instant messaging essay

Mission Statement
Editorial Staff
Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Perceived Positive and Negative Effects of Instant Messaging on Academic Writing

In the age of technology, does instant messaging enhance or hinder writing? A case study offers insights from a generation that’s never lived without the internet.

In the spring of 2021, I met with several high school directors. Each of them brought up the same concern: today’s high schoolers are struggling to obtain college-level writing skills. The directors blame this problem primarily on instant messaging (IM) and the internet, and they are unsure how to adjust their writing curriculum in order to meet this generation’s unique needs. This experience led me to wonder how the students themselves think IM has affected their writing. Perhaps with a clearer idea of young writers’ strengths and weaknesses, we can better address the confounding problems posed by the age of the internet.

THE RESEARCH

Jill Adams’s 2007 study “ Student Perceptions of the Impact of Instant Messaging on Academic Writing ” addresses this issue by investigating how students perceive IM’s influence on their writing. Adams examined middle school students’ written documents and conducted interviews with five students to determine how they viewed their writing strengths and weaknesses. Their responses suggest that there are distinct positive and negative effects of IM on academic writing.

“On my papers, I tend to have really bad organization—my thoughts are all spread out or they’re all in the same long paragraph.” Anonymous Student Participant

The perceived positive effects include the following:

Speed: Students noted that IM has greatly increased the speed at which they write.
Original ideas: Some students believed that IM helped them come up with original ideas and creative content in their academic writing.
Voice: Many participants thought their voice in writing was greatly improved by IM. One student said, “I used to have really bad voice in my papers. I haven’t had a teacher ask for better voice anymore” (under “Impact of Instant Messaging on writing products”).

The perceived negative effects of IM are as follows:

Lack of organization: Instant messages are typically written in one “paragraph” that can contain unrelated ideas. This unorganized style is also apparent in academic writing, as noted by one student: “On my papers, I tend to have really bad organization—my thoughts are all spread out or they’re all in the same long paragraph” (under “Impact of Instant Messaging on writing products”).
Rushing: Students’ increased writing speed is a double-edged sword. While it provides certain advantages, it can also lead to mistakes, lack of proper planning, and omission of important details.
Lack of proper mechanics: The study found that students’ papers had poor word choice, improper spelling and punctuation, and lack of capitalization. Students said they did not care about those mechanics when using IM.

THE IMPLICATIONS

These perceived positive and negative effects give us a glimpse at the advantages and disadvantages of the rising generation’s writers. In order to properly teach this generation how to improve their writing, educators must play to their strengths and assist them with their weaknesses. The middle school students of 2007 are also now the authors of today, so editors may need to more frequently help their authors with organizing thoughts, planning, including important details, and applying an appropriate mechanical style.

Individuals who grew up with instant messaging need not be an enigma; if we understand their unique advantages and disadvantages, we unlock the key to their writing success.

To learn more about how students perceive the effects of IM, read the full article:

Adams, Jill. 2007. “Student Perceptions of the Impact of Instant Messaging on Academic Writing.” Literacy Learning: The Middle Years 15 (2): 37–45. https://go.gale.com/ps/anonymous?id=GALE%7CA166201100&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=13205692&p=AONE&sw=w

—Kennadie Halliday, Editing Research

FEATURE IMAGE BY PRISCILLA DU PREEZ

Find more research

For more on technology’s impact on editing, check out Madeline Hill’s Editing Research article “ Online Editing: The Effects of Technology on Future Editors .”

Read Sheelah M. Sweeny’s (2011) article to learn more about teaching the IM generation how to improve their writing: “Writing for the Instant Messaging and Text Messaging Generation: Using New Literacies to Support Writing Instruction.” Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 54 (2): 121–30. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.54.2.4 .

