Abstract
Parks’ (1980) criticism of the cross‐situational consistency of communication apprehension produced several studies that replicated the measures and procedures, hut found different results. A meta‐analysis of 17 studies was conducted to determine what conclusions are warranted given the available data. The meta‐analysis disclosed a large effect (combined z = 17.48, p < .0001) for cross‐situational consistency. The average r between trait‐CA and state/situational anxiety was .473. Further analysis of the “file drawer problem” showed that over 96 non‐significant tests must be unpublished in various file drawers to reduce the combined z to statistical non‐significance. Thus, the meta‐analysis warrants a strong claim for the cross‐situational consistency of communication apprehension
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
