Embedding Media Richness in Online Assessment Feedback: Effects of Multimedia Delivery and Paralinguistic Digital Cues on Social Presence and Student Engagement 

  • Robyn L. MoffittEmail author
  • Christine Padgett
  • Rachel Grieve


Online learning in higher education is rapidly increasing in popularity.


  1. Aghajani, M., & Adloo, M. (2018). The effect of online cooperative learning on students’ writing skills and attitudes through Telegram application. International Journal of Instruction, 11, 433–448.
  2. Aldunate, N., & González-Ibáñez, R. (2017). An integrated review of emoticons in computer-mediated communication. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–6.
  3. Bangert, A. (2008). The influence of social presence and teaching presence on the quality of online critical inquiry. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 20, 34–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boston, W., Diaz, S. R., Gibson, A. M., Ice, P., Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2009). An exploration of the relationship between indicators of the community of inquiry framework and retention in online programs. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 14, 3–19.Google Scholar
  5. Boudrias, J., Bernaud, J., & Plunier, P. (2014). Candidates’ integration of individual psychological assessment feedback. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29, 341–359. Scholar
  6. Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1–13. Scholar
  7. Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 219–233. Scholar
  8. Carr, C. T., Wohn, D. Y., & Hayes, R. A. (2016). Thumbs up as social support: Relational closeness, automaticity, and interpreting social support from paralinguistic digital affordances in social media. Computers in Human Behaviour, 62, 385–393. Scholar
  9. Carruthers, C., McCarron, B., Bolan, P., Devine, A., McMahon-Beattie, U., & Burns, A. (2015). ‘I like the sound of that’—An evaluation of providing audio feedback via the virtual learning environment for summative assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40, 352–370. Scholar
  10. Cobb, S. C. (2011). Social presence, satisfaction, and perceived learning of RN-to-BSN students in web-based nursing courses. Nursing Education Perspectives, 32, 115–119. Scholar
  11. Crook, A., Mauchline, A., Maw, S., Lawson, C., Drinkwater, R., Lundqvist, K., et al. (2012). The use of video technology for providing feedback to students: The feedback experience for staff and students? Computers & Education, 58, 386–396. Scholar
  12. Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organisational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554–571. Scholar
  13. Dawson, P., Henderson, M., Mahoney, P., Phillips, M., Ryan, T., Boud, D., et al. (2019). What makes for effective feedback: Staff and student perspectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44, 25–36. Scholar
  14. Derks, D., Bos, A. E. R., & Grumbkow, J. V. (2008). Emoticons in computer-mediated communication: Social motives and social context. CyberPsychology & Behaviour, 11, 99–101. Scholar
  15. Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83, 70–120. Scholar
  16. Felton, J., Koper, P. T., Mitchell, J., & Stinson, M. (2008). Attractiveness, easiness and other issues: Student evaluations of professors on Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 45–61. Scholar
  17. Forsythe, A., & Johnson, S. (2017). Thanks, but no-thanks for the feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42, 850–859. Scholar
  18. Gleaves, A., & Walker, C. (2013). Richness, redundancy or relational salience? A comparison of the effect of textual and aural feedback modes on knowledge elaboration in higher education students’ work. Computers & Education, 62, 249–261. Scholar
  19. Grieve, R., Moffitt, R. L., & Padgett, C. R. (2019). Student perceptions of marker personality and intelligence: The effect of emoticons in online assignment feedback. Learning and Individual Differences, 69, 232–238. Scholar
  20. Grieve, R., Padgett, C. R., & Moffitt, R. L. (2016). Assignments 2.0: The role of social presence and computer attitudes in student preferences for online versus offline marking. Internet and Higher Education, 28, 8–16. Scholar
  21. Guàrdia, L., Crisp, G., & Alsina, I. (2017). Trends and challenges of e-assessment to enhance student learning in higher education. In E. Cano & G. Ion (Eds.), Innovative practices for higher education assessment and measurement (pp. 36–56). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
  22. Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. The American Journal of Distance Education, 11, 8–26. Scholar
  23. Hattie, J., & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249–271). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Hemingway, A. P. (2011). How students’ gratitude for feedback can identify the right attitude for success: Disciplined optimism. Perspectives: Teaching Legal Research and Writing, 19, 169–173.Google Scholar
  25. Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31, 51–66. Scholar
