Describe the three basic services provided by a parole agency. Which service is essential to the success of the concept of parole? Simply, without the service of your choice, the concept of parole would be a failure. What are some of the criticisms for administering parole?

Students’

uncertainty management in the college classroom
Michael Sollitto, Jan Brott, Catherine Cole, Elia Gil and Heather Selim

Department of Communication & Media, Texas A&M University—Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi, TX, USA

ABSTRACT
The uncertainty experienced by college students can have serious
repercussions for their success and subsequent retention. Drawing
parallels between instructional context and organizational context
will enrich theory and research about students’ experiences of
uncertainty in their college courses. Therefore, this study used
Uncertainty Management Theory to explore how students
manage their uncertainty about college courses with their
classmates. Overall, the results suggest that although students
experience uncertainty mostly related to their academic needs,
their uncertainty management focuses more on their
socioemotional needs. In managing their uncertainty, students
rely on direct communication with their peers, which suggests the
importance of considering uncertainty management as a
relational activity as opposed to an independent activity. Given
this, instructors can facilitate classroom climates and activities that
allow students to establish relationships with one another and
work interdependently to achieve their academic goals.

ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 10 February 2017
Accepted 23 August 2017

KEYWORDS
Information-seeking;
student–student
communication; Uncertainty
Management Theory

The uncertainty that college students experience is an important and overlooked consider-
ation for scholars because of the sheer amount of effort college administrators and person-
nel expend to enroll and retain their students (see Seidman, 2012 for review). Each year,
colleges and universities lose approximately one-third of their students (U.S. News and
World Reports, 2016), despite the attention devoted to orientation and first-year learning
programs at many institutions (Tinto, 2006). Notwithstanding these worthy efforts from
academic institutions, students still experience levels of uncertainty that may lead to
dropout (Tinto, 2012). Increasing retention is critical because college is a key place for stu-
dents to learn and hone the critical thinking skills needed for successful contributions to
society (Seidman, 2012). If “we want our students to be catalysts for change, both within
their fields and in society in general” (Seidman, 2012, p. 1), we need to help them manage
their uncertainty about college. Although students may experience uncertainty about many
aspects of their college career, this study focuses on uncertainty in the college classroom,
since the classroom is the “center of a student’s educational life and in turn at the center
of institutional action for student success” (Tinto, 2012, p. 114). Furthermore, the classroom
is a place where students actively interact with other students, faculty members, and engage in
the formal learning process that is essential to academic achievement (Tinto, 2012).

© 2017 National Communication Association

CONTACT Michael Sollitto michael.sollitto@tamucc.edu Department of Communication & Media, Texas A&M
University—Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi, TX, USA

COMMUNICATION EDUCATION, 2018
VOL. 67, NO. 1, 73–87
https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2017.1372586

D
ow

nl
oa

de
d

by
[

E
P

–
IP

S
W

IC
H

]
at

0
0:

56
1

3
D

ec
em

be
r

20
17

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/03634523.2017.1372586&domain=pdf

mailto:michael.sollitto@tamucc.edu

Homepage

http://www.tandfonline.com

Understanding the uncertainty students face about their courses can help students
develop realistic expectations about the kind of effort needed to succeed in college, and
how to deal with their instructors and classmates (Tinto, 2012). By learning what kinds
of uncertainty students face, administrators can establish campus cultures, programs,
and services to help students in their academic progress (Tinto, 2012). It is also important
to understand student information-seeking strategies because information-seeking is a
proactive communication act that individuals use to develop better clarity about their
experiences (Kramer, 2004). The manner in which individuals seek information is an
important determinant for the type of information that they gather and the quality of
information that they receive (Kramer, 2009). Students’ approaches to seeking infor-
mation can affect their knowledge of how to perform their work, how to communicate
appropriately in the classroom, and, largely, how to succeed academically and
socioemotionally.

Organizational scholars have long understood the importance of examining uncer-
tainty in light of organizational satisfaction and performance (Kramer, Meisenbach, &
Hansen, 2013). In many ways, the same rationale could apply to the academic setting,
given its parallels to the organizational context (Myers, 2017). Classrooms and organiz-
ations are both rule-filled environments that contain authority figures and peers who
work together (Daly & Korinek, 1980; Sollitto, Johnson, & Myers, 2013). Students, like
organizational members, encounter uncertainty about their courses and, as a result, try
to get information that will help them reduce that uncertainty (Myers & Knox, 2001).
In response, students tend to use overt, indirect, third-party, testing, and observing infor-
mation-seeking strategies to proactively gain information from their instructors (Myers &
Knox, 2001). It is worth exploring how students seek information from their classmates,
though, since classmates are abundant and accessible sources of information capable of
serving as informal coaches/mentors (Parker, Hall, & Kram, 2008) who help students
better apply course content, receive support, and develop social connections (Colvin &
Ashman, 2010). Classmates are important sources of academic support (Thompson,
2008; Thompson & Mazer, 2009), confirmation (Johnson & LaBelle, 2016), and connect-
edness (Sollitto et al., 2013), all of which are helpful for social and academic gains (Johnson
& LaBelle, 2016; Smith & Peterson, 2007). Peer coaches/mentors are particularly powerful
sources of support because they can communicate freely without the potential burden or
awkwardness of power differences that characterize instructor/student relationships.
Additionally, peer mentor relationships allow students to confide in one another,
support one another, offer critical feedback when necessary, and, in general, engage in
mutual social development (Parker et al., 2008).

