College Is Not A Content Delivery System: Interpersonal Interactions and Student Success

Montgomery College graduates via

It's that time of year again, when thousands of high school students go off to college.  What is it that college offers, in an era when the internet is teeming with freely available information?

All too often, we think of education, particularly higher education, as a content delivery system:  College provides access to information and programs that foster the development of particular skills, such as critical thinking.  This idea leads some to enthusiastically embrace technology as a replacement for the traditional college experience.  After all, we can make the content and relevant assignments available online, for a fraction of the cost now incurred by college students (see, for example, massive open online courses [MOOCs] and aspects of Kevin Carey's vision of the future "University of Everywhere").  This would seem like an ideal way to increase access to, and reduce the costs of, higher education. Right?

Not really.  The problem with this approach is that it ignores the important role of interpersonal interactions in education.

Higher education is not merely the mechanical transmission of content and skills to students.  College students' success is embedded in their immersion in a broader college culture, comprised of a network of relationships with faculty, staff, and other students.  Decades of research have found that positive, educational or intellectual interactions with faculty and peers, both within and outside of the classroom, are associated with students' intellectual development and academic success.¹  Faculty-student interactions:

are critical for everything from building students' capacity as scholars, fostering degree aspirations and retention (especially in the sciences), and promoting the success of students from underrepresented backgrounds.²

One review of relevant research concludes that many of the effects of college are "mediated through the interpersonal environments they create."³  In other words, higher education affects students largely through the kinds of social interactions they have in college.  The authors argue that personal and academic growth emerges from interacting with those who are different from us and engaging in substantive discussions of new ideas.⁴

Why are social interactions and relationships important for college students' success?  Here are just a few of the many factors that are potentially relevant.

Teacher and student interaction via

People are sources of practical, academic help.
Students who have good relationships with their professors and with their peers have access to a key learning resource -- other people.  They can ask questions about the material or about course assignments, learn effective study skills, get extra help, and participate in study groups.  Students hone their intellectual skills and deepen their understanding of course material through their interactions with faculty and other students.⁵  As one community college student noted:

You know, the more I talk to other people about our class stuff, the homework, the tests, the more I'm actually learning, . . . and the more I learn not only about other people but also about the subject, because my brain is getting more, because I'm getting more involved with the students.  I'm getting more involved with the class even after class.⁶  

Faculty and peers can also model relevant academic skills, such as critical thinking and respectful discourse.  More broadly, faculty can act as advisors and mentors, providing guidance to students as they navigate their college experience (e.g., helping them choose classes and programs of study, identifying ways to pursue their academic and professional interests, suggesting effective responses to academic challenges or setbacks).  Students who are assigned a faculty mentor have better academic performance and a lower dropout rate.⁷   Faculty, staff, and even peers can also connect students with support services as well as academic and professional opportunities (e.g., study abroad, internships).

College classroom -- lots of smiles here! (via)

Strong, positive relationships provide a safe space for teaching and learning.
Learning often involves vulnerability -- we have to stretch ourselves, and in doing so, we risk failure.  Learning is hard work, and we will make mistakes along the way (in fact, certain difficulties and errors can enhance learning⁸).  Students are asked to embrace new perspectives and ways of thinking, which can be distressing.⁹  Positive student-teacher relationships are important to creating a supportive environment for learning, as noted by this undergraduate student:

[I would learn best with a] caring relationship [with my instructor] in which honest feedback and opportunities for growth are provided.  With this type of relationship I would feel free to take risks to enhance my own growth.¹⁰

Teaching can be risky as well.  When instructors create a new class activity or assignment, it will sometimes fall flat (even a tried-and-true teaching technique can fall flat, at times -- yep, been there myself).  This means that trust, empathy, and respect among students and teachers are fundamental to successful teaching and learning.

