religiousca

JournalofInterculturalCommunicationResearch

Vol.37,No.1,March2008,pp.1–15

AnExaminationofReliabilityand

ValidityoftheReligious

CommunicationApprehensionScaleNarissraM.Punyanunt-Carter,JasonS.Wrench,MichaelW.Corrigan,&JamesC.McCroskey

Religiouscommunicationapprehension(RCA)isconceptualizedastheanxietyorfearassociatedwitheitherrealoranticipatedinteractionaboutreligionwithpeopleofotherreligions.ARCAscalewasconstructedandresultsfromthisstudyindicatedthatthescaleisbothgenerallyvalidandreliable.Inthisstudy,426participantscompletedsurveysregardingtheirreligiouscommunicationbehavior.Findingsalsorevealedapositiverelationshipbetweenreligiouscommunicationapprehensionandreligiousreceiverapprehension.Therewasanegativerelationshipamongreligiouscommunica-tionapprehension,toleranceforreligiousdisagreement,andwillingnesstocommunicateaboutreligion.

Keywords:ReligiousCommunicationApprehension;ReligiousReceiverApprehension;ToleranceforReligiousDisagreement;WillingnesstoCommunicateaboutReligion

Religionhasbeenstudiedbyvariousdisciplines.Forthepast30years,withinthecommunicationstudiesdiscipline,religionhasbeenmainlycoupledtotheReligiousCommunicationAssociation(Schultze,2005).Researchhassuggestedlinksbetweenreligiousbeliefsandaffectsoncommunicationbehavior(Schultze,2005).TheobjectiveofthisstudywastoconceptualizereligiouscommunicationapprehensionNarissraM.Punyanunt-Carter(Ph.D.,KentStateUniversity,2002)isanAssistantProfessorintheDepartmentofCommunicationStudiesatTexasTechUniversity.JasonS.Wrench(Ed.D.,WestVirginiaUniversity,2002)isanAssistantProfessorintheSchoolofCommunicationStudiesatSUNY-NewPaltz.MichaelW.Corrigan(Ed.D.,WestVirginiaUniversity,2002)isanAssistantProfessorintheDepartmentofCommunicationArtsatEdgewoodCollege.JamesC.McCroskey(Ed.D.,PennsylvaniaStateUniversity,1966)isDistinguishedResearchProfessorattheUniversityofAlabama-Birmingham.CorrespondencetoNarissraPunyanunt-Carter,TexasTechUniversity,P.O.Box43083,DepartmentofCommunicationStudies,Lubbock,TX79409-3083,USA.Email:

ISSN1747-5759(print)/ISSN1747-5767(online)ß2008WorldCommunicationAssociation

DOI:10.1080/17475750802077339

2N.M.Punyanunt-Carteretal.

(RCA)conceptualizedastheanxietyorfearassociatedwitheitherrealoranticipatedinteractionaboutreligionwithpeopleofotherreligions.Anotherobjectiveofthisstudywastoconstructareligiouscommunicationapprehensionscale.

Forseveraldecades,therehasbeenasignificantamountofresearchcollectedoncommunicationapprehension(CA).CAis‘‘anindividual’sleveloffearoranxietyassociatedwitheitherrealoranticipatedcommunicationwithanotherpersonorpersons’’(McCroskey,1984,http://wendang.chazidian.communicationscholarshaverepeatedlystressedtheeffectsandimportanceofcommunicationapprehensioninpublicandprivatecommunicativecontexts(McCroskey,1977;Richmond,Beatty,&Dyba,1985).Overathousandstudieshaveconcentratedonthecauses,progression,consequences,andtreatmentofCA,whichhasmadeCAthesinglemostresearchedcommunicationvariableinthefield(Richmond,Martin&Cox,1997).AgreatdealoftheresearchonCAhasexaminedthemeasurementandimplementationofthisconstruct(Neuliep&McCroskey,1997).