Given that classmates are often valuable sources for a variety of academic and socioe-
motional gains (McCabe, 2016), it is important for scholars to study how students decide
to approach one another about their uncertainty. With greater detail about student–
student information-seeking strategies, instructors can work to create classroom cultures,
climates, and activities that encourage information sharing between students. Administra-
tors can emphasize to incoming students that their classmates can be powerful resources
for their retention and success in college. And scholars can fill a gap in the literature about
student–student communication in general (Johnson & LaBelle, 2015; Waldeck, Kearney,
& Plax, 2001) and student–student information-seeking, in particular (Myers, Martin, &

74 M. SOLLITTO ET AL.

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

Mottet, 2002), by focusing on the ways that students communicate about and manage the
uncertainty about their college courses with their classmates.

Uncertainty Management Theory (UMT; Kramer, 2004) provides a potentially fruitful
theoretical framework for exploring these issues because it describes why uncertainty
occurs, how individuals decide to manage their uncertainty, and the results of their infor-
mation-seeking strategies. Furthermore, UMT can provide scholars with another frame-
work to discover how to help students gather the information they need to stay in
college and be successful students. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to
use UMT to create a foundation of knowledge about the types of uncertainty students
experience and the strategies that they use to manage that uncertainty with their
classmates.

Experiencing uncertainty in the college classroom

UMT is a reformulation of Berger and Calabrese’s (1975) Uncertainty Reduction Theory
to account for the notion that the experience of uncertainty and the decision to manage
that uncertainty is mostly a cognitive process. According to UMT, individuals use com-
munication strategies once they decide they need to proactively seek information
(Kramer, 2004). Uncertainty typically occurs when a message or situation is inconsistent
with individuals’ mental scripts and schemes. Individuals then engage in a cognitive
process of managing their uncertainty before consulting with other people. In this
process, individuals weigh their options for uncertainty management and decide if they
can reduce their uncertainty individually without exerting effort to acquire information
from another source (Kramer, 2004). Individuals cognitively manage their uncertainty
by denying that it exists, tolerating it, assimilating it, accepting it, or by imagining infor-
mation-seeking. The desire to reduce uncertainty spurs information acquisition, but infor-
mation acquisition can be hindered by competing motives that prevent or limit
individuals’ capacity to gather the needed information (Kramer, 1999). When individuals
successfully work through their competing motives, they use communication strategies to
increase, maintain, or decrease their level of uncertainty. For example, if individuals decide
that their need for information is greater than their need for a desired image in the eyes of
others, they will seek the information that they need.

To navigate an instructional setting, students require various types of information to
succeed socially and academically (Morris, Wu, & Finnegan, 2005). West and Pearson
(1994) found that students ask questions to satisfy needs for content-specific information,
appraise correct answers to problems, gather additional perspectives on content, gain
insight into the operation of the classroom, and generally be informed. These reasons see-
mingly reflect that students need information to meet academic goals and find socioemo-
tional support, and that this need may motivate information-seeking. Additionally,
individuals are motivated to seek information due to self-interest, unpredictability
between risks and rewards about information acquisition, and desire to gain control of
a situation (Kramer, 2004).

Another crucial component of UMT is that individuals cognitively process their experi-
ences of uncertainty (Kramer, 2004). In the cognitive process, individuals may also weigh
their options about how and from whom to seek information. Students may attempt to
satisfy their uncertainty before the active pursuit of information. They may also make

COMMUNICATION EDUCATION 75

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

decisions about which of their classmates are approachable and which possess the intellec-
tual prowess to provide the desired information, as well as decisions based on the possible
face threats or repercussions that would come if they were to ask their classmates for
information.

UMT is an important theoretical framework for exploration now because contempor-
ary classrooms and students are different than students in the past. Many aspects of the
college classroom have changed dramatically in recent years due to increasing use of class-
room technology and the changing characteristics of students (Lechuga, 2016). Class-
rooms are now populated by millennial students who “bring different attitudes,
expectations, preparation, strengths, and shortcomings into the college classroom than
previous students” (Mazer & Hess, 2016, p. 356). Researchers suggest that millennial stu-
dents feel a sense of academic entitlement (Boswell, 2012), expect individual focus and
assurance from their instructors about their academic performance (Goldman &
Goodboy, 2014), and want opportunities to engage with their peers (Borges, Manuel,
Elam, & Jones, 2010). As “digital natives” (Palfrey & Gasser, 2008), contemporary students
enter college classrooms with a near-innate ability to make sense of and use increasingly
complex technology (Jones & Healing, 2010). Given these distinguishing characteristics, it
is likely that millennial students will encounter different types of uncertainty, process
uncertainty differently, and think about how to deal with their uncertainty differently
than previous students, all of which may lead students to manage uncertainty with their
classmates differently than students of past generations. To investigate these possibilities,
we proposed the following questions:

RQ1: What types of uncertainty do students experience in their college courses?

RQ2: What motivates students to seek information from their classmates?