Highly effective teachers tend to reflect a strong trust in students.  They usually believe that students want to learn, and they assume, until proven otherwise, that they can. [. . .] Above all, they tend to treat students with what can only be called simple decency.¹¹  

Students participate more in class when instructors create a more supportive atmosphere.¹²   Conversely, when students do not feel respected or supported, they are likely to disengage from class and/or school, hindering their ability to learn and succeed.¹³  Both students and teachers highlight the importance of open, supportive, comfortable, safe, and respectful relations in class.¹⁴   Feeling respected when interacting with faculty is a key factor in academic motivation and confidence.¹⁵

Having good relationships with students is likely to reduce teachers' frustration
and increase their enthusiasm (via)

Positive teacher-student relationships can result in better teaching.
When professors have positive relationships with their students, they are likely to enjoy their teaching more and be more motivated to provide high-quality instruction.  The professor who has positive engagement with students will probably be more approachable and committed to going the extra mile to support students' academic development.  Students report that faculty approachability, enthusiasm, and dedication are helpful to their success¹⁶ and faculty are seen as more approachable when they show concern for their students.¹⁷  In short, positive teacher-student relationships are likely to improve faculty job satisfaction and enthusiasm for teaching, as well as their approachability, which is likely to result in better student outcomes.¹⁸

via

Good relationships can strengthen students' motivation.
When professors show genuine concern for their students, their students are more motivated, have a more positive attitude toward the class, get better grades, and learn more.¹⁹  Similarly, more frequent student-faculty interactions outside of class are associated with stronger student motivation.²⁰  Poor relationships with faculty undermine students' motivation:  Students who feel alienated or distant from their professors tend to be discouraged and unmotivated.²¹  Faculty enhance students' motivation directly through encouragement, positive feedback, and concrete suggestions for improvement.  In other words, faculty can let students know that success is possible, as well as how to achieve it, which can foster students' sense of self-efficacy and academic self-confidence.

A positive teacher-student relationship also motivates students to work harder to please the instructor.²² As one undergraduate student put it:

When you have a personal relationship, or personal interaction, it makes you want to give 100% and do your best -- you don't want to let this person down.  ²³ 

Peer interactions also predict student motivation.²⁴  Strong relationships with peers can also foster a greater motivation and engagement with coursework.

The more students are involved, academically and socially, in shared learning experiences that link them as learners with their peers, the more likely they are to become more involved in their own learning and invest the time and energy needed to learn (Tinto, Goodsell, & Russo, 1993).  The social affiliations that those activities provide serve as a vehicle through which academic involvement is engaged.²⁵

In other words, students' relationships with faculty and peers have the potential to increase their motivation and effort, which is likely to result in enhanced learning and better academic outcomes.

via

Relationships can provide emotional support.
Students have emotional needs and concerns which can intrude on their academic work.  A bad grade can result in feelings of hopelessness.  A family crisis can cause anxiety that makes it hard to focus on studying.  Feelings of loneliness, experiencing harassment or disrespect, a difficult breakup -- all of these have the potential to negatively impact a student's academic life.  Students need supportive relationships with friends, family, faculty, and staff to help them weather these difficulties. While most of my meetings with students focus on course-related, academic matters, my students also discuss personal problems with me, seeking advice or a shoulder to lean on.  I have reason to think these conversations are helpful academically as well as personally, as students who go to their college mentor for support and encouragement are more likely to stay in college.²⁶  Receiving sufficient emotional support (along with social companionship support) may be key to successful adjustment to college for first-year students.²⁷

Students of color often face stereotyping and discrimination
that can make them feel marginalized (via)

Positive relationships can increase students' sense of belonging.
When students have warm relationships with faculty, staff, and other students, it helps them feel connected to the college community.  The sense that others in the college community know them and care about them increases their commitment to their college education and makes it more likely that they will persist and achieve their academic goals.²⁸  College students' sense of belonging is also associated with stronger academic motivation and self-efficacy.²⁹   Overall rates of college completion are lower than desirable (especially for lower-income students), given the financial costs of higher education and benefits of obtaining a college degree.  Stronger relationships with faculty and peers are likely to increase student persistence and academic success.

The sense of belonging can be precarious for first-generation and ethnic minority college students, who may feel marginalized within the college community or experience doubts about whether they belong in college at all.³⁰  So for all students, a sense of belonging is associated with positive academic outcomes, but for first-generation and ethnic minority students, strong and positive relationships with faculty, staff, and peers may be even more critical for academic success.  One study of Latino students found that those who frequently discussed course content with peers outside of class had a stronger sense of belonging to the campus community.³¹

College students often lack confidence in their abilities (via)

Students' relationships can strengthen their academic self-concept.
When students get encouragement and positive feedback from their teachers and peers about their work, they begin to have greater confidence in their academic abilities.  Academic self-confidence is greater among students who see their faculty members as approachable and respectful, for example.³²  Students need other people to provide validation that their ideas are valuable and they are worthy of being in college; college students, particularly new students, have a strong need for self-esteem and self-affirmation.³³

Faculty, whether as advisors or role models, can expand the students' sense of their possible future. One of my students, for example, wrote me a couple of years ago to let me know that taking my General Psychology course helped re-invigorate his own love of learning:

I found I really loved the material which helped, but more than that I was really struck by how much you obviously loved what you do and that really resonated with me for a very long time. That was exactly the kind of engagement I was looking for in my life.

