Comparison of All Strategies in Verbal Communication

Comparison of All Strategies in Verbal Communication

Noor Hanim Rahmat

Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Malaysia

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.906000234

Received: 05 June 2025; Accepted: 09 June 2025; Published: 09 July 2025

ABSTRACT

One of the biggest challenges in learning a language is the ability to use verbal communication using that target language. Some can write reasonably well in the target language but stumble when asked to speak the language. Language learners need motivation to be confident enough to use the target language for communication. One way to improve language users’ motivation to use the target language is to use communication strategies. This pilot study investigates language learners’ perception of the use of communication strategies. 33 respondents were chosen to participate in this study. The instrument used is a questionnaire with 6 sections. The first section is the demographic profile. The remaining sections are social-affective, fluency-oriented, negotiation for meaning, accuracy-oriented, message reduction, orientation, and non-verbal strategies. SPSS analysis was done, and the findings are presented from descriptive statistics. The study showed that learners use the above-mentioned strategies. This study also revealed frequent communication strategies as social-affective, fluency-oriented, and accuracy-oriented strategies. These findings bear interesting implications for the teaching and learning of communication strategies in language classrooms.

Keywords: communication strategies, social-affective, fluency-oriented, negotiation for meaning, accuracy-oriented, message reduction, orientation, and non-verbal

INTRODUCTION

Communication is the exchange of information between individuals. Communication can be in many forms, such as verbal, non-verbal, written, or even visual. One of the most challenging tasks for instructors teaching a foreign language is for the learners to have confidence in communicating. What stops language learners from using the target language? There are several communication barriers. The first is physical barriers, and this refers to. Environmental factors such as noise, crowded rooms, or even technical problems. The second type is emotional barriers. This includes stress or anxiety on the part of the speaker/learner. Next is a linguistic barrier, and this refers to differences in language between the speaker and listener. Next are cultural barriers and which include differences in communication styles and values. The last type is psychological barriers. This includes prejudice and emotional disturbances.

In addition to that, language learners often need an extra push to use the target language. Kulsum et.al (2025) found that among some challenges for communication in the target language are understanding grammar, fluency, pronunciation, limited vocabulary, lack of self-confidence, shyness, anxiety, and lack of motivation. According to Giantari et.al (2023), language learners sometimes lacked motivation to use the target language. Sometimes language learners become demotivated because of past experiences, such as negative evaluation, and this may lead to a fear of using the target language. According to Abas et.al. (2025), in the learning of In a foreign language, there is a relationship between motivation and fear, and this fear directly influences students’ satisfaction with learning the foreign language.

For motivation, language learners need to be taught to use communication strategies. According to Rahmat (2023), appropriate communication strategies ensure that the information is conveyed. The sender (of the information) needs to negotiate meaning so that that message gets understood. In the context of this study, learners need to use a variety of communication strategies to facilitate their verbal communication

This study is done to explore perception of learners on their use of oral communication strategies. Specifically, this study is done to answer the following questions;

How do learners perceive their use of social-affective strategies in verbal communication?

How do learners perceive their use of fluency-oriented strategies in verbal communication?

How do learners perceive their use of negotiation of meaning strategies in verbal communication?

How do learners perceive their use of accuracy-oriented strategies in verbal communication?

How do learners perceive the use of message reduction, orientation, and non-verbal strategies in verbal communication?

How do the means differ for all strategies in verbal communication?

LITERATURE REVIEW

Theoretical Framework- Related Models and Theories for Verbal Communication

Communication is a process of conveying information from the sender to the receiver. It can be in the form of verbal, written, or even visual. Wesley & Maclean (1957) presented a communication model. The model suggested that the communication process does not begin with the information sent by the source or sender. They state that communication starts with environmental factors. This is because the environment influences how the message is kept (by the sender) or how the message is received by the receiver. A case in point is in this day and age of online/electronic communication. Sometimes, a message that is sent via electronic means/written is sometimes misunderstood because it may lack intended emotions. Perhaps a visual message without the accompanying text may be misunderstood, or even the person who sent the message may be in a different state of mind from the receiver. Misunderstandings may occur because the environment of the sender may not be the same as the environment of the receiver. Mehrabian (1981) states that communication makes up 55% of non-verbal forms, 38% of vocal, and 7% verbal. So, what speakers say is as important as how they say it.

Classroom communication today is becoming more complex as communication takes many forms now. An instructor communicates course content verbally and is accompanied by written and even visual forms. Learners are expected to communicate effectively with the instructors and their peers in and outside the classroom, and now, also via online. How to help learners constantly improve their communication strategies. According to social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1989), in the classroom context, learners learn through observation, imitation, and even modelling desirable behaviour. Concerning Figure 1 below, the theory states that there are three main factors that influence learning. The first is that learners learn from observing the behaviour of others. The learner then forms their own cognitive beliefs and expectations to make sense of the learning. Nevertheless, their environment plays an important role in the formation of the learners’ beliefs and expectations of what is learnt.