RQ3: What cognitive processes are involved with students’ decisions to seek information
from their classmates?

Managing uncertainty in the college classroom

Students, like organizational members, are proactive consumers of information who rely
on a variety of behaviors to satisfy their information needs (Myers & Knox, 2001). Kramer
(2004) articulated that individuals typically rely upon passive, active, interactive, and
alternative strategies for information acquisition. Passive strategies involve information
acquisition through unsolicited means. For example, if a student experiences uncertainty
about how to participate in class discussion, a passive strategy might be to wait until the
instructor provides feedback about the student’s participation and then adjust accordingly.
Active strategies involve attempts to manage uncertainty without direct interaction, often
with monitoring or testing. Using the same scenario as above, a student may discreetly
monitor other students’ methods of classroom participation to discern the best way to par-
ticipate. Interactive strategies attempt to reduce uncertainty through direct interaction,
either with the source of uncertainty, or through a third-party. With this strategy, a
student may directly ask a nearby classmate about the best ways to participate in class dis-
cussion. Alternative strategies involve individuals diverting their attention away from their
uncertainty and toward other activities. With this strategy, students may turn their

76 M. SOLLITTO ET AL.

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

attention away from uncertainty about classroom participation and focus on other activi-
ties to minimize the discomfort created by the uncertainty. Although we know some about
how students manage uncertainty with instructors (Myers & Knox, 2001), it is possible
they will choose to seek information in different ways from their peers. These differences
may occur because students are of equal status to one another, which may reduce the
potential social costs of bothering a professor or appearing foolish. Additionally, the
shared experience of being a student might make some likely to approach information-
seeking differently, especially if they perceive their peers as uniquely capable of providing
guidance, comfort, and support (Parker et al., 2008; Thompson, 2008). Therefore, the fol-
lowing research question was proposed:

RQ4: What communicative strategies do students use to seek information from their
classmates?

Typically, the acquisition of information will result in some alteration to an individual’s
level of uncertainty (Kramer, 2004). The acquisition of information might increase,
decrease, or maintain one’s uncertainty. Students may experience outcomes that go
beyond uncertainty management, though. For example, their information-seeking beha-
viors may also foster relationship development, new understanding, or alternative ways
of thinking about course content (Parker et al., 2008). Therefore, the following question
was proposed:

RQ5: What outcomes do students achieve from seeking information from their classmates?

Method

Our methodological approach involved the use of Boyatzis’ (1998) thematic analysis
process, which involves three distinct stages: deciding on sampling and design issues
(data collection), developing themes/codes and applying them to the data (data analysis),
and validating results.

Data collection

We gave a sample of college students a survey packet during the 13th week of a 16-week
semester; the packet contained six open-ended questions assessing their uncertainty man-
agement in the college classroom and three basic demographic questions. The sample con-
sisted of 138 undergraduate students (57 men, 80 women, and 1 unreported) recruited
from a variety of communication courses at a medium-sized southern university. The
average age of the students was 22.2 years (SD = 5.60). The sample included 20 first-
year students, 29 sophomores, 42 juniors, and 46 seniors. The students reported on
their experiences in a total of 55 different classes across 11 different academic disciplines:
Communication (n = 83), History (n = 9), Science (n = 9), Business (n = 6), English (n = 6),
Math (n = 6), Political Science (n = 5), Sociology (n = 5), Performing Arts (n = 4), Art (n =
3), and Psychology (n = 2).

On the open-ended survey, we directed participants to consider their communication
behavior in the course that they attended immediately prior to the course in which they
completed the questionnaire. We asked them to expound upon their answers as much

COMMUNICATION EDUCATION 77

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

as possible. This design allowed for greater depth and description from a variety of courses
throughout the university (Plax, Kearney, McCroskey, & Richmond, 1986). Participants
responded to the following open-ended questions: (1) Explain the things about the
course that you are sometimes unsure or uncertain about. (2) What motivates you to
talk to your classmates about things in the course that you are sometimes unsure or uncer-
tain about? (3) Explain the thought process that you use to make decisions about asking
particular classmates about things in the course that you are sometimes unsure or uncer-
tain about. (4) Describe what you say or do with your classmates to gain information about
the things you are sometimes unsure or uncertain about in the course. (5) How do you
benefit from the information that you receive from your classmates about the things
you are sometimes unsure or uncertain about in your course? (6) Explain why you
might choose to seek information from your classmates instead of your instructor.

Data analysis

Thematic analysis, as an analytical tool, allowed us to observe patterns in the data and
ascribe meaning to those patterns based upon the recurrence, repetition, and forcefulness
of meaning (Boyatzis, 1998; Owen, 1984). To do this, we followed several steps. First, one
author read each of the survey responses to develop understanding and familiarity with the
data and to identify units of analysis. Units of analysis included any words, phrases, or
series of sentences that reflected students’ uncertainty management (as articulated in
the research questions). Although the study’s research questions were designed to align
with the open-ended survey questions, we reviewed the units for their relevance to any
of the research questions. In other words, units of analysis from answers to each survey
question could correspond with any one of the guiding research questions, if we deter-
mined them to be relevant.