Whether encouraging students to take a particular class, apply for an internship, or consider graduate school, faculty and staff can help students see themselves as capable of achieving more than they thought possible.

Employers are looking for interpersonal skills (via)

Relational skills and personal growth are important educational outcomes.
College education is not just about intellectual development; it must address the whole person.  Certainly intellectual growth is an important aspect of higher education, but it must be accompanied by personal growth to ready students for the challenges of work and life after college.  Research has found that non-cognitive skills (e.g., perseverance, self-control, emotional stability) predict success in school and work,³⁴ so gains in relevant non-cognitive skills are another important outcome of education.  These "soft skills" are also what employers are looking for in new hires.  Interpersonal skills are highly ranked among those sought-after skills:  Employers rate characteristics such as the ability to work on a team and communicate with others as among the top skills they look for in employees.³⁵  Social interactions with faculty and peers predict college students' personal development, as well as their intellectual growth.³⁶  In other words, the interactions students have with peers and faculty have the potential to help them develop skills that are vital to employment and success at work.

Abraham Maslow's theory states that we have an intrinsic need for love and belongingness (via)

Positive relationships fulfill our need for interpersonal connection.
Humans have a fundamental need to have close interpersonal relationships.  We need to have regular interpersonal interactions within the context of caring relationships.³⁷  When our social needs are not being met, we experience distress, making it more difficult to focus on other goals and activities.  In other words, students are unlikely to learn or grow academically if they are suffering from depression and anxiety resulting from social isolation or loneliness.  While students are likely to have relationships with friends and family outside of the college community, strengthening students' relationships within the college community is important, particularly for residential students, to ensure that all students can satisfy their relational needs on a regular basis.

Learning is Social

Don't get me wrong -- I believe in increased access to education and I love the array of educational resources available online.  But if we are serious about designing higher education, we need to understand the needs of learners.  Rather than thinking of learning as an individual activity, we need to remember that learning is usually social.

We are social animals.  Researchers are increasingly finding evidence that virtually every aspect of our behavior -- including thinking and learning -- is influenced by our social context.  Even the most minimal social connection can enhance our achievement motivation.  When someone interested in math finds out that they share a birthday with a successful math student, they become more motivated to pursue math and they work longer on a math problem.  Our achievement motivations are not merely our own, but are affected by our sense of social connection, or what has been termed mere belonging.³⁸   Our memory is also better when we are socially engaged:  People remembered a list of items better when the person reading the list sat closer to them, leaned in, and engaged in eye contact (showed greater immediacy) than when the experimenter sat further away and didn't engage in eye contact.³⁹  (As one student aptly says, "I learn better when I am treated as a person rather than a number"⁴⁰) Conversely, the threat of future social isolation causes impairment in our capacity for intelligent thought.⁴¹

Can students learn from content alone, without interacting with a teacher or other students?  Probably, at least in some cases.  But research suggests that such learning might be less rich than the learning that is fostered through social interactions and supportive relationships within a diverse community of teachers and peers.  In addition, it is clear that many, if not most students, need more than just access to online content to successfully learn.  While thousands of students have enrolled in MOOCs, very few actually finish the course, and those who do are typically those who have already completed some college (indeed, one study concludes that most of those who enroll in MOOCs are young and well-educated).  Most students need more than just access to an online course to successfully learn the material.  Further, what students gain from higher education isn't just the content learned in one class -- students immersed in the college experience learn broadly and deeply from what they do in and outside of class, including a myriad of social interactions and influences within and beyond the specifics of any one class.

Rather than re-imagine college as a content-rich, but interpersonally impoverished, landscape, we should combine a content-rich learning environment with strategies to expand the social interactions that foster college students' learning and academic success.