Figure 1- The Social Cognitive

Theory by Albert Bandura

(Source: Nickerson, 2025)

Past Studies on Communication Strategies

A study was done by Karasova & Kleckova (2023) to investigate student teachers’ awareness of students’ disruptive behaviour. The study also looks at these student teachers’ communication strategies to address the behaviour. The participants were students attending a teacher preparation institution in the Czech Republic. The instruments used were an orientation script and a task list.  A feedback interview was also done. Findings showed that these student teachers were not able to respond to disruptive behaviour. They needed to be equipped with communication strategies to address disruptions in classrooms.

Next, Rahman & Isroyana (2021) conducted a study to explore communication strategies used by EFL students in English classrooms. This qualitative study was done to explore the types of communication strategies and the most frequent types used. The participants were 20 students from Central Lombok, Indonesia. Data was collected from interviews and observations. The field notes and videotape were analysed. Findings revealed that most of the students used different types of communication strategies. Among some of the strategies were asking for clarification, requesting an explanation, asking for repetition, circumlocution, message abandonment, meaning negotiation, and interaction monitoring. The most frequently used strategies were asking for clarification, message abandonment, and meaning negotiation.

Musheke & Phiri (2021) carried out a quantitative study to investigate the factors affecting effective communication. The study was also done to develop a communication model to improve organisational performance. 88 respondents participated in this study. The instrument was a questionnaire. Findings revealed there was no statistically significant relationship between management and the channel of communication used. The findings also showed that there was a relationship between the channel of communication used and effective communication.

Finally, a qualitative study was done by Masithoh et.al. (2018) to explore the use of communication strategies by students of the English Education Department in one university in Indonesia. Data was collected from observation, interview, and documentation. Findings revealed that students with high proficiency used more communication strategies than students with low proficiency Therefore, the use of communication strategies benefits students in several ways. Students depended on the use of specific communication strategies to accomplish different learning tasks. The use of the strategies facilitated interaction in and outside classroom settings.

Conceptual Framework of the Study

Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework of the study. This study explores learners’ perception on the use of communication strategies to learn a foreign language. According to Kavasoğlu (2013), there are five main types of communication strategies. The first is social affective strategies. This includes the use of techniques by the learner to understand and express emotions when they interact in social environments. Secondly, learners use fluency-oriented strategies to use the target language. This includes the effort by the learners to have a smooth and natural flow in conversations. Thirdly, learners also use negotiation for meaning strategies. This involves the learners use sub-strategies such as asking for clarification, rephrasing, and confirming for understanding. Next, learners also use accuracy-oriented strategies to promote clarity and precision during communication. Finally, is the use of message reduction, orientation and non-verbal strategies. For message reduction, learners may choose to topic avoidance, or even message abandonment. Orientation strategies involve the learners focusing on clearly conveying the message. This is also done by building relationships and ensuring the interaction experience is positive. Non-verbal strategies refer to the learners using behaviour other than the spoken words to convey information. This study also explores the most frequently used communication strategies used by the learners.

Figure 2- Conceptual Framework of the Study

Comparison of all Strategies in Verbal Communication

METHODOLOGY

This quantitative pilot study is done to explore the motivational factors for learning among undergraduates. A purposive sample of 33 participants responded to the survey. The instrument used is a 5 Likert-scale survey. 1 refers to never, 2 refers to rarely, 3 refers to sometimes, 4 refers to very often, and 5 refers to always.

Table 1- Likert Scale

The instrument is replicated from communication strategies by Kavasoğlu (2013) to reveal the variables in Table 2 below. The survey has 6 sections. Section A has items on the demographic profile. Section B has 6 items on Social-affective strategies. Section C has 6 items on Fluency-oriented strategies. Section D has 4 items on Negotiation for meaning strategies. Section E has 5 items on accuracy-oriented strategies, and Section F has 5 items on Message reduction, orientation, and non-verbal strategies.

Table 2- Distribution of Items in the Survey

Table 2 also shows the reliability of the survey. The analysis shows a Cronbach alpha of .843 for social-affective strategies, .875 for fluency-oriented strategies, .893 for negotiation for meaning strategies, .907 for accuracy-oriented strategies, and .847 for message reduction, orientation, and non-verbal strategies. The overall Cronbach alpha for all 26 items is .964, thus, revealing a good reliability of the instrument chosen/used. Further analysis using SPSS is done to present findings to answer the research questions for this study.