  26. Henderson, M., Ryan, T., & Phillips, M. (2019). The challenges of feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. Scholar
  27. Hostetter, C., & Busch, M. (2013). Community matters: Social presence and learning outcomes. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 13, 77–86.Google Scholar
  28. Hu, Y., Zhao, J., & Wu, J. (2016). Emoticon-based ambivalent expression: A hidden indicator for unusual behaviours in Weibo. PLoS ONE, 11, e0147079. Scholar
  29. Ishii, K., Lyons, M. M., & Carr, S. A. (2019). Revisiting media richness theory for today and future. Human Behaviour & Emerging Technologies, 1, 124–131. Scholar
  30. Jaggars, S. S., & Xu, D. (2016). How do online course design features influence student performance? Computers & Education, 95, 270–284. Scholar
  31. Kebritchi, M., Lipschuetz, A., & Santiague, L. (2017). Issues and challenges for teaching successful online courses in higher education: A literature review. Journal of Educational Technology, 46, 4–29. Scholar
  32. Kemp, N., & Clayton, J. (2017). University students vary their use of textese in digital messages to suit the recipient. Journal of Research in Reading, 40, S141–S157. Scholar
  33. Killingback, C., Ahmed, O., & Williams, J. (2019). ‘It was all in your voice’—Tertiary student perceptions of alternative feedback modes (audio, podcast, and screencast): A qualitative literature review. Nurse Education Today, 72, 32–39. Scholar
  34. Krohn, F. B. (2004). A generational approach to using emoticons as nonverbal communication. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 34, 321–328. Scholar
  35. Lan, Y.-F., & Sie, Y.-S. (2010). Using RSS to support mobile learning based on media richness theory. Computers & Education, 55, 723–732. Scholar
  36. Liu, S. Y., Gomez, J., & Yen, C.-J. (2009a). Community college online course retention and final grade: Predictability of social presence. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8, 165–182.Google Scholar
  37. Liu, S., Liao, H., & Pratt, J. A. (2009b). Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance. Computers & Education, 52, 599–607. Scholar
  38. Luangrath, A. W., Peck, J., & Barger, V. A. (2017). Textual paralanguage and its implications for marketing communications. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27, 98–107. Scholar
  39. Mahoney, P., Macfarlane, S., & Ajjawi, R. (2019). A qualitative synthesis of video feedback in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 24, 157–179. Scholar
  40. McCarthy, J. (2015). Evaluating written, audio and video feedback in higher education summative assessment tasks. Issues in Educational Research, 25, 153–169.Google Scholar
  41. Merry, S., & Orsmond, P. (2008). Students’ attitudes to and usage of academic feedback provided via audio files. Bioscience Education, 11, 1–11. Scholar
  42. Mitchell, K. M., & Martin, J. (2018). Gender bias in student evaluations. Political Science and Politics, 51, 648–652. Scholar
  43. Moffitt, R. L., Padgett, C., & Grieve, R. (2020). Accessibility and emotionality of online assessment feedback: Using emoticons to enhance student perceptions of marker competence and warmth. Computers & Education, 143, 1–11. Scholar
  44. Morris, C., & Chikwa, G. (2016). Audio versus written feedback: Exploring learners’ preference and the impact of feedback format on students’ academic performance. Active Learning in Higher Education, 17, 125–137. Scholar
  45. Mulliner, E., & Tucker, M. (2017). Feedback on feedback practice: Perceptions of students and academics. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42, 266–288. Scholar
  46. O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85–95. Scholar
  47. Olaniran, B. (2003). Computer-mediated communication: A test of the impact of social cues on the choice of medium for resolving misunderstandings. Journal of Information Technology Systems, 31, 205–222. Scholar
  48. Orrell, J. (2006). Feedback on learning achievements: Rhetoric and reality. Teaching in Higher Education, 11, 441–456. Scholar
  49. Ouellette, G., & Michaud, M. (2016). Generation text: Relations among undergraduates’ use of text messaging, textese, and language and literacy skills. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 48, 217–221. Scholar
  50. Parkin, H. J., Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., & Thorpe, L. (2012). A role for technology in enhancing students’ engagement with feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37, 963–973. Scholar
  51. Pitt, E., & Norton, L. (2017). ‘Now that’s the feedback I want!’ Students’ reactions to feedback on graded work and what they do with it. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42, 499–516. Scholar
  52. Prada, M., Rodrigues, D. L., Garrido, M. V., Lopes, D., Cavalheiro, B., & Gaspar, R. (2018). Motives, frequency and attitudes toward emoji and emoticon use. Telematics and Informatics, 35, 1925–1934. Scholar
  53. Rawle, F., Thuna, M., Zhao, T., & Kaler, M. (2018). Audio feedback: Student and teaching assistant perspectives on an alternative mode of feedback for written assignments. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9.