• Students should be encouraged to engage with their professors and peers both in class and outside of class.  (I know, I know -- you may be intimidated or think that faculty aren't interested in meeting with students, but you need to get past those concerns and take advantage of the opportunities for intellectual and personal growth that college affords.)  
• Faculty can include classroom and co-curricular activities that foster more opportunities for students to interact with each other and with their instructors.  (It is clear that faculty need to do more than just post office hours if we want to encourage such interactions.)  
• College facilities can be structured to encourage intellectual interactions (student lounges could be situated near faculty offices, for example⁴²).  
• Programs can create spaces for academic discourse, such as informal discussions that are attended by students, faculty, and staff. (That was my goal in creating the Psychology Brown Bag Series at Montgomery College.)  

This is not to say that such interactions couldn't be fostered in an online or blended learning environment.  Indeed, online college courses often include structures to encourage interactions with peers and/or the instructor.  The online environment can also provide intellectual, interpersonal interactions, though they need to be designed with the specifics of online learners in mind.  The argument for the importance of relationships is not meant to denigrate the potential of online courses.  Let's just not kid ourselves -- giving students access to content alone is not sufficient for successful higher education.  

What higher education offers is not merely intellectual content.  It is the opportunity to engage in an academic culture of diverse learners and teachers and researchers.  The relationships students form in college can help them learn and motivate them to do their best work.  Faculty, staff, and peers can help students dream big and make progress toward achieving their dreams.  At its best, college provides a supportive interpersonal environment in which students can discuss new ideas, stretch themselves, and grow, both intellectually and personally.  Content may be available freely on the internet, but students need more than access to content to succeed in college.  They need strong, positive relationships with faculty, staff, and other students.  They need a community.  They need people.

My students clowning at the National Museum of the American Indian (2011)

You might also enjoy these other posts on teaching:

Making a Difference: Whether You Know it or Not
Become an Incremental Theorist
Teaching toward a Better World
Writing is Life
Losing the Lecture
Interrogating Museum Exhibits
The Value of Dissent