When Newsrooms Cut Copy Editors

What English Language Learners Can Teach Us About Editing

Why Practicing Creative Writing Increases Writing Skill across Genres

Skylar Griego

This is an interesting topic. But I think the strengths and weaknesses outlined here are outdated at this point. The variety of instant communication methods available to us has exploded since 2007, and many people now text/IM with multiple messages styled like short paragraphs now. On top of that, we now have emojis, memes, and gifs as a mainstream form of communication. I would be very interested in an updated version of this study for both those students surveyed in 2007 and today’s middle schoolers.

instant messaging

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

Frontiers - Exploring the Emotional Experience During Instant Messaging Among Young Adults: An Experimental Study Incorporating Physiological Correlates of Arousal
National Center for Biotechnology Information - PubMed Central - How Do Instant Messages Reduce Psychological Withdrawal Behaviors?—Mediation of Engagement and Moderation of Self-Control
Academia - Instant Messaging
Business LibreTexts - Instant Messaging and Text

instant messaging (IM) , form of text-based communication in which two people participate in a conversation over their computers or smartphones via an Internet -based chat room or application.

Instant messaging (IM) platforms, generally referred to as messaging services or apps, often monitor for users’ online presence and show an indication of their availability. For example, the popular workplace messaging service Slack shows a green circle next to a user’s profile name if they are available to chat. IM software relies on a central server or servers to monitor user availability. In the past, when a user logged into an IM system, the login was recognized by the system, and other online users who had that address listed as a “buddy,” or friend, were notified of the user’s presence. With the modernization of such apps, users rarely have to log in or out of an application to receive messages, and applications rarely send notifications to friends simply to indicate online availability. IM software establishes a direct connection between users so they can talk to each other synchronously, in real time. The technology came to the forefront of digital communication in the 1990s in response to ongoing battles between commercial ventures engaged in its development.

One of the precursors to a formal IM was the Compatible Time-Sharing System (CTSS), which originated in 1961 at the Computation Center at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). CTSS was housed in a large mainframe . Users connected to the mainframe through remote dial-up terminals to send messages back and forth to one another and share files. CTSS soon grew beyond MIT, allowing several hundred users from a number of colleges to converse with one another by 1965, thereby adopting modern IM-like qualities.

IM was invented in 1971 as a chat function on a government computer network . American computer scientist Murray Turoff created IM as part of the Emergency Management Information Systems and Reference Index (EMISARI) for the Office of Emergency Preparedness. Its original purpose was to help exchange information which would aid the U.S. government during emergencies. One of EMISARI’s first uses was to facilitate communication among government officials to assist the anti-inflation wage and price control efforts of the Nixon administration. EMISARI users accessed the system through teletypewriter terminals linked to a central computer. EMISARI continued to be used by the U.S. government for management of emergency situations until 1986. The EMISARI chat function was called the Party Line and was originally developed to replace telephone conferences. Party Line users all had to log on to the same computer over phone lines and read the text of the chats on Teletype units.

During the 1970s the first public chat software emerged. “Talk,” designed to work within the UNIX operating system , also required that users be logged on to the same computer to use the program. This was truly the forerunner of IM systems, since users could send a message to anyone else on the system and a note would pop up on the user’s terminal . This software was often used in combination with “Finger,” a program that allowed users to determine whether one user or another was present online at the time.

The first large-scale rollout of IM came from America Online (AOL). IM had been a part of the AOL browser as early as 1988, in the form of lists of acquaintances that let AOL customers know when their friends, relatives, or other acquaintances who also used AOL were online. Such lists were called “buddy lists” after the rollout of AOL Instant Messenger (AIM) in 1997. AIM flourished and, as the popularity of the Internet grew, so did the demand for software systems that allowed real-time conversation. The late 1980s also saw the introduction of Internet Relay Chat (IRC) software for group conversations, and by the mid-1990s other IM software, such as ICQ (or “I Seek You”) for non-AOL Internet users, also became available.