NeuliepandMcCroskey(1997)notedthatinterculturalcommunicationisacontextthatcontainsuncertainty,unfamiliarity,anduniqueness.Oftentimes,whenindividualsarepresentedwithculturaldifferences,theywillmostlikelyexperienceanxietyanduncertainty(Gudykunst&Kim,1997).Thisanxietyfeltcanbedefinedasinterculturalcommunicationapprehensionor‘‘thefearassociatedwithrealoranticipatedinteractionwithpeoplefromdifferentgroups,especiallydifferentculturalorethnicgroups’’(Neuliep&McCroskey,1997,p.147).TheresearchersnotedthatinAmerica,interculturalcommunicationishardtoavoid.Researchersincommunicationhavestudiedseveraltypesofcommunicationapprehensionandinvariouscontexts.

Religiouscommunicationasacontexthasbeenwidelyresearched,butcommunicationapprehensionhasnotbeenexaminedthusfarinthisuniquecontext.Thepresentstudyexaminedaspectsofapprehensioninregardstoperceptionsaboutcommunicatingandreceivinginformationaboutreligionwithpeopleofdifferentreligions.ThegoalofthecurrentstudywastodevelopanddeterminethereliabilityandthevalidityoftheReligiousCommunicationApprehensionScale.Thestudyattemptedtoprovidefurtherinsightintotherelationshipbetweenhowpeoplecommunicateandreceiveinformationaboutreligionfrompeoplewithdifferentreligions.TherearemanyvariablesthatmayinfluenceRCA,suchasreligion,communicationapprehension,receiverapprehension,andtolerancefordisagreement.

Religion

Oneofthemostimportantinfluencesinaperson’slifeistheirreligion(Bromley,1991).Religioncaninfluencepeople’sperceptionsonsocial,personal,andprofessionalmatters(Bromley,1991).Ragsdale(1994)arguedthatbecausereligionaffectsvaluesandbeliefs,itcanalsoinfluencethekindsofcommunicationbehaviorsthataredisplayedandusedininteractionswithothers.Forinstance,Stewartand

JournalofInterculturalCommunicationResearch3

Roach(1993)discoveredthatreligiousbeliefsmayinfluenceperceptionsofargumentativeness.Theirfindingssuggestedthatreligionwasamotivationandintentionforsomepeopletoarguewithothers.Moreover,thisresearchprovidedevidenceabouthowreligioncaninfluenceourcommunicationbehaviors.

Otherstudieshaveshownthatreligioncanalsoinfluencehowpeopleperceiveandreceivecommunicationfromothers.Forinstance,Stewart(1994)foundapositivesignificantrelationshipbetweenaspeaker’sreligiousinvolvementandanaudience’sperceptionofthatspeaker.Heutilizedascriptedintroductiontomanipulatethespeaker’sperceivedreligiousinvolvementanddiscoveredthatanaudienceviewedaspeakerwithreligiousinvolvementsignificantlymorefavorablythanifthespeakerrevealedthattheywerenotinvolvedwiththeirreligion.Inthesamefashion,Ragsdale(1992)foundapositiverelationshipbetweenreligiouscommitmentandself-disclosure.Ragsdalesuggestedthataperson’sreligiousorientationmayimpacttheircommunicationbehaviorsregardingtheirintentandamountofdisclosure.Itisapparentthatreligionnotonlyaffectshowwecommunicatebutalsohowwereceiveinformation(e.g.,Wrench,Corrigan,McCroskey,&Punyanunt-Carter,http://wendang.chazidian.communicationApprehension

Previousresearchhasshownthatpeoplewhoexperiencehighamountsofanxietyorfearregardingcommunicationwilloftenwithdrawfromand/oravoidcommunica-tionsituations(Daly&McCroskey,1984).Severalcausesofcommunicationapprehensionhavebeensuggested.Thesevaryfromculturemodeling(Daly&Stafford,1984;Richmond&McCroskey,1998)topersonalitycharacteristics(Butler,1986;McCroskey,Daly&Sorenson,1976),andbiologicaltemperament(Beatty&McCroskey,2001).

