Reliability and Valid~ty of the Willingness to Communicate Scale

The study of various general orientations toward communication has held an important place in communication research for over a half-century. This research has been conducted under a wide variety of conceptualizations. These have included stage fright, speech anxiety, communication apprehension, shyness, reticence, unwillingness to communicate, willingness to communicate, talkativeness, verbal activity, vocal activity, and a number of others. Although these are all related constructs, there are important distinctions among them. One group of constructs relates to anxiety or apprehension about communicating (stage fright, speech anxiety, communication apprehension). Another centers on actual talking frequency (verbal activity, vocal activity, talkativeness). A third centers on the preference to approach or avoid communication (reticence, unwillingness to communicate, willingness to communicate). The concept of "shyness" iscommonly employed in the field of psychology. It fits with the apprehension group when taken from the perspective of Buss (1980L the talking-frequency group when taken from the perspective of McCroskey and Richmond (1982), or both groups when taken from the perspective of Leary (1983). Because of these differences in usage, use of the term "shyness" generally leads to confusion rather than clarity. Within the anxiety group the construct which has received the most attention in recent years is "communication apprehension/' the fear or anxiety associated with either real or anticipated communication with another person or persons. The primary measure representing this orientation is the Personal Report of Communication Apprehension (PRCA).There are several highly reliable versions of this instrument (PRCA.-20,McCroskey, 1970; PRCA25, McCroskey, 1978; PRCA-24, McCroskey, 1982; PRCA-24B, McCroskey, 1986). All have a good case for validity, but the on"ewith the best case is the PRCA-24 (see particularly Levine & McCroskey, 1990; McCroskey, Beatty, Kearney, & Plax, 1985; and McCroskey & Richmond, 1982)., Within the talking-frequency group there is no single construct which is predominant.