  54. Reio, T. G., & Crim, S. J. (2013). Social presence and student satisfaction as predictors of online enrolment intent. American Journal of Distance Education, 27, 122–133. Scholar
  55. Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2017). Social presence in relation to students’ satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behaviour, 71, 402–417. Scholar
  56. Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., & Swan, K. (2010). Adding a web-based perspective to the self-assessment of knowledge: Compelling reasons to utilise affective measures of learning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 321–328. Scholar
  57. Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7, 68–81.Google Scholar
  58. Rodrigues, D., Prada, M., Gaspar, R., Garrido, M. V., & Lopes, D. (2018). Lisbon emoji and emoticon database (LEED): Norms for emoji and emoticons in seven evaluative dimensions. Behaviour Research Methods, 50, 392–405. Scholar
  59. Rodríquez-Hidalgo, C., Tan, E. S. H., & Verlegh, P. W. J. (2017). Expressing emotions in blogs: The role of textual paralinguistic cues in online venting and social sharing posts. Computers in Human Behaviour, 73, 638–649. Scholar
  60. Rolfe, V. (2011). Can Turnitin be used to provide instant formative feedback? British Journal of Educational Technology, 42, 701–710. Scholar
  61. Rosen, A. S. (2018). Correlations, trends and potential biases among publicly accessible web-based student evaluations of teaching: A large-scale study of data. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43, 31–44. Scholar
  62. Shepherd, M. M., & Martz, Wm B., Jr. (2006). Media richness theory and the distance education environment. The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 47, 114–122.Google Scholar
  63. Short, J. A., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  64. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153–189. Scholar
  65. Stapa, S. H., & Shaari, A. H. (2012). Understanding online communicative language features in social networking environment. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 12, 817–830.Google Scholar
  66. Stewart, C., Bachman, C., & Johnson, R. (2010). Predictors of faculty acceptance of online education. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6, 597–616.Google Scholar
  67. Strong, R., Irby, T. L., Wynn, J. T., & McClure, M. M. (2012). Investigating students’ satisfaction with relearning courses: The effect of learning environment and social presence. Journal of Agricultural Education, 53, 98–110. Scholar
  68. Sun, P.-C., & Cheng, H. K. (2007). The design of instructional multimedia in e-learning: A media richness theory-based approach. Computers & Education, 49, 662–676. Scholar
  69. Thompson, R., & Lee, M. J. (2012). Talking with students through screencasting: Experimentations with video feedback to improve student learning. The Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy, 1. Retrieved from
  70. Timmis, S., Broadfoot, P., Sutherland, R., & Oldfield, A. (2016). Rethinking assessment in a digital age: opportunities, challenges and risks. British Educational Research Journal, 42, 454–476. Scholar
  71. Walter, N., Ortbach, K., & Niehaves, B. (2015). Designing electronic feedback—Analysing the effects of social presence on perceived usefulness. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 76, 1–11. Scholar
  72. Weidlich, J., & Bastiaens, T. J. (2019). Designing sociable online learning environments and enhancing social presence: An affordance enrichment approach. Computers & Education, 142, 1–17. Scholar
  73. West, J., & Turner, W. (2016). Enhancing the assessment experience: Improving student perceptions, engagement and understanding using online video feedback. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53, 400–410.
  74. Wingo, N. P., Ivankova, N. V., & Moss, J. A. (2017). Faculty perceptions about teaching online: Exploring the literature using the technology acceptance model as an organising framework. Online Learning, 21, 15–35. Scholar
  75. Zhan, Z. H., & Mei, H. (2013). Academic self-concept and social presence in face-to-face and online learning: Perceptions and effects on students’ learning achievement and satisfaction across environments. Computers & Education, 69, 131–138. Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robyn L. Moffitt
    • 1
    Email author
  • Christine Padgett
    • 2
  • Rachel Grieve
    • 2
  1. 1.RMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.University of TasmaniaHobartAustralia

Personalised recommendations