ResearchhasfoundthatCAaffectsindividualssocially,psychologically,occupationally,andacademically(Richmond&McCroskey,1995).ResearchhasshownthatindividualswithhighlevelsofCAareperceivedaslesspopularorattractivethanindividualswithlowerlevelsofCA(McCroskey,1977).Also,individualswithhighlevelsofCAarelesslikelytoengageinsocialsituations,becauseitmakestheminadequate(Watson,Monroe,&Atterstrom,1984).

BourhisandAllen(1992)foundanegativerelationshipbetweenCAandmeasuresofcognitiveperformance.AllenandBourhis(1996)noticedthattherewasasignificantnegativerelationshipbetweenCAandvariouscommunicationskills.Moreover,CAhasbeenlinkedwithhighercollegedropoutrates(Frymier,1993).Overall,studiesoncommunicationapprehensionhaverepeatedlyshownhowinfluentialitisonseveralsocially-relevantvariables.

Toassesscommunicationapprehension,McCroskey(1982)createdthePersonalReportofCommunicationApprehension-24(PRCA-24).ThePRCA-24scalegivesameasurementoftraitCAandCAacrossfourgeneralsituationalcontexts,suchaspublicspeaking,interpersonal,smallgroup,andpublicspeaking.ThisscaleisusefulbecauseCAistypicallyconceptualizedonacontinuum.Atthehighendof

4N.M.Punyanunt-Carteretal.

thecontinuumistraitCA,whichreferstoanindividual’sdispositiontoexperienceanxietyinavarietyofconditionsacrosstime.AtthelowendofthecontinuumisstateCA,whichreferstoanxietythatisencounteredinspecificcontextsorsituations(Winiecki&Ayres,1999).

AlargeamountofresearchhasexaminedtraitapproachesaswellassituationalfeaturesofCA(Neuliep&McCroskey,1997).Inamassivemeta-analysis,Booth-Butterfield(1998)foundasignificantrelationshipbetweentraitandstateapprehension.Nevertheless,therearecertainsituationsthatmaycauseapprehensionmorethanothers.Buss(1980)reasonedthatsomeofthemostprominentcausesofapprehensionincludedifferent,foreign,and/oratypicalsituations.Inotherwords,anunusualoruncommoninteractionwithsomeoneelsecouldpossiblyincreaseapprehension.Similarly,BergerandCalabrese(1975)maintainedthatwhenstrangersfirstcommunicatewitheachother,theyhavesomeapprehensionabouttheinteractionbecausetheydonotknoweachother.Thus,theycontendedthatstrangerswilltrytoreduceuncertaintybyusingvariouscommunicationbehaviors,suchasusingnonverbalcuesandinformation-seekingstrategies.Asituationthatisoftenfilledwithuncertainty,dissimilarity,andnoveltycouldbewhereanindividualhastocommunicateaboutreligionwithsomeonewhohasadifferentreligion.Inthiscommunicativesituation,anindividualmayalsoincreaseapprehensionaboutlisteningorreceivinginformationaboutreligionfromsomeonewhobelievesinacompletelydifferentreligion.

BasedontheresearchliteratureitisimportanttocreateascaleformeasuringRCA.Forascaletobeusefulitneedstobebothvalidandreliable.Therefore,thenextsectionisgoingtoexamineaseriesofpreviouslyvalidatedcommunicationvariablesthatwillbeutilizedinthecurrentstudytotesttheconcurrentvalidityofthenewlydevelopedRCAscale.