By the early 2000s several IM systems were in use on the Internet, with multiple versions for different computer operating systems ( Windows , Mac OS , Linux ). Such systems included Apple’s iChat, which made its debut in 2002 during the rollout of OS X Jaguar, the third version of Apple’s Mac OS X operating system. Beginning in 2011, Apple products used the centralized service iMessage (via the Apple Messaging application) to facilitate communication between users. Though Apple’s Messaging app supports MMS and SMS messages, which are delivered using cell service, the app uses the Internet to send “iMessages.” Skype , an IM and video conferencing service that was introduced in 2003, was popular for its messaging and its video-call-oriented framework. Microsoft bought Skype in 2011, but the application was soon overshadowed by options such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams, both of which gained popularity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Google Talk was first linked to the company’s Gmail service in 2005. The service has since gone through multiple iterations , with its name changed to “Hangouts” and “Allo,” among others. In 2024 Google owned the services Google Meet and Google Chat, with Google Chat designated as the company’s official IM service.

IM became linked to social media platforms with the release of MySpaceIM by MySpace in 2006, Facebook ’s Facebook Chat in 2008, and Facebook Messenger in 2011. Many more platforms have integrated IM chatting as part of their features. WhatsApp , owned by Meta Platforms , which also owns Facebook, is prominent in the space, reporting more than 2 billion monthly users. Slack and Microsoft Teams are workplace-oriented platforms that have modernized IM features. With the proliferation of artificial intelligence , chatbots have become popular as well, and users sometimes choose to message a bot rather than a human.

Communication in Instant Messengers Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

The present research provides really interesting insights into the nature of human communication through such digital resources as instant messengers. Some note that face-to-face communication is richer due to non-verbal communication, and digital communication is deprived of this possibility. However, it is clear that digital communication can be as rich as face-to-face communication. Emoticons and stickers make communication more emotionally loaded. It is quite expected that women use more emoticons and stickers as they are more emotional, and they want to share their emotions or express their attitude towards news, concepts, or remarks. It is also clear that men are more concerned about sharing information. Just like in face-to-face communication, they are not as emotional as women are.

It is quite interesting to discover the change in communication patterns of a male when he is speaking with a female. Thus, when speaking with a female, a male uses more emoticons and stickers. It is also clear that people use additional resources (emoticons, stickers, pictures, and so on) and the choice of these resources depends on users’ characters and mood. It is also possible to add that these resources are equivalent to non-verbal tools in non-verbal communication. It is necessary to add that the present research also helped me acquire some skills in applying different research methods.

The research is based on the observation that lasted for a month and unveiled peculiarities of people communication, but it can be improved. However, the number of participants is insufficient. Four participants of both sexes took part in the research. The next step will be an analysis of data obtained through the observation of at least 100 participants. This number of samples can be relevant as it is important to make sure that people having different characters take part in the research. The next step can be observing the way people of different ages use instant messaging. At this point, it is necessary to add that it is essential to use a mixed research method with a focus on qualitative data. It is important to see the difference between the communication patterns of people of different ages and characters. However, it is also important to understand why people have such patterns. It can also be interesting to compare the way two people communicate face-to-face and using an instant messenger. It is possible to assume that digital and face-to-face communication of a person has certain similarities.

It can also be interesting to look into cultural differences in communication patterns. It is possible to observe the way people pertaining to different cultures communicate. At that, it is possible to compare the way; for example, Americans and Chinese people use instant messaging. It can also be interesting to observe the way intercultural communication occurs. It is clear that people having similar cultural backgrounds have similar codes, but there are high chances that for people pertaining to different cultures, certain emoticons and patterns can mean different things.

Obviously, these methods will require a significant amount of time and effort. It will be necessary to analyze numerous text messages and have numerous interviews with different people (and analyze people’s answers). Nonetheless, this will be important research, as it will reveal peculiarities of people’s digital and face-to-face communication. It will also help identify the role instant messaging plays in people’s lives and can potentially play.

Technical Writing and Its Types
Successful Life: Interview Reflection
Face-to-Face Communication: Why It Is Better Than Other Types of Communication
How Instant Messages Have Changed Communication
Tencent Qq and Window Messenger: China Market Comparing
Text Messaging as a Communication Form
Confrontation: Connecting and Engaging
Communication and Interpersonal Interaction in Care Homes
James Veitch, June 2016: Presentation Critique
Failure to Communicate Effectively in Healthcare
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, April 8). Communication in Instant Messengers. https://ivypanda.com/essays/communication-in-instant-messengers/

"Communication in Instant Messengers." IvyPanda , 8 Apr. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/communication-in-instant-messengers/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'Communication in Instant Messengers'. 8 April.