References

1. Two articles that review this research are:
• Lamport, M. A. (1993).  Student-faculty informal interaction and the effect on college student outcomes:  A review of the literature.  Adolescence, 28, 971-991.
• Terenzini, P. T., Pascarella, E. T., & Blimling, G. S. (1999).  Students' out-of-class experiences and their influence on learning and cognitive development:  A literature review.  Journal of College Student Development, 40, 610-623.
• Also see this study on the impact of peer relationships:  Whitt, E. J., Nora, A., Edison, M., Terenzini, P., & Pascarella, E. T. (1999).  Interactions with peers and objective and self-reported cognitive outcomes across 3 years of college.  Journal of College Student Development, 40, 61-78.
2. Baker, V. L. & Griffin, K. A. (2010).  Beyond mentoring and advising:  Toward understanding the role of faculty "developers" in student success.  About Campus, 14, 2-8.  doi:  10.1002/abc.20002 (p. 2)
3. Terenzini, P. T., Pascarella, E. T., & Blimling, G. S. (1999).  Students' out-of-class experiences and their influence on learning and cognitive development:  A literature review.  Journal of College Student Development, 40, 610-623 (p. 614).  See also: Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1980).  Student-faculty and student-peer relationships as mediators of the structural effects of undergraduate residence arrangement.  Journal of Educational Research, 73, 344-353. 
4. Terenzini, P. T., Pascarella, E. T., & Blimling, G. S. (1999).  Students' out-of-class experiences and their influence on learning and cognitive development:  A literature review.  Journal of College Student Development, 40, 610-623.
5. Kember, D., Leung, D. Y. P., & Ma, R. S. F. (2006).  Characterizing learning environments capable of nurturing generic capabilities in higher education.  Research in Higher Education, 48, 609-632.  doi:  10.1007/s11162-006-9037-0; Smith, D. G. (1977). College classroom interactions and critical thinking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 180-190.; Whitt, E. J., Nora, A., Edison, M., Terenzini, P., & Pascarella, E. T. (1999).  Interactions with peers and objective and self-reported cognitive outcomes across 3 years of college.  Journal of College Student Development, 40, 61-78.
6. Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 68, 599-623. (p. 611)
7. Campbell, T. A. & Campbell, D. E.  (1997).  Faculty/student mentor program:  Effects on academic performance and retention.  Research in Higher Education, 38,  727-742.; Hu, S., & Ma, Y.  (2010).  Mentoring and student persistence in college:  A study of the Washington State Achievers Program.   Innovative Higher Education, 35,329-341.  doi:  10.1007/s10755-010-9147-7
8. Clark, C. M. & Bjork, R. A. (2014).  When and why introducing difficulties and errors can enhance instruction.  In V. A. Benassi, C. E. Overson & C. M. Hakala (Eds.) Applying science of learning in education:  Infusing psychological science into the curriculum.  Retrieved from the Society for the Teaching of Psychology web site:  http://teachpsych.org/ebooks/asle2014/index.php
9. Baxter Magolda, M.  (1987).  The affective dimension of learning:  Faculty-student relationships that enhance intellectual development.  College Student Journal, 21,46-58.
10. Baxter Magolda, M.  (1987).  The affective dimension of learning:  Faculty-student relationships that enhance intellectual development.  College Student Journal, 21,46-58. (p. 54).  
11. Bain, K.  (2004).  What the best college teachers do.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (p.18)
12. Nunn, C. E.  (1996).  Discussion in the college classroom:  Triangulating observational and survey results.  Journal of Higher Education, 67, 243-266.
13. Juvonen, J. (2006).  Sense of belonging, social bonds, and school functioning.  In Alexander, P. A., & Winne, P. H. (Eds.) Handbook of Educational Psychology, 2nd Edition, p. 655-674.  Mahwah, NJ:  Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. 
14. Anderson, L. E., & Carta-Falsa, J. (2002).  Factors that make faculty and student relationships effective.  College Teaching, 50, 134-138.
15. Komarraju, M., Musulkin, S., & Bhattacharya, G. (2010).  Role of student-faculty interactions in developing college students' academic self-concept, motivation, and achievement.  Journal of College Student Development, 51, 332-342.  doi:  10.1353/csd.0.0137
16. Devlin, M., & O'Shea, H. (2012).  Effective university teaching:  Views of Australian university students from low socio-economic status backgrounds.  Teaching in Higher Education, 17, 385-397.  doi:  10.1080/13562517.2011.641006
17. Denzine, G. M., & Pulos, S.  (2000).  College students' perceptions of faculty approachability.  Educational Research Quarterly, 24, 56-66.
18. Graham, E. E., West, R., & Schaller, K. A. (1992).  The association between the relational teaching approach and teacher job satisfaction.  Communication Reports, 5, 11-22.  doi: 10.1080/08934219209367539; Spilt, J. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., & Thijs, J. T. (2011).  Teacher wellbeing:  The importance of student-teacher relationships.  Educational Psychology Review, 23, 457-477.  doi:  10.1007/s10648-011-9170-y
19. Teven, J. J., & McCroskey, J. C. (1997).  The relationship of perceived teacher caring with student learning and teacher evaluation.  Communication Education, 46, 1-9.; Wilson, J. H. (2006).  Predicting student attitudes and grades from perceptions of instructors' attitudes.  Teaching of Psychology, 33, 91-95  doi:  10.1207/s15328023top3302_2; Wilson, J. H. (2008).  Instructor attitudes toward students:  Job satisfaction and student outcomes.  College Teaching, 56, 225-229.; Wilson, J. H., & Taylor, K. W. (2001).  Professor immediacy as behaviors associated with liking students.  Teaching of Psychology, 28, 136-138. 