ReceiverApprehension

Receiverapprehension(RA)wasoriginallydefinedbyWheeless(1975)as‘‘thefearofmisinterpreting,inadequatelyprocessing,and/ornotbeingabletoadjustpsychologicallytomessagessentbyothers’’(p.263).Wheelessreasonedthataperson’sinabilitytoeffectivelydecodeinformationand/orlistencompetentlymaybeduetoRA.WheelessarguedthatRAisdistinctlydifferentfromCAintermsofhowinformationisencodedanddecoded.Hebelievedthatthereisadifferenttypeofapprehensionthatoccurswhensomeonecommunicatesinformation(i.e.,communicationapprehension)andwhensomeonereceivesinformation(i.e.,receiverapprehension).Wheelessfoundthatpeople‘‘experiencedsignificantlylowerapprehensionasreceiversthanassources’’(p.267).Hereasonedthattheseresultsarenotunexpected,becausemostpeopletendtobelessapprehensiveaboutreceivinginformationthancommunicatinginformation

Sargent,Weaver,andKiewitz(1997)alsofoundthatindividualswithlowCAaremoreinclinedtolistenorreceivecomplexandstimulatingtypesofinformation.

JournalofInterculturalCommunicationResearch5

Inaddition,individualswithlowCAtendtowanttolistentootherswhentheiremotionsandfeelingsareimportant.Byandlarge,thereisapositiverelationshipbetweenCAandRA.

ResearchershavediscoveredthatRAispositivelyassociatedtoattentiveness(e.g.,Roberts&Vinson,1998),attitudeformation(e.g.,Wolvin&Coakley,1994)andinformationprocessing(e.g.,Beatty,1981).Beatty,Behnke,andHenderson(1980)foundapositiverelationshipbetweenRAandhowparticipantsfeltwhilelisteningtoconfrontationalmaterial.Forthatreason,onemayassumethatifreligionisatopicthatonedoesnotwanttolistento,thentheremaybearelationshiptoone’sreceiverapprehension.

OneofthemostpopularmeasuresofreceiverapprehensionisWheeless’(1975)ReceiverApprehensionTest(RAT).Beattyetal.(1980)determinedthattheRATisavalidmeasurementofreceiverapprehension.TheresearchersalsonotedthattheRATisinternallyconsistent.Beatty(1985)foundthatoverallRATscoresweretypicallystableexceptwhentherewasanticipationregardingadifficultlisteningtask.SinceresearchhaspreviouslyfoundarelationshipbetweenCAandtheRAT,itisexpectedthatthereisapositiverelationshipbetweenreligiouscommunicationapprehensionandreceiverapprehensionofreligiousinformation,sothefollowinghypothesiswasposed:

H1:Thereisapositiverelationshipbetweenreligiouscommunicationapprehen-

sionandreceiverapprehension.

ToleranceforReligiousDisagreement

Thecommunicativevariable‘‘tolerancefordisagreement’’initiallycamefromorganizationalandgroupcommunicationresearchliterature,becauseresearchersnotedadifferencebetween‘‘badconflict’’and‘‘goodconflict’’(McCroskey,Knutson,&Hurt,1975;Teven,McCroskey,&Richmond,1998).Ingeneral,conflictisoftenperceivednegatively(Wrench,McCroskey,&Richmond,inpress).Forthatreason,McCroskeyandWheeless(1976)triedtodistinguishthedifferenttypesofconflictandnotedthatdisagreementsandconflictswerenotthesame.Rather,adisagreementisadifferenceofopinionandmayormaynotleadtoconflict.McCroskeyandWheelessperceivedthatthetypeofrelationshippeoplesharedwitheachotherwoulddetermineifdisagreementswouldleadtoconflictornot.McCroskeyandWheelessdescribed‘‘tolerancefordisagreement’’astheamountoftoleranceindividualshaveforhandlinginterpersonalconflict.

Later,Knutson,McCroskey,Knutson,andHurt(1979)notedthatdisagreementswereusuallyaboutsubstantiveandpracticalmattersexceptwhenpersonaltopicswereincorporatedintotheinteraction.Theresearchersalsoarguedthateveryonewouldnotmoveinalinearfashionfromdisagreementtoconflict.Theresearchersbelievedthatindividualsmightvaryfromoneanotherbasedonatraitcalled‘‘tolerancefordisagreement(TFD)’’.TFDexplainswhycertainpeoplewillrecognizeconflictfasterthanothers.