Second, following the initial reading of the data, we wrote individual units on a separate
sheet of paper to assess similarities between the units and compare them to other units to
develop emergent themes (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) about types of uncertainty (RQ1),
motivation (RQ2), cognitive processes (RQ3), information-seeking strategies (RQ4),
and outcomes (RQ5). We devoted attention to the internal homogeneity of the units to
ensure that all units within a theme were meaningfully related to one another and that
units were distinct from those that represented other themes (Patton, 2002). As themes
emerged and became more apparent from the data, the author team worked together to
create definitions and exemplary indicators of each theme (Boyatzis, 1998) in a way
that best reflected students’ uncertainty management. Upon creation of the themes and
definitions, the author team created a codebook to use for categorizing the remaining data.

To verify that our analysis was consistent and trustworthy (Boyatzis, 1998; Lincoln &
Guba, 1985), we engaged in peer debriefing, intercoder reliability, and member checks. We
first discussed the initial themes and descriptions with a peer to check for any assumptions
or biases that could have affected the coding of the units. The peer made suggestions that
helped clarify the assignment of units into particular themes and suggested small altera-
tions to the definitions. Second, two independent coders, provided with descriptions of
the themes and 25% of the data, helped ensure the consistency of the coding (Boyatzis,
1998; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Alpha reliability figures above .80 are considered appropri-
ate (Hayes & Krippendorff, 2007; Krippendorff, 2004); we achieved a satisfactory

78 M. SOLLITTO ET AL.

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

reliability of .87. Third, the first author asked seven undergraduate students who partici-
pated in the study to serve as a member check to assess how well the emergent themes
aligned with their experiences. The participants agreed that the themes and descriptions
matched their uncertainty management experiences.

Results

Types of uncertainty

Students articulated six different types of uncertainty they had experienced in their college
courses: logistical, content, relevance, normative, social, and academic performance. Stu-
dents faced logistical uncertainty when they were curious about the quantity and nature of
assigned activities, or when they lacked insight about how to operate software or equip-
ment necessary to complete activities, and deadlines. As one student noted, “I am uncer-
tain about what questions to answer on the homework assignments, where to find the
homework assignments, and how to answer the questions when I do find them.” Students
experienced content uncertainty when they were confused about particular terms, defi-
nitions, and theories associated with a subject area, or confused about the resources or
means through which to find needed information about the course. A student remarked,

I’m not always sure about how all the different and moving parts of programming work.
Sometimes they seem to follow the same rules, while other times the tools or syntax are com-
pletely different. For example, sometimes double quotes are necessary to define a parameter,
while other times only a single quote.

Another student added, “I’m always unsure about the theater lingo and sometime [sic]
unsure about the lighting terms and names of the lights.” Students’ uncertainty about rel-
evance involved uncertainty or frustration with the application of the class and assign-
ments to students’ academic interests or career aspirations. For example, one student
shared,

I am sometimes unsure what the point of this class is since it deals with understanding and
analyzing new media outlets and understanding how they affect communication and social
trends. I am uncertain as to why this class’s subject and online discussion assignments are
productive for my education.

Students faced normative uncertainty when they were unsure about the classroom
norms: the structure and use of class time, the topics that would emerge during class dis-
cussion, and how they should approach communicating about the topics with their
instructors. For example, one student wrote, “Sometimes I am unsure about what the
topic of our discussion will be for a given day and how that discussion will actually
take place. Sometimes class is structured as a lecture, but sometimes it is based on discus-
sion.” Students experienced social uncertainty when they were unsure about how to inter-
act with their classmates, what friendships already existed among classmates, and why
classmates behaved in certain ways. One student described uncertainty about others in
the course in this way: “There are a lot of nonmajors in the course, so I get unsure
about if anybody in the class even likes theater, so it makes it tough to get to know
people sometimes.” Students reported uncertainty about academic performance when
they were curious about their learning gains and their achievements in the course.

COMMUNICATION EDUCATION 79

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

Students expressed that they became uncertain about the quality of their work and how to
maintain or improve their performance. For example, one student shared, “Due to the fact
that the course is centered around practice rather than theory, I sometimes become uncer-
tain about how well I am performing.”

Motives for seeking information

Students articulated four motives for seeking information: to obtain clarity, gain perspec-
tive, achieve performance goals, and manage impressions. Students described their desire
to obtain clarity when they perceived their instructors as unapproachable or lacking the
availability or ability to help them gain certainty. For example, a student said, “If the pro-
fessor is unclear/difficult, I’ll go to multiple classmates to gain a consensus, or if the pro-
fessor is rude. Also if the question is small and I’d rather not waste the professor’s time.”
Students expressed that they sought information to gain perspective when they desired
knowledge, additional insight and, perhaps most importantly, new perspectives from
their classmates that could inform their own approaches or paradigms to their course-
work. One student said, “Because it is a class that deals with television criticism, I like
to hear other students’ perspectives because they may be different from my own, which
helps me see different sides of the argument.”

The motive to achieve performance goals involved students’ desire to achieve success in
their classroom endeavors, such as high scores on graded assignments, and contributions
to class discussion. As one student suggested, “Getting a good grade on an assignment or
presentation motivates me. As well as wanting an understanding of what I need to do to
perform well.” Students expressed motivation of managing impressions due to their face
concerns with the instructor. They expressed fear of embarrassment or the appearance
of foolishness if they sought greater clarity from their instructors. Students’ reluctance
to lose face manifested itself in seeking information from classmates. As one student
stated, “I would prefer to see if others are confused or it is just me. It’s more embarrassing
to ask the professor a question that can come across uneducated than a fellow student.”

