Cited by 371Communication in Education and HealthcareAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Validity of the PRCA as an index of oral communication apprehension

McCroskey, James C.·1978·Communication Monographs

Abstract

This paper reviews the research which has employed the PRCA to measure the construct of oral communication apprehension. It is concluded that the PRCA is a reliable and valid measure of that construct.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/03637757809375965

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McCroskey, J. C.
Affiliations
West Virginia University (US)
Corresponding author
McCroskey, James C.
Venue
Communication Monographs
Published
1978-08
Volume
45
Issue
3
Pages
192-203
ISSN
  • 0363-7751 (ISSN-L)
  • 1479-5787
OpenAlex
W2006089454
Cited by
371
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
FWCI
25.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Communication Monographs (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Communication in Education and Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
oral communication apprehension, speaking anxiety, psychometric validity, reliability statistics, anxiety assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review