The Effect of EFL Teachers’ Extrovert and Introvert Personality on Their Instructional Immediacy

Amir Mahdavi Zafarghandi, Sepideh Salehi, Masoud Khalil Sabet


The Language teaching is a complex process influenced by many psychological factors such as personality traits (Tonelson, 1981) and socio-communicative styles (Thomas. Et al. 1994). This research sets out to investigate the effect of Teachers' Introvert and Extrovert personality on their instructional Immediacy. In order to address this issue, a study was conducted on 14 PhD holder university EFL lecturers from Guilan province. Instruments for this research included preliminary Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator (MBTI) Test, non-verbal immediacy scale, along with verbal immediacy scale observation inventory. After determining the lecturers' Introvert/Extrovert personality, at the next stage, six sessions of direct observation of each lecturer's classroom instructional immediacy were conducted. Statistical analysis of Fisher's exact test between data along with Pearson's correlation was run to determine the relationship between teacher's extrovert personality and their use of verbal immediacy; the results indicate strong, positive correlation (r=.7, p<. 03). Similarly, a strong, positive correlation was found between extrovert personality and use of non-verbal immediacy (r=.75, p<. 01). The other finding of the study was that instructors’ gender showed no significant relation with their verbal and nonverbal instructional immediacy.



EFL teachers, Introvert / Extrovert personalities, Verbal and Nonverbal instructional immediacy

Full Text:



Ali Shah, S. (2009) Impact of Teacher’s Behavior on the Academic Achievement of University Students. PhD thesis, University of Arid Agriculture, Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

Andersen, J. F. (1979). Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teacher effectiveness. Communication Yearbook, 3, 543-559.

Andersen, P. (1999), Nonverbal Communication: Forms and Functions, California: Mayfield, 118-21.

Aries, E. (1996). Men and women in interaction: Reconsidering the differences. New York: Oxford University Press.

Arnold, M. (2003). Selling with Emotional Intelligence. Chicago: Dearborn Press.

Baker, J. A. (2006). Contributions of teacher-child relationships to positive school adjustment during elementary school. Journal of School Psychology, 44(3), 211-229.

Board of Directors of IAEVG, (2001). International Association for Educational and Vocational Guidance. Paris.

Chory, R. M., McCroskey, J.C. (1999). The relationship between teacher management, communication style, and affective learning. Communication Quarterly, 47, 1-18.

Clayson, D. E. (1999). Student’s evaluation of teaching effectiveness: Some implications of stability. Journal of Marketing Education, 21(1), 68-75.

Furnham, A. (1990). Language and personality. In in W.P. Robinson, and H. Giles (Ed), the New Handbook of Language and Social Psychology. New York: Wiley

Gorham, J. (1988). The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and Students learning. Communication Education, 37, 40-53.

Gorham, J., & Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationship of teachers’ use of humor in the classroom to immediacy and student learning. Communication Education, 30, 46-62.

Hackman, M. Z., & Walker, K. B. (1990). Instructional communication in the televised classroom: The effects of system design and teacher immediacy on student learning and satisfaction. Communication Education 39 (3): 196-206.

Hallinan, M. T. (2008). Teacher influences on students' attachment to school. Sociology of Education, 81(3), 271-283. Retrieved from

Leaper. C., & Ayres. M. (2007). A Meta-Analytic Review of Gender Variations in Adults' Language Use: Talkativeness, Affliative Speech, and Assertive Speech. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 328-363.

Mansour, M. (1972). Introduction to Professional Counseling. Tehran: Atai publication.

Mehrabian, A. (1969). Methods & designs: Some referents and measures of nonverbal behavior. Behavioral Research Methods and Instrumentation, 1, 203-207.

Mehrabian, A. (2007). Nonverbal Communication. Transaction Publishers.

Miller, A. (1991). Personality types, learning styles and educational goals. Educational Psychology, 11(3/4).

Myers, I.B., Myers, P.B., McCaulley, M., Quenk, N.L & Hammer, A.L. (1998). MBTI Manual: A guide to the development and use of the .Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd Ed. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Palmer, P.J. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life. San-Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Payne, K. E. (2001). Different but equal: Communication between the sexes. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Penne baker, J.W., & King, L.A. (1999). Linguistic styles: language use as an individual difference. Journal of personality and social psychology 77, 1296-1312.

Polk, J. A. (2006). Traits of Effective Teachers. Arts Education Policy Review, 107, 23-30.

Richmond, V. P., McCroskey, J. C., & Johnson, A. E. (2003). Development of the Nonverbal Immediacy Scale (NIS): Measures of self- and other-perceived nonverbal immediacy. Communication Quarterly, 51, 502-515. Retrieved from

Schaubhut, N. A., & Thompson, R. C. (2009, in press-a). Technical brief for the MBTI® Form M and Form Q assessments, Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Shindler, J. V. (1998). Who Gets into Teaching? Cognitive Style as a variable in Predicting Teaching as a Career Choice. ERIC.

Shoarinejad, A. (1984). General Psychology. Tehran: Toos Inc. P.575.

Smith, P. B. 1977. Small Groups and Personal Change. London: Methuen. P.482.

Sperber, M. (2005). Notes from a career in teaching. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. B20.

Thomas, C. Richmond, V. P. and McCroskey, J. (1994). the Association between Immediacy and Socio-Communicative Style. Communication Research Reports, Vol. 11 Issue 1, p107

Tonelson, S. W. (1981). The Importance of Teacher Self-Concept to Create a Healthy Psychological Environment for Learning. Education 102, 96 – 100.

Witt, P., Wheeless, L., & Allen, M. (2004). A meta-analytical review of the relationship between teacher immediacy and student learning. Communication Monographs, 71(2), 184-207.

Zeisset, C. (2006). The Art of Dialogue: Exploring Personality Differences for More Effective Communication. Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc. p. 13. ISBN 0-935652-77-9.

Zhang, Q., & Oetzel, J. G. (2006). A cross-cultural test of immediacy-learning models in Chinese classrooms. Communication Education, 55, 313-330.

National Schools of Character: Award Winning Practices. Published and distributed by the Character Education Partnership.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2022 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.