Cognitive processes

Students expressed four cognitive assessments they make prior to seeking information:
assessing competence, evaluating similarity, appraising ability, and gauging dispositions.
Students reported they engaged in assessing competence when they made judgments
about their classmates’ level of knowledge and engagement in the course and their class-
mates’ likelihood of answering questions or providing information in an understandable
manner. For example, a student explained, “Things that affect my decision on what class-
mate to ask is if the student is knowledgeable toward the class.” Students engaged in eval-
uating similarity when they appraised the relatability of their classmates based upon their
personality and physical characteristics or the perception that they also may be experien-
cing confusion and uncertainty. A student shared, “Most students are as unsure as I am
about the course work and because we are all in the same boat and never really receive
direction from the professor. We mostly depend on each other to learn the material.”
When students reported they were appraising ability, they were considering their own

80 M. SOLLITTO ET AL.

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

ability to gather needed information without consultation with other classmates against
the risks and rewards of information-seeking. As one student explained,

I try to answer the question in my own head and most of the time I will talk myself out of
asking the question in order to save face. But if I am unable to figure things out for myself
I will ask someone for additional assistance.

Students reported gauging dispositions when they considered their classmates’ approach-
ability and friendliness; considering which classmates would be most receptive and
amiable to inquiries for information. One student suggested: “If I am unsure or uncertain
about a topic I usually feel ok to talk to my classmates about it. Their compassion and
kindness motivates me to talk to them.”

Information-seeking strategies

Students articulated four strategies they used to seek information from their classmates:
disclosure, emotional inquiry, direct questions, and collaboration. Students used disclosure
to make a declarative statement to classmates about the level or type of uncertainty that
they experienced. One student illustrated this by stating, “I immediately state my level
of understanding or lack of knowledge about the topic.” Another student added, “I tell
them that what we just talked about in class made no sense to me.” Students employed
the emotional inquiry strategy to ask their classmates how they felt (including how uncer-
tain they felt) about an assignment or topic covered in the course. For example, a student
said, “I might ask the person I sit closest to in class how they feel about the assignment.”
Another student noted, “I look at my classmates faces to see if they might be confused and
then I ask them if they know where or how to begin the assignment.” Students use direct
questions to request assistance, additional insight, or clarification to help them complete
their tasks or assignments. For example, a student said, “I ask them what topic they are
doing their speeches on, what sites they are using for sources, and what their main
points are. That gives me some basic information to keep me focused and successful.”
Similarly, another student shared, “I would ask them if they had time today to help me
with the lesson.” Another student stated, “I like to ask for examples so that I can try to
figure it out.” Students used the strategy of collaboration as a collective effort with other
students to engender certainty through the exchange of ideas, brainstorming, study ses-
sions, or the formation of coalitions to seek guidance from the instructor. One student
declared, “My classmates and I would form study groups/sessions in the library and
teach each other the lessons we just leaned in the class. We will sometimes go to our pro-
fessor’s office hours if we have any uncertain questions.” Another student noted, “I study
with them so that we can work on the problem together.”

Outcomes of information-seeking

Students reported achieving six distinct outcomes from their information-seeking strat-
egies: intellectual capacity, performance ability, affirmation, relational networks, perspec-
tive, and curiosity. Students gained intellectual capacity when they attained enhanced
clarity about the trigger or source of their uncertainty. A student articulated, “I benefit
from the information learned from my classmates because now I know the information

COMMUNICATION EDUCATION 81

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

that I would need for future references.” When students gained intellectual capacity, they
developed the requisite knowledge base to understand and learn the subject under inves-
tigation in their courses. Similarly, students achieved performance ability when they devel-
oped new skills or physically completed their tasks using the information they gathered
from their classmates. A student expressed that she improved her ability to communicate
by seeking information: “I am able to better converse with the members of my group and
better handle how to deal with introverts and extroverts to gain a better understanding of
their boundaries and communication skills by receiving information.” Students reported
affirmation, an emotional outcome, when they gained enhanced confidence about their
own abilities or assurance that other students expressed similar levels of uncertainty. Stu-
dents achieved a level of personal comfort from their information acquisition that allowed
them to minimize their anxiety about being lost and confused. As one student explained,
“My mind is at ease after I receive an answer. I feel better knowing that it is not me who is
lost on what to do for the class that day.” Students developed or maintained relational net-
works when they established new bonds or strengthened existing connections with their
classmates by seeking information from them. For example, a student said, “It deepens
the relationship with my classmate through these interactions to gain information.”
When students reported perspective, they garnered unique or previously unconsidered
viewpoints on their course work from their classmates. As a student described, “I
benefit a lot because someone might have a useful or cool idea or know how to utilize
the equipment better than I know how to do. So, I get new perspective on the techniques
of video production.” Students expressed confusion when they sought information from
their classmates, but it resulted in elevated levels of uncertainty or anxiety. A student con-
fessed, “Sometimes I have difficulty comprehending what my classmates just told me in
regards to the question that I asked them. So sometimes I walk away being more confused
than I was in the first place.”