IvyPanda . 2021. "Communication in Instant Messengers." April 8, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/communication-in-instant-messengers/.

1. IvyPanda . "Communication in Instant Messengers." April 8, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/communication-in-instant-messengers/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Communication in Instant Messengers." April 8, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/communication-in-instant-messengers/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

Basic site functions
Ensuring secure, safe transactions
Secure account login
Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
Remembering privacy and security settings
Analyzing site traffic and usage
Personalized search, content, and recommendations
Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

Remembering general and regional preferences
Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Research article
Open access
Published: 11 January 2022

Effects of using mobile instant messaging on student behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement: a quasi-experimental study

Ying Tang ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4757-1604 1 &
Khe Foon Hew 1

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education volume 19 , Article number: 3 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

96k Accesses

37 Citations

9 Altmetric

Metrics details

Mobile instant messaging (MIM) has become the most popular means for young people to communicate. MIM apps typically come with a myriad of features that educators may leverage to increase student learning. However, it remains poorly understood to what extent and in what aspect MIM can facilitate student engagement. We address the gap by comparing the effects of using MIM and asynchronous online discussion (AOD) on student online engagement, using a quasi-experimental study involving a historical cohort control group. Understanding which communication mode can better promote student online engagement is particularly important during the current widespread use of online learning. Specifically, we examined engagement from the behavioral, emotional, and cognitive dimensions. The results showed that the MIM group was more behaviorally engaged in discussion activities, producing more messages, more words, and higher rates of participation, task completion, and interaction. Emotionally, no statistically significant difference was found in students’ affective evaluation of course interaction and satisfaction between the two groups. However, MIM appeared to help students with improved intimacy and interpersonal relationships. Cognitively, the MIM group was more engaged than the AOD group. In particular, MIM seemed to facilitate interactive idea exchange and thus contributing to more “creating” activities. We conclude by providing suggestions for future instructional practice and research directions.

Introduction

With the wide penetration of smartphones and mobile broadband access, mobile instant messaging (MIM) is becoming an essential means of communication worldwide (Dhir et al., 2020 ). As of July 2020, WhatsApp was the most popular MIM app with 2 billion monthly active users, followed by Facebook Messenger (1.3 billion) and WeChat (1.2 billion) (Statista, 2021 ). A recent study showed that MIM has surpassed voice calls, emails, face-to-face communication, and social network sites (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) and become the most popular means of daily communication (Pew Research Center, 2019 ). Typical MIM apps offer various functions including group chats, audio/video chats, file sharing, real-time location sharing, and exchange of nonverbal graphics such as emoji and stickers.

MIM presents a unique “quasi-synchronous” communication because although posted messages are available synchronously to participants, the message production process (typing) is available only to the sender; the recipient does not have direct access to real-time message production by the sender (Garcia & Jacobs, 1999 ). When a new message arrives, a push notification will pop up and prompts users to engage in communication either instantaneously or with a short time lag. In other words, whether and when to participate in the communication is up to the message receiver after they get notified about message arrival. This is different from synchronous communication (e.g., phone calls, video chats), which requires the transmitter and receiver to be present at the same time and/or space at a mutually agreed schedule. There is no response time delay in synchronous communication because it happens in real time, unlike MIM quasi-synchronous communication where there is often some short delay. MIM is different from asynchronous communication (e.g., emails, forum discussions) because most MIM messages are answered promptly (Andujar, 2019 ) within 60 s (as in the case of WhatsApp) (Rosenfeld et al., 2018 ), whereas the average response time of asynchronous communication is markedly longer—24 h for email (Chang et al., 2016 ) and 24 to 48 h for online discussion forums (Jeong & Frazier, 2008 ). Figure 1 illustrates the differences between asynchronous, synchronous, and quasi-synchronous communication with examples.

