Y Emotion Review

Mary Helen Immordino-Yang (2010)

Towards a microdevelopmental, interdisciplinary approach to social emotion.

Emotion Review 1, 1-4

Emotions about others quality of mind eg admiration, compassion,

p1 ‘their neurobiology remains elusive’ important for knowing how to act in the social world.

P2 ‘ emotions as intersubjective psychological processes’

What is it that makes these sorts of emotions difficult to study

· Complex

· Subjective

· Play out over time cf basic and social emotions that ‘pertain to others’ more immediate actions or circumstances’ the evaluation accumulates over time and involves reflection and also inference about what is meaningful and in so doing constructing an appropriate emotional response. They represent knowledge structures.

cf

Basic and appraisal models of emotion that assume a linear, context independent process p2 ‘ ‘emotions as organisms’ coherent, packaged responses to invariant classes of environmental stimuli ‘( Gendron & Barrett, 2009)

Approach to adopt

Emotions about others require a micro developmental approach ‘ a person is viewed as actively constructing increasingly complex mental behaviour and meaning, in essence organizing his mind state, by hierarchically coordinating pieces of mentally represented information , including social, cognitive, affective and episodic information into context –specific functional skills’

p3 ‘consistent with a constructionist approach in that emotion is built out of smaller pieces that are not themselves emotional per se ( Barrett, 2009a) but seeks to specify how the process of constructing the emotion is context-dependent, fundamentally subjective and involves dynamic cycling between simpler and more complex knowledge and feeling states in accordance with the context and other sources of emotional variability’ ‘The total sum of these states dynamically self-organising over the time course of the emotion can be described as both a person’s understanding and experience of emotion’

Using the example of Amy with the admiration script ‘ mentally coordinates the components of her reactions by relating her life to that of the protagonist, she builds an understanding that transcends her reaction to this particular story and offers a more general, abstract assessment of her own life’

Advantages of the approach ( microdevelopmental)

P3

· ‘Allows study of effective and cognitive under the same framework’

· doesn’t attempt to standardize the emotional experience

· uncovers any stable elements within the variability of emotion

Suggestions for methodological approach

Use a story - P3 ‘ control the context while leaving the participant free to build their own meaning’ This allows for variability between individual interpretations at the same time the context is stable for all participants

G-wardena & Z 1997

Gunawardena , C.N. and Zittle, F.J. (1997)

Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment

The American Journal of Distance Education, vol. 11 No. 3.

Reviews the research of

1. Spear & Lea, 1992

2. Walther 1992

Both studies consider the p8 ‘social psychological dimension from the ‘social cues’ perspective’ using

· Short et al social presence

· Rutter cueless model

· Keisler’s reduced social cues perspective

S& L, and Walther both conclude that social presence of Short et al the most influential

Short et al definition of social presence

‘ the degree of salience of the other person in the interaction and the consequent salience of the interpersonal relationships’ i.e. how real is the other person

The present articles identifies two concepts that arise out of their definition definition

Intimacy ( based on Argyle & Dean, 1965) Social presence as a quality of the medium itself. Level of intimacy depends on physical distance, eye contact, smiling. Therefore text based CMC low on this measure.

Immediacy (Wiener and Mehrabian, 1968) a measure of the psychological distance that a communicator puts between himself and herself and the object of his/her communication - p9 ‘depends on the communicator and their presence in the sequence of interaction’ p10 ‘ interactivity is a quality ( potential) that may be realized by some or remain an unfulfilled option for others’ p 11 ‘ Research on social presence and CMC has indicated that despite the low social bandwidth of the medium, users of computer networks are able to project their identities, whether ‘real’ or ‘pseudo’ feel the presence of others online, and create communities with commonly agreed upon conventions and norms that bind them together in exploring issues of common interest’

Teacher immediacy as a predictor of student satisfaction (first paragraph of page 10) –

Also cf Cooper ( Empathy in Education) p10 ‘ Teacher immediacy behaviors include both verbal and nonverbal actions such as gesturing, smiling, using humour and vocal variety, personalizing examples, addressing students by name, questioning, praising, initiating discussion, encouraging feedback, and avoiding tense body positions’

Digital skills/literacies ( teachers and students/ Design

P24 ‘It is these skills and techniques, rather than the medium, that will ultimately impact students’ perceptions of interaction and social presence, which will influence their satisfaction with computer conferencing’

P24 Social Presence

P 9 ‘ According to Short et al, argument , social presence is both a factor of the medium, as well as the communicators and their presence in a sequence of interaction’

Commenting on fact that only students who rated SP as high used emoticons p11‘ this raises the questions of individual differences along personality or socio-psychological lines, and begs the need for future research to investigate IDs 9 other than learning styles) as mediating factors in CMC satisfaction, as well as learning outcomes.’

Verbal immediacy

Parenthetical a construction that can be used to extend the meaning of a word or phrase but is not one of the main constituents of a sentence, eg interposed to indicate meaning

P11 research has also indicated that CMC users develop an ability to express missing non verbal cues in written forum ( emtoicons)…. .. and paraenthtical metalinguistic cues such as ‘hmmmm’ or ‘yuk’ ( Hilz, 1994; Walther, 1992). ‘

Aim of present study

How effective is social presence as a predictor of overall learner satisfaction?

2y p12 ;to examine, whether or not there was an interaction effect between participants’ uuse of emoticons, social presence and satistfaction

Focuses on immediacy using bipolar scales such as personal/impersonal, social/unsocial

Context similar to DZX222 survey. 50 adult distance learners enrolled at 5 universities . Course – learner centered collaborative learning model. 61 item questionnaire – not dissimilar to that of the DZX survey

Measuring Social presence categories into which the 55 survey items fell

· · Active participation

· · Attitude to CMC

· · Barriers to participation

· · Confidence in mastering CMC

· · Adequate training alongside

· · Technical experience in using CMC

· · Overall satisfaction with the course.

One questionnaire item asked if they used emoticons

Findings (based on step wise regression analysis - assumes latent variables in construction of the survey rather than identifying them with data reduction techniques)) reliability and validity checks carried out.

· P19 ‘ social presence alone is a strong predictor of satisfaction in text-based computer conferencing’

· Interaction between use of emoticons and social presence. P21 ‘ at low levels of social presence, the use of emoticons had no effect on satisfaction, while at higher levels of social presence, there is an improvement on satisfaction as emoticon use increases’ p22 ‘ a rich-get-richer scenario’ ‘Stenfield’s (1986) study of social and task-orientated use of email where those most likely to use computers socially did not perceive them as low in social presence’

· P23 ‘ a majority of participants agreed that there were more social and personal messages toward the latter part of the conference than during the initial stages’ ? implications for building online communities.

Conclusion

P23 implications for design ‘ equal attention must be paid to designing techniques that enhance social presence’