FINDINGS

Findings for Demographic Profile

This section discusses the analysis of the demographic profiles. The data for (i) gender and (ii) type of presentation preference is presented in percentages in the form of pie charts.

Figure 3- Percentage for Demographic Profile

Figure 3 shows the percentage for gender. 61% of the respondents are male and 39% of them are female students.

Figure 4- Percentage for Presentation Preference

Figure 4 shows the percentage for presentation preference. 71% of the students preferred online. On the other hand, 29% of them preferred face-to-face presentations.

Findings for Social-Affective Strategies

This section presents data to answer research question 1: How do learners perceive their use of social-affective strategies in verbal communication?

Figure 5- Mean for Social-Affective Strategies

Figure 5 presents the mean for affective strategies. Item 3 has the highest mean of 4.1 (SD=0.7), which states that the learners tried to give a good impression to the listener. Next, two items share the same mean of 4. Item 1 (Mean=4; SD=0.8) states that the students tried to relax when they felt anxious, and they also tried to enjoy the conversation (item 2: Mean 4; SD=0.8). Interestingly, the lowest mean (mean=3.8; SD=0.9) is item 5, which states that the student did not mind taking risks of making mistakes.

Findings for Fluency-Oriented Strategies

This section presents data to answer research question 2- How do learners perceive their use of fluency-oriented strategies in verbal communication?

Figure 6- Mean for Fluency-Oriented Strategies

Figure 6 shows the mean for fluency-oriented strategies. The highest mean is 4.1 (SD=0.8) for item no 6, which states that students tried to speak loudly to be heard. Next, learners reported that they took time to express what they wanted to say (mean=4; SD=0.7). The lowest mean is item no 1 (mean=3.6; SD=1.0), which states that the students paid attention to their rhythm and intonation.

Findings for Negotiation for Meaning Strategies

This section presents data to answer research question 3- How do learners perceive their use of negotiation of meaning strategies in verbal communication?

Figure 7- Mean for Negotiation of Meaning Strategies

Figure 7 above shows the mean for negotiation of meaning strategies. Two items share the same mean of 3.9. The first is item 3 which states that while speaking, the learners paid attention to the listener’s reaction (mean=3.9; SD=0.8). Next, students also reported that they gave examples if the listeners understood what she was saying (mean=3.9; SD=0.8). Two items shared the same mean of 3.8 and the items are item no 1 (mean=3.8; SD=0.8) which states that the learners made comprehension checks and also item no 2 (mean-3.8; SD- 1.0) which states that the learners repeated what they said to be understood.

Findings for Accuracy-Oriented Strategies

This section presents data to answer research question 4- How do learners perceive their use of accuracy-oriented strategies in verbal communication?

Figure 8- Mean for Accuracy Oriented Strategies

Figure 8. above presents the mean for accuracy-oriented strategies. Two items share the same highest mean of 3.8, and they are item no 2 (mean =3.8; SD=0.8SD = 0.8) which state that the learners reported to use proper expressions when speaking and also item 3 (mean=3.8; SD=0.8) which states that the learners corrected themselves when they made mistakes. Item no 5 had the lowest mean of 3.4 (SD=1.1) which states that the learners tried to speak like a native speaker.

Findings for Message Reduction, Orientation and Non-Verbal Strategies

This section presents data to answer research question 5- How do learners perceive the use of message reduction, orientation and non-verbal strategies in oral communication?

Figure 9- Mean for Message Reduction, Orientation, and Non-Verbal Strategies

Figure 9 shows the mean for message reduction, orientation, and non-verbal strategies. The highest mean is 4.2 (SD=0.6). for item number 2, which states that learners used words that are familiar to them. Next, two items share the same mean of 3.8. The first is item no 1 (mean=3.8; SD=0.7), which states that they used simple expressions. Next is item number 5 (mean=3.8; SD=0.8), which states that learners used gestures and facial expressions if they could not communicate. The lowest mean is 3.6 (SD=0.7), which states that learners changed the original message to make themselves understood.

Findings for Comparison of Mean

This section presents data to answer research question 6- How do the means differ for all strategies in verbal communication?

Figure 10- Comparison of Mean for all Strategies

Figure 10 shows the comparison of mean of all strategies. Three strategies shared the same highest mean of 4.1, and they are social-affective, fluency-oriented, and accuracy-oriented strategies. The lowest mean of 3.8 is message reduction, orientation, and non-verbal-strategies.

CONCLUSION

Summary of Findings and Discussions

As far as effective strategies, learners reported that they tried to give a good impression on the listener, and this made them anxious. They do not want to take risks of making mistakes. Similarly, Kulsum et.al. (2025) also reported that among the challenges of verbal communication using the target language is anxiety, shyness, and lack of confidence.