Discussion

The purpose of this investigation was to discover the types of uncertainty that students
experience and the process through which they manage that uncertainty with their class-
mates. In an era in which millennial students comprise many of our students in college
classrooms, and administrators continually work to retain those students with programs
intended to meet the academic and socioemotional needs of the students (Elam, Stratton,
& Gibson, 2007), the results of this investigation are particularly salient for theory and
practice. Results of this study suggest that although students did experience uncertainty
related to their academic needs, their uncertainty management processes focused signifi-
cantly on their socioemotional needs. Additionally, in their uncertainty management pro-
cesses with their peers, students relied on direct communication (as opposed to the more
indirect strategies they tend to use with instructors), reinforcing the importance of recog-
nizing uncertainty management as a relational activity as opposed to solely an indepen-
dent activity.

That students focus on socioemotional needs in their uncertainty management (e.g.,
managing impressions, appraising ability, evaluating similarity, gauging dispositions)
makes sense given previous assertions that millennial students face enormous pressure
for academic success from themselves and their parents, leading them to seek counsel

82 M. SOLLITTO ET AL.

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

from their peers (Bland, Melton, Welle, & Bigham, 2012; Borges et al., 2010). Similarly, we
know millennial students find comfort in environments with clear prescriptions about
how to behave (Howe & Strauss, 2000) and prefer content relevant to their personal
and professional aspirations (Goldman, Cranmer, Sollitto, LaBelle, & Lancaster, 2017).
It then seems reasonable that in their pursuit of academic excellence, students in this
study experienced uncertainty about specific terminology of their discipline and classes,
the way that their classes were structured, the relevance of classes, how they were perform-
ing, and how to associate or communicate with others in the class. However, students not
only sought information helpful to their academic success, but also sought information
helpful to their socioemotional well-being. Students gained emotionally by receiving affir-
mation that their thinking was on the correct path and by gaining comfort from knowing
someone else felt similar levels of uncertainty. Students also gained socially by creating or
strengthening their relational networks with their classmates.

Affirmation and strengthened relational networks are valuable outcomes for students
because, as we know from research, creating relationships with classmates impacts stu-
dents’ confidence and well-being (Antonio, 2004), competence in their course work (Sol-
litto et al., 2013), and opportunities to receive academic support (Thompson & Mazer,
2009). If students do not gain information relevant to their academic and emotional
well-being, they are at risk of missing the certainty needed to make their college careers
intellectually and socially rewarding, or even of dropping out of school entirely (Tinto,
2012).

In managing their uncertainty, students relied on direct interactions with their class-
mates. This is intriguing given previous researchers have discovered that students are
likely to use less direct strategies to interact with instructors (overt and indirect questions
being the few strategies students use that involve discussion with instructors [Myers &
Knox, 2001]). In this study, students reported a variety of strategies that reflect greater
interaction between themselves and their classmates. For example, students’ elaborating,
inquiring, questioning, and collaborating information-seeking strategies with classmates
suggest that they made use of the accessibility and comfort provided by their classmates
to actively acquire information to manage uncertainty. It could be that these strategies,
especially disclosure and emotional inquiry, provide the opportunity to save face and
reduce social costs with their classmates by easing into a conversation about their levels
of uncertainty (Kerssen-Griep, 2001; Kerssen-Griep, Trees, & Hess, 2008).

The focus on socioemotional needs and direct interaction with classmates in these stu-
dents’ uncertainty management process suggests the need to see uncertainty management
as an interdependent, relational activity as opposed to an independent activity. Results of
this study show that as students cognitively assessed their own ability to seek information,
they also assessed the competence, imagined interaction, disposition, and similarity of
their classmates. Knowing this provides a new and important consideration to the infor-
mation-seeking literature because it helps scholars understand that students’ experience of
uncertainty is often accompanied by their efforts to address the relational and social costs
of seeking information. Scholars engaged in research utilizing UMT could benefit from
this understanding and continue to explore the relational processes students engage in
when reducing uncertainty with their peers.

Given that this study did not directly observe students managing uncertainty or ask
how students simultaneously managed their uncertainty with instructors and classmates,

COMMUNICATION EDUCATION 83

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

future research could pursue these processes and questions in order to gain more compre-
hensive knowledge of how students experience and manage uncertainty throughout their
college careers. Scholars could use observations, interviews, and surveys longitudinally to
ascertain how often students experience various kinds of uncertainties, as well as the effect
uncertainty has on their academic and socioemotional well-being and, ultimately, on their
desire to remain in school.

Implications for teaching and learning

This study has important implications for instructors, who can shift the classroom experi-
ence of their students from one comprising uncertainty to one of support and clarity.
Given that students in this study did rely on their peers not only for academic uncertain-
ties but also for socioemotional ones, teachers could create and facilitate activities to help
students establish relationships and trust with their peers. Content-related activities could
also provide complex problems that place students in frequent contact with one another
and that require necessary reliance on peers for success. Complex, scaffolded assignments
could encourage students to seek academic information from each other, and would allow
students to further enhance their relational networks and develop confidence in their
intellectual abilities.

