3.8 Article

A longitudinal analysis of communication traits: communication apprehension, willingness to communicate, and self-perceived communication competence

Journal

COMMUNICATION QUARTERLY
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/01463373.2023.2292216

Keywords

Communication apprehension; willingness to communicate; self-perceived communication competence; trait; state; reliability; temporal stability

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This longitudinal study examined the changes in communication apprehension, willingness to communicate, and self-perceived communication competence over a 15-year period. The results indicate that these traits behaved more like state characteristics, with changes observed over time. However, group communication apprehension remained stable, suggesting it may be more trait-like. The limitations of the study include poor temporal stability in some measures.
This longitudinal study assessed the communication apprehension, willingness to communicate, and self-perceived communication competence for a group of participants across a 15-year span. In total, 220 of 237 participants completed the 15-year project. The data represent six time points, with data collections happening once every three years. The results show that meeting communication apprehension, dyadic communication apprehension, public communication apprehension, willingness to communicate, and self-perceived communication competence all changed across time, indicating these traditionally thought of trait-like variables behaved more as state-like characteristics. Group communication apprehension did not change over time, indicating it may be more trait-like than state like. Results are limited by evidence of poor temporal stability for the public communication apprehension, self-perceived communication competence, and willingness to communicate measures.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available