20. Jaasma, M. A., & Koper, R. J.  (1999).  The relationship of student-faculty out-of-class communication to instructor immediacy and trust and to student motivation.  Communication Education, 48, 41-47.
21. Komarraju, M., Musulkin, S., & Bhattacharya, G. (2010).  Role of student-faculty interactions in developing college students' academic self-concept, motivation, and achievement.  Journal of College Student Development, 51, 332-342.  doi:  10.1353/csd.0.0137 
22. Cotten, S. R., & Wilson, B.  (2006).  Student-faculty interactions:  Dynamics and determinants.  Higher Education, 51, 487-519.  doi:  10.1007/s10734-004-1705-4; Terenzini, P. T., Rendon, L. I., Upcraft, M. L. Millar, S. B., Allison, K. W., Gregg, P. L., & Jalomo, R.  (1994).  The transition to college:  Diverse students, diverse stories.  Research in Higher Education, 35,57-76.
23. Cotten, S. R., & Wilson, B.  (2006).  Student-faculty interactions:  Dynamics and determinants.  Higher Education, 51, 487-519.  doi:  10.1007/s10734-004-1705-4 (p. 500)
24. Rugutt, J., & Chemosit, C. C. (2009).  What motivates students to learn?  Contribution of student-to-student relations, student-faculty interaction and critical thinking skills.  Educational Research Quarterly, 32, 16-28.
25. Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 68, 599-623. (p. 615).
26. Hu, S., & Ma, Y.  (2010).  Mentoring and student persistence in college:  A study of the Washington State Achievers Program.   Innovative Higher Education, 35,329-341.  doi:  10.1007/s10755-010-9147-7
27. Ramsay, S. Jones, E., & Barker, M. (2007). Relationship between adjustment and support types:  Young and mature-aged local and international first year university students.  Higher Education, 54,247-265.  doi:  10.1007/s10734-006-9001-0
28. Hagenauer, G., & Volet, S. E. (2014).  Teacher-student relationship at university: an important yet under-researched field.  Oxford Review of Education, 40, 370-388.  doi:  10.1080/03054985.2014.921613; Tinto, V.  (1975).  Dropout from higher education:  A theoretical synthesis of recent research.  Review of Educational Research, 45,  89-125.
29. Freeman, T. M., Anderman, L. H., & Jensen, J. M. (2007).  Sense of belonging in college freshmen at the classroom and campus levels.  The Journal of Experimental Education, 75,203-220.
30. Chang, J. C.  (2005).  Faculty-student interaction at the community college:  A focus on students of color.  Research in Higher Education, 46, 769-802. doi:  10.1007/s11162-004-6225-7; Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2007).  A question of belonging:  Race, social fit, and achievement.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 82-96.  doi:  10.1037/0023-3514.92.1.82
31. Hurtado, S., & Carter, D. F.  (1997).  Effects of college transition and perceptions of the campus racial climate on Latino college students' sense of belonging.  Sociology of Education, 70, 324-345.
32. Komarraju, M., Musulkin, S., & Bhattacharya, G. (2010).  Role of student-faculty interactions in developing college students' academic self-concept, motivation, and achievement.  Journal of College Student Development, 51, 332-342.  doi:  10.1353/csd.0.0137
33. Terenzini, P. T., Rendon, L. I., Upcraft, M. L. Millar, S. B., Allison, K. W., Gregg, P. L., & Jalomo, R.  (1994).  The transition to college:  Diverse students, diverse stories.  Research in Higher Education, 35,57-76.
34. Kyllonen, P. C. (2013).  Soft skills for the workplace.  Change:  The Magazine of Higher Learning, 45,16-23.  doi:  10.1080/00091383.2013.841516; Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R.  (2012).  Psychological correlates of university students' academic performance:  A systematic review and meta-analysis.  Psychological Bulletin, 138,353-387.  doi:  10.1037/a0026838
35. Kyllonen, P. C. (2013).  Soft skills for the workplace.  Change:  The Magazine of Higher Learning, 45,16-23.  doi:  10.1080/00091383.2013.841516
36. Halawah, I.  (2006).  The impact of student-faculty informal interpersonal relationships on intellectual and personal development.  College Student Journal, 40,670-678.
37. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995).  The need to belong:  Desire for interpersonal attachment as a fundamental human motivation.  Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529.
38. Walton, G. M., Cohen, G. L., Cwir, D., & Spencer, S. J. (2012).  Mere belonging:  The power of social connections.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 513-532.  doi:  10.1037/a0025731
39. Kelley, D. H., & Gorham, J.  (1988).  Effects of immediacy on recall of information.  Communication Education, 37, 198-207.  doi:  10.1080/03634528809378719
40. Baxter Magolda, M.  (1987).  The affective dimension of learning:  Faculty-student relationships that enhance intellectual development.  College Student Journal, 21,46-58. (p. 52
41. Baumeister, R. F., Twenge, J. M., & Nuss, C. K. (2002).  Effects of social exclusion on cognitive processes:  Anticipated aloneness reduces intelligent thought.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83,817-827.  doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.83.4.817
42. Cotten, S. R., & Wilson, B.  (2006).  Student-faculty interactions:  Dynamics and determinants.  Higher Education, 51, 487-519.  doi:  10.1007/s10734-004-1705-4