Communication strategy use of EFL learners in videoconferencing, virtual world and face-to-face environments

被引:5
|
作者
Cirit-Isikligil, Nazli Ceren [1 ]
Sadler, Randall W. [2 ]
Arica-Akkok, Elif [3 ]
机构
[1] Istanbul Univ Cerrahpasa, Istanbul, Turkey
[2] Univ Illinois, Linguist, Champaign, IL USA
[3] Ankara Univ, Linguist, Ankara, Turkey
关键词
communication strategy; computer-mediated communication; virtual world; videoconferencing; English as a foreign language;
D O I
10.1017/S0958344022000210
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
This study investigates the communication strategy (CS) use of English as a foreign language (EFL) learners in videoconferencing (VC), virtual world (VW), and face-to-face environments. The study was conducted with 30 senior Turkish undergraduate EFL students. The data were collected via video and audio recordings of three opinion-exchange tasks, a background and post-task questionnaire, and an interview that includes a retrospective think-aloud protocol. The participants worked in groups of five to complete the opinion-exchange tasks in each of the three environments. The findings indicated that the participants made use of a wide range of CSs, and although some of the CSs differed, mostly the same types were employed in all the environments. However, the results revealed that the frequency of CSs showed variance among environments, with the highest number in the VC environment and the lowest in the VW. It was possible to establish a connection between the differences in the frequency and the types of strategy use with the distinctive features of the environments, the proficiency level of the participants, and the type of the tasks that was utilized. Additively, 10 new strategy types were discovered.
引用
收藏
页码:122 / 138
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Investigating ICT using problem-based learning in face-to-face and online learning environments
    Pearson, J
    COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 2006, 47 (01) : 56 - 73
  • [42] The hyperpersonal effect in online dating: effects of text-based CMC vs. videoconferencing before meeting face-to-face
    Antheunis, Marjolijn L.
    Schouten, Alexander P.
    Walther, Joseph. B.
    MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY, 2020, 23 (06) : 820 - 839
  • [43] Text-based communication influences self-esteem more than face-to-face or cellphone communication
    Gonzales, Amy L.
    COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2014, 39 : 197 - 203
  • [44] Is avatar-to-avatar communication as effective as face-to-face communication? An Ultimatum Game experiment in First and Second Life
    Greiner, Ben
    Caravella, Mary
    Roth, Alvin E.
    JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 2014, 108 : 374 - 382
  • [45] Effects of an online learning community on active and reflective learners' learning performance and attitudes in a face-to-face undergraduate course
    Zhan, Zehui
    Xu, Fuyin
    Ye, Huiwen
    COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 2011, 56 (04) : 961 - 968
  • [46] Individual Swift Trust and Knowledge-Based Trust in Face-to-Face and Virtual Team Members
    Robert, Lionel P., Jr.
    Dennis, Alan R.
    Hung, Yu-Ting Caisy
    JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 2009, 26 (02) : 241 - 279
  • [47] Gender Differences on Self-disclosure in Face-to-Face Versus E-mail Communication
    Yu, Tong
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON EDUCATION, LANGUAGE, ART AND INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION, 2014, 3 : 742 - 745
  • [48] Expertise Judgment and Communication Accommodation in Linguistic Styles in Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Groups
    Liao, Wang
    Bazarova, Natalya N.
    Yuan, Y. Connie
    COMMUNICATION RESEARCH, 2018, 45 (08) : 1122 - 1145
  • [49] Developing Relationships in Computer-Mediated Communication and Face-to-Face Setting: A Longitudinal Experimental Study
    Mustafa, Hasrina
    Bin Hassan, Md. Salleh
    Bin Abu Hassan, Musa
    Ismail, Narimah
    Abu Samah, Bahaman
    PERTANIKA JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HUMANITIES, 2007, 15 (02): : 85 - 96
  • [50] Social-psychological influences on opinion expression in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication
    Ho, Shirley S.
    McLeod, Douglas M.
    COMMUNICATION RESEARCH, 2008, 35 (02) : 190 - 207