Robert J. Kibler

A test of concurrent validity for linguistic indices of deception

Previous research suggested that 11 linguistic indices discriminate truth‐telling from deceptive language behavior. The present study sought to obtain concurrent validity for these indices by correlating them with other indices which have already been empirically validated as measures of various aspects of uncertainty, vagueness, negative affect, and reticence. Concurrent validity was obtained only for those indices purportedly measuring reticence.

Writing Behavioral Objectives: A Programed Article.

The purpose of this article is to train interested teachers in the mechanics of writing behavioral objectives. The article begins with a brief rationale for employing behavioral objectives and instructions for using the program. The program is designed for individuals who have little or no experience in writing behavioral objectives, however it may also be useful to individuals who desire to improve their objective writing ability.

A comparison of norm‐referenced and criterion‐referenced measurement with implications for communication instruction

The renewed interest in the educational accountability issue has stimulated a re‐examination of measurement. Criterion‐referenced measurement (CRM) evaluates a students progress relevant to a performance standard, rather than to the progress of his peers. Seemingly, CRM offers a viable approach to accountability for communication instruction. The current article (1) compares norm‐referenced and criterion‐referenced measurement; (2) suggests sortie implications that CRM holds for communication instruction; and (3) discusses salient problems involved in implementing CRM in communication instruction.

Hypnosis and the Reduction of Speech Anxiety.

Hypnosis and systematic desensitization are compared and contrasted as viable means of reducing speech anxiety. Both methods show substantial promise, but Speech‐Communication researchers have not thoroughly explored the potential of hypnosis to date.

Behavioral objectives and speech communication instruction

This article presents information regarding behavioral objectives and their use for speech teachers. The paper considers: (1) definitions of three types of objectives; (2) description of an instructional model; (3) values of using behavioral objectives; and (4) criticisms against behavioral objectives and their respective counter‐arguments.

An investigation of the effect of presentations by effective and ineffective speakers on listening test scores

Research investigating effects of differences in the administration of listening tests on test scores gives conflicting results. This study was designed to measure relative effects of “effective” and “ineffective” speakers presenting the Brown‐Carlsen and STEP tests on listening test scores. Analyses of the test scores found statistically significant differences between subjects hearing “effective” and “ineffective” speaker presentations for both the Brown‐Carlsen and STEP tests. Since subjects hearing “effective” speakers scored higher on both tests, results suggest variables such as “effective” speaker presentations positively influence listening test score results. Future research validating dimensions of administering listening tests seems necessary.

Effect of Training in the Use of Behavioral Objectives on Student Achievement.

This study was an experimental investigation of the effects on cognitive learning of training students to use behavioral objectives. One half of the Ss received training via programmed instruction in the use of objectives. They were also required to achieve a criterion score on a measure of ability to use objectives. The remaining Ss received a placebo treatment. Results indicated that Ss receiving training achieved statistically significant higher scores on an examination consisting of items matched to objectives than Ss not trained, although the absolute difference gave no support to useful practical application. SUPPLYING EXPLICIT STATEMENTS of instructional objectives to learners is an integral aspect of mastery learn ing models of instruction (1, 2, 5). This practice appears to be based on the assumption that objectives will reduce the students uncertainty about what is required of him, thus permitting the student to maximize learning by selectively attending to the most relevant stimuli in the instructional setting. If this assumption is valid, then it is reasonable to exp ct th t when performance is compared between Ss given behavioral objectives (BOs) and Ss not given objec tives, those possessing objectiv s should exhibit greater learning. As Duchastel and Merrill (6) demonstrated in their extensive review of obj ctives research, however, this relationship has not been co sistently observed. While This content downloaded from 157.55.39.235 on Fri, 07 Oct 2016 04:39:20 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms BASSETT AND KIBLER 13 learner posession of objectives has been shown to facilitate learning in a number of studies, such a facilitating effect has not been observed across all studies. The generalizability of such an effect is therefore quite difficult to determine at this time. Furthermore, serious methodological problems appear in the literature with such frequency that it is pos sible to place reasonable confidence in few of the studies. Although there are many methodological inadequacies in the objectives literature, the ability of learners to use the objectives given to them emerges as an especially crit ical question for research. Several investigators have sug gested that students need to know how to use objectives before effects on learning will be present (3, 4, 9, 12, 13). Only three studies have been found, however, which re port procedures for training learners to use objectives. Boardman (3) and Brown (4) attempted to train Ss to use BOs, although neither assessed the effectiveness of the training. Furthermore, both concluded from anecdotal evidence that their limited training procedures were prob ably inadequate. In contrast, Morse and Tillman (12) em pirically tested the effects of their training efforts. Morse and Tillman s training consisted of having students read Mager s (11) Preparing Instructional Objectives with accompanying classroom instruction. Ss in a second train ing condition were directed to read Mager s book out of class, with no classroom instruction provided. A third group (control) was directed to perform an unrelated task. hi the second part of the study, one half of the Ss were given BOs for an assigned reading and the remaining half were not given objectives. Ss with objectives achieved higher scores on test items matched to those objectives than did Ss not posessing objectives. However, no signif icant main effect due to training and no significant inter action effect between training and possession of BOs were found. Consequently, Morse and Tillman concluded that training was not necessary for students to use objectives effectively in learning. The factor which most seriously limits the confidence which may be placed in this conclusion concerns the validity of the training procedures. Morse and Tillman acknowledge that Mager s book provides information about objectives, but does not contain instruction in how to use objectives in learning. Hence, the validity of the training is questionable. Conclusions about the effects of training cannot be drawn without establishing a strong correspondence between the training and the required terminal behavior. Since BOs are assumed to be a learning tool, it seems reasonable that students may require training before they are able to use objectives with maximum effectiveness. How ever, most investigators have ignored the question of stu dent ability to use objectives on the assumption that when learners are given BOs they will use them, and that they will use them as the investigator intended. Because little information on the need for training students to use ob jectives is presently available, the validity of the two as sumptions is not known. However, if training is necessary, and it is not provided, then positive effects of BOs may not emerge. Because it seems important to determine if training learners to use BOs is necessary, the relationship between training in the use of objectives and learner achievement was investigated in this study. Specifically, this hypothesis was tested: When objectives are provided for alunit of instruction, Ss trained to use objectives will achieve a significantly greater number of correct answers on an examination consisting of items matched to the objectives than Ss not so trained.

Object importance and commitment to position: Predictors of attitude position

Two hypotheses were tested: object importance and commitment to position will (1) in combination, and (2) each separately, predict attitude position. Responses were collected on three scales for each item: attitude position, commitment, and importance. Data were analyzed by multiple linear regression analyses. Results suggest that attitude position is not a unitary construct and that its composition includes commitment, importance, and one or more other variables not yet adequately determined.

Effects of selected levels of misspelling and mispronunciation on comprehension and retention

Abstract Previous research by the authors suggests that moderate degrees of mispronunciation in a message may not affect comprehension or retention. This study expands the previous research by investigating the relative effect of mode of presenting verbal errors on comprehension and retention. Misspellings were compared with mispronunciations to determine if one mode (i.e., written vs. oral) tended to affect comprehension and retention more than the other. Results indicated that, although subjects perceived three significantly different levels of mispronunciation and misspelling in messages, neither increasing the frequency of verbal errors in a message nor altering the mode of presenting a message significantly affected comprehension or retention.