Further, learning environments might benefit from instructors teaching their students the
value of seeking information from peers (and from instructors, of course). In this way, tea-
chers can help students mitigate face issues (Kerssen-Griep et al., 2008) by making infor-
mation-seeking and uncertainty management a standard part of what happens in the
classroom. In addition to classroom activities and discussions, administrators (recognizing
the tendency for millennial students to experience academic and socioemotional uncer-
tainty) could also use orientations or first-year learning programs to help students establish
social connections and to explicitly address peer uncertainty management strategies.

Contributions

Results of this study make important contributions to scholarship and practice. This study
heeds the call of researchers who have advocated for increased attention to student–
student communication in the classroom (Johnson & LaBelle, 2015; Waldeck et al.,
2001), illustrating that students manage their uncertainty to enhance their academic
and socioemotional well-being while building relationships with their classmates (rather
than simply to gain information). If uncertainty management is indeed more relational
than functional for our millennial students, perhaps teachers and administrators can
create opportunities for students to work together and transform a feeling that is often
considered negative (uncertainty) into a tool to build relationships and interactions that
keep students successful, happy, and in college.

References

Antonio, A. L. (2004). The influence of friendship groups on intellectual self-confidence and edu-
cational aspirations in college. The Journal of Higher Education, 75, 446–471. doi:10.1353/jhe.
2004.0019

84 M. SOLLITTO ET AL.

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2004.0019

https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2004.0019

Berger, C. R., & Calabrese, R. J. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward
a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1,
99–112. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x

Bland, H. W., Melton, B. F., Welle, P., & Bigham, L. (2012). Stress tolerance: New challenges for
millennial college students. College Student Journal, 46, 362–376.

Borges, N. J., Manuel, R. S., Elam, C. L., & Jones, B. J. (2010). Differences in motives between
Millennial and Generation X medical students. Medical Education, 44, 570–576. doi:10.1111/j.
1365-2923.2010.03633.x

Boswell, S. S. (2012). “I deserve success”: Academic entitlement attitudes and their relationships
with course self-efficacy, social networking, and demographic variables. Social Psychology of
Education, 15, 353–365. doi:10.1007/s11218-012-9184-4

Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code develop-
ment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Colvin, J. W., & Ashman, M. (2010). Roles, risks, and benefits of peer mentoring relationships in
higher education. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 18, 121–134. doi:10.1080/
13611261003678879

Daly, J. A., & Korinek, J. T. (1980). Instructional communication theory and research: An overview
of classroom interaction. In D. Nimmo (Ed.), Communication yearbook 4 (pp. 515–532). New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.

Elam, C., Stratton, T., & Gibson, D. D. (2007). Welcoming a new generation to college: The millen-
nial students. Journal of College Admission, 195, 20–25. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=
EJ783953

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Goldman, Z. W., Cranmer, G. A., Sollitto, M., LaBelle, S., & Lancaster, A. L. (2017). What do college

students want? A prioritization of instructional behaviors and characteristics. Communication
Education, 66, 280–298. doi:10.1080/03634523.2016.1265135

Goldman, Z. W., & Goodboy, A. K. (2014). Making students feel better: Examining the relation-
ships between teacher confirmation and college students’ emotional outcomes.
Communication Education, 63, 259–277. doi:10.1080/03634523.2014.920091

Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure
for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 77–89. doi:10.1080/1931245070
9336664

Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising: The next great generation. New York, NY:
Vintage Books.

Johnson, Z. D., & LaBelle, S. (2015). Examining the role of self-disclosure and connectedness in the
process of instructional dissent: A test of the instructional beliefs model. Communication
Education, 64, 154–170. doi:10.1080/03634523.2014.978800

Johnson, Z. D., & LaBelle, S. (2016). Student-to-student confirmation in the college classroom: An
initial investigation of the dimensions and outcomes of students’ confirming messages.
Communication Education, 65, 44–63. doi:10.1080/03634523.2015.1058961

Jones, C., & Healing, G. (2010). Net generation students: Agency and choice and the new technol-
ogies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 344–356. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00370

Kerssen-Griep, J. (2001). Teacher communication activities relevant to student motivation:
Classroom facework and instructional communication competence. Communication
Education, 50, 256–273. doi:10.1080/03634520109379252

Kerssen-Griep, J., Trees, A. R., & Hess, J. A. (2008). Attentive facework during instructional feed-
back: Key to perceiving mentorship and an optimal learning environment. Communication
Education, 57, 312–332. doi:10.1080/03634520802027347

Kramer, M. W. (1999). Motivation to reduce uncertainty: A reconceptualization of uncertainty
reduction theory. Management Communication Quarterly, 13, 305–316. doi:10.1177/
0893318999132007

Kramer, M. W. (2004). Managing uncertainty in organizational communication. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.

COMMUNICATION EDUCATION 85

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03633.x

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03633.x

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-012-9184-4

https://doi.org/10.1080/13611261003678879

https://doi.org/10.1080/13611261003678879

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ783953

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ783953

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2016.1265135

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2014.920091

https://doi.org/10.1080/19312450709336664

https://doi.org/10.1080/19312450709336664

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2014.978800

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2015.1058961

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00370

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520109379252

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520802027347

https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318999132007

https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318999132007

Kramer, M. W. (2009). Managing uncertainty in work interactions. In T. D. Afifi & W. Afifi (Eds.),
Uncertainty, information management, and disclosure decisions: Theories and applications (pp.
164–181). London: Routledge.