The differences between asynchronous, synchronous, and quasi-synchronous communication

MIM is both a mobile and quasi-synchronous communication tool. MIM is developed specifically for mobile devices and not for computers, which means users can carry WhatsApp or WeChat easily in their pocket (Unuth, 2020 ). The mobility of MIM tools and the quasi-synchronicity of MIM communication are two interwoven features and are not separable from each other. The quasi-synchronous communication of MIM is attributed to the portability and mobility of mobile devices. Thus, the word “quasi-synchronicity” has the connotation that easy accessibility of a mobile device is available in the communicative process. To explain, the message notification of a mobile phone alerts a receiver whenever a new WhatsApp or WeChat message arrives. The receiver can then choose to join the conversation anytime and anywhere he or she prefers.

In addition to its unprecedented popular social use, MIM demonstrates the potential to support teaching and learning. Like other computer-mediated communicative (CMC) channels, MIM shatters the temporal and spatial restrictions of traditional face-to-face meetings and allows people to stay connected (Kiesler et al., 1984 ). Besides, its multi-functionality and flexibility enable learning by facilitating resource sharing and distant collaboration (Tang & Hew, 2019 ; Xue & Churchill, 2019 ). For example, teachers have used MIM to support language practice (e.g., Andujar, 2016 ), after-class tutorial services (e.g., Butgereit, 2007 ), class-related information delivery (e.g., Chai & Fan, 2016 ), and assignment submission (e.g., Dambal et al., 2015 ). According to a recent literature review, MIM seemed to be particularly beneficial for developing a social presence in computer-mediated learning environments, mainly due to the friendly environment created with multiple integrated lively elements (e.g., visuals, audio, videos, and other graphical icons), as well as the increased interactivity of the quasi-synchronous communication (Tang & Hew, 2017 ). As for its impact on improving student learning outcomes, most experimental studies reported positive effect, especially when MIM was used to supplement course content in interactive class activities (e.g., Andujar, 2016 ; Chai & Fan, 2016 ). However, researchers also found that messaging can be obstructive to student learning, such as taking a longer time to complete the task or having lower assignments scores (Bowman et al., 2010 ; Chen & Yan, 2016 ; Fox et al., 2009 ). Unstructured messaging can also negatively influence one’s overall productivity due to the increase of communicative workload, engagement in multitasking, and frequency of message notification interruptions (Rennecker & Godwin, 2003 ).

Although the use of MIM has significantly increased, MIM has received much less attention in education, compared with other popular social tools such as Facebook and Twitter (Pimmer & Rambe, 2018 ). Questions remain concerning whether MIM is superior to other CMC mode (such as asynchronous online discussion [AOD]) in engaging students. In this study, we referred to the media synchronicity theory and examined the influence of MIM on learning through the lens of engagement, which is linked to desired learning behaviors and outcomes (Finn & Zimmer, 2012 ; Xu et al., 2020 ). We adopted a quasi-experimental research design to compare the influences of using MIM and AOD on student behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement. The central research question is: How effective is the impact of MIM-supported educational activities on student online engagement as compared to AOD?

This study offers the following original contributions. First, we empirically compare the extent to which MIM influences student online engagement with the commonly used AOD mode. Understanding which communication mode can better promote student online engagement is particularly important during the current health crisis. Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, many institutions have little choice but to use online education for remote teaching and learning. Yet despite the widespread use of online education, the lack of student online engagement remains a problem (Farrell & Brunton, 2020 ). This study offers timely empirical evidence to help teachers choose the appropriate communication mode to foster student online engagement. Second, we investigate student engagement as a multi-dimensional construct, uncovering the nuances in how different communication modes influence student engagement behaviorally, emotionally, and cognitively. Third, we provide pedagogical suggestions to promote student engagement and learning in MIM-supported educational activities in CMC contexts.

In the following sections, we first review related literature on media synchronicity theory, the multidimensional nature of engagement, as well as empirical studies of the educational use of MIM. We proceed to describe the research design and present the comparative results of the behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement of participants from the two groups. We discuss the results in relation to media synchronicity and student motivation and conclude with a set of instructional design suggestions and directions for future research.

Literature review

In this section, we review related literature on the media synchronicity theory, the multiple dimensions of engagement, as well as previous studies