This study also reported the perception of learners on fluency-oriented strategies. Students reported that they tried to speak loudly to be heard, and they took time to express what they wanted to say.  Kulsum et.al (2025) and Abas et.al (2025) report similar findings on the need to focus on fluency in verbal communication.

As far as negotiation of meaning strategies and accuracy-oriented strategies, the learners reported that they paid attention to the listener’s reaction. They reported that they gave examples if the listeners understood what she was saying. They also they used proper expressions when speaking and corrected themselves when they made mistakes. They reported that they tried to speak like a native speaker. They also comprehension checks and repeat the messages when needed to be better understood. This finding is in accordance with the findings by Rahman & Isroyana (2021) reported asking for clarification and meaning negotiation as the most frequently used strategies. In addition to that learner reported their perceptions on the use of strategies such as message reduction, orientation and non-verbal strategies. They reported that they used words that are familiar to them. They reported using simple expressions as well as gestures and facial expressions if they could not communicate. This study also revealed frequent communication strategies as social-affective, fluency-oriented and accuracy-oriented strategies. Similar findings were reported by Rahman & Isroyana (2021) who reported among the most frequently strategies are asking for clarification and message abandonment, which mirrors social-affective strategies. This is because speakers need to make adjustments to their verbal communication such as making clarification or even reducing some parts of the message to fit into the social surroundings.

Implications and Suggestions for Future Research

To sum up, this study revealed interesting findings to capture the initial theoretical and conceptual framework presented at the start of this study. The most frequently reported verbal communication strategies were social-affective, fluency-oriented, and accuracy-oriented. This finding complies with the factors in Bandura’s (1989) social cognitive theory that states that learning depends on three main components and they are behaviour, environment, and personal. To begin with, the learner (personal factors) depends on accuracy-oriented strategies to communicate effectively with the people around them. Next, the learners need an environment that supports their learning of the language and the practice of the target language. Finally, in order to be understood in the language learning environment, learners need to focus on fluency-oriented strategies. Future research could focus on researching with more respondents and also look into the relationship between the communication strategies.

REFERENCES

1. Abas, A., Zubbir,N., Jamrus, M.H.M., Azam, N.S., Rahmat, N.H., & Dona,M.A. (2025) Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction in Foreign Language Learning: Insights through Herberg’s Theory. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), IX(V), 2361-2373. https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.905000184
2. Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9), 1175–1184. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.9.1175
3. Giantari, K., Kurniawan, E., & Suherdi, D. (2023) Factors Affecting Students’ Reluctance to Speak English in Classroom Interactions. TELL-US Journal, 9(2) , 285-300. http://dx.doi.org/10.22202/tus.2023.v9i2.6712
4. Jackson, L. (2015). Research Methods and Statistics Critical Thinking Approach (5^th Edition). Boston, USA: Cengage Learning.
5. Karasova, J. & Kleckova, G. (2023) Supporting Learners through Effective Communication: Student Teachers’ Communication Strategies to Address Learner Behaviour. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 48(3), 19-36. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1416419.pdf
6. Kulsum, E.M., Jamjami, A.Y., Uyun, A.S., Widianingsih, A.W. S. (2025) A Study on the Difficulties in English Speaking for EFL Students. Journal on Education, 7(2), 10648010659. http://jonedu.org/index.php/joe
7. Masithoh, H., Fauziati, E., & Supriyadi, S. (2018) Communication Strategies Used by the Students on the Perspective of Language Proficiency, International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, (5), 21- http://dx.doi.org/10.18415/ijmmu.v5i5.257
8. Mehrabian, A. (1981) Silent Messages: Implicit Communication of Emotions and Attitudes. 2nd Edition, Wadsworth, Belmont.
9. Musheke, M.M., & Phiri, J. (2021) The Effects of Effective Communication on Organizational Performance Based on the Systems Theory. Open Journal of Business and Management, 9(2),659-671. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2021.92034
10. Nickerson, C. (2025). Albert Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/social-cognitive-theory.html
11. Rahman, , & Isroyana, D.N. (2021) Communication Strategies used by EFL Students in English Classroom Setting. Jo-ELT (Journal of English Language Teaching, 8(2), 207-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.33394/jo-elt.v8i2.4482
12. Rahmat, H (2023). Exploring Direct and Indirect Strategies in Communication: The Case for ESL Learners. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 13(5), 2353-2363. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v13-i5/17094
13. Yaman, Ş., & Kavasoğlu, M. (2013). The adaptation study of the oral communication strategy inventory into Turkish. International Journal of Human Sciences, 10(2), 400-419. Retrieved from https://www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/view/2685
14. Westley, B. H., & MacLean, M. S. (1957). A Conceptual Model for Communications Research. Journalism Quarterly, 34(1), 31-38. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769905703400103