Kramer, M. W., Meisenbach, R. J., & Hansen, G. J. (2013). Communication, uncertainty, and vol-
unteer membership. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 41, 18–39. doi:10.1080/
00909882.2012.750002

Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and rec-
ommendations. Human Communication Research, 30, 411–433. doi:10.1093/hcr/30.3.411

Lechuga, V. M. (2016). The changing landscape of the academic profession: Faculty culture at for-
profit colleges and universities. New York, NY: Routledge.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Mazer, J. P., & Hess, J. A. (2016). Editors introduction. [Forum: Instructional communication and

millennial students]. Communication Education, 65, 356. doi:10.1080/03634523.2016.1173715
McCabe, J. (2016). Friends with academic benefits. Contexts, 15, 22–29. doi:10.1177/

1536504216662237
Morris, L. V., Wu, S., & Finnegan, C. L. (2005). Predicting retention in online general education

courses. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19, 23–36. doi:10.1207/
s15389286ajde1901_3

Myers, S. A. (2017). The instructor-student relationship as an alternative form of superior-subor-
dinate relationship. Communication Education, 66, 110–112. doi:10.1080/03634523.2016.
1221513

Myers, S. A., & Knox, R. L. (2001). The relationship between college student information-seeking
behaviors and perceived instructor verbal behaviors. Communication Education, 50, 343–356.
doi:10.1080/03634520109379260

Myers, S. A., Martin, M. M., & Mottet, T. P. (2002). The relationship between student communi-
cation motives and information seeking. Communication Research Reports, 19, 352–361. doi:10.
1080/08824090209384863

Owen, W. F. (1984). Interpretive themes in relational communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech,
70, 274–287. doi:10.1080/003356340938367

Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital: How children grow up in a digital age. New York, NY:
Basic Books.

Parker, P., Hall, D. T., & Kram, K. E. (2008). Peer coaching: A relational process for accelerating
career learning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7, 487–503. doi:10.5465/
amle.2008.35882189

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.

Plax, T. G., Kearney, P., McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1986). Power in the classroom VI:
Verbal control strategies, nonverbal immediacy and affective learning. Communication
Education, 35, 43–55. doi:10.1080/03634528609388318

Seidman, A. (2012). Introduction. In A. Seidman (Ed.), College student retention: Formula for
student success (pp. 1–6). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Smith, R. A., & Peterson, B. L. (2007). “Psst … what do you think?”: The relationship between
advice prestige, type of advice, and academic performance. Communication Education, 56,
278–291. doi:10.1080/03634520701364890

Sollitto, M., Johnson, Z. D., & Myers, S. A. (2013). Students’ perceptions of college classroom con-
nectedness, assimilation, and peer relationships. Communication Education, 62, 318–331. doi:10.
1080/03634523.2013.788726

Thompson, B. (2008). How college freshmen communicate student academic support: A grounded
theory study. Communication Education, 57, 123–144. doi:10.1080/03634520701576147

Thompson, B., & Mazer, J. P. (2009). College student ratings of student academic support:
Frequency, importance, and modes of communication. Communication Education, 58, 433–
458. doi:10.1080/03634520902930440

Tinto, V. (2006). Research and practice of student retention: What next? Journal of College Student
Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 8, 1–19. doi:10.2190/c0c4-eft9-eg7w-pwp4

86 M. SOLLITTO ET AL.

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2012.750002

https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2012.750002

https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/30.3.411

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2016.1173715

https://doi.org/10.1177/1536504216662237

https://doi.org/10.1177/1536504216662237

https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1901_3

https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1901_3

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2016.1221513

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2016.1221513

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520109379260

https://doi.org/10.1080/08824090209384863

https://doi.org/10.1080/08824090209384863

https://doi.org/10.1080/003356340938367

https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2008.35882189

https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2008.35882189

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634528609388318

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520701364890

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2013.788726

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2013.788726

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520701576147

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520902930440

https://doi.org/10.2190/c0c4-eft9-eg7w-pwp4

Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college: Rethinking institutional action. Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.

U.S. News and World Report. (2016). Freshman retention rate. Retrieved from http://colleges.
usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/freshmen-least-
most-likely-return

Waldeck, J. H., Kearney, P., & Plax, T. G. (2001). Instructional and developmental communication
theory and research in the 1990s: Extending the agenda for the 21st century. In W. B. Gudykunst
(Ed.), Communication yearbook 24 (pp. 207–229). Newberry Park, CA: Sage.

West, R., & Pearson, J. C. (1994). Antecedent and consequent conditions of student questioning: An
analysis of classroom discourse across the university. Communication Education, 43, 299–311.
doi:10.1080/03634529409378988

COMMUNICATION EDUCATION 87

D
ow
nl
oa
de
d
by
[
E
P
–
IP
S
W
IC
H
]
at
0
0:
56
1
3
D
ec
em
be
r
20
17

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/freshmen-least-most-likely-return

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/freshmen-least-most-likely-return

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/freshmen-least-most-likely-return

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529409378988

Copyright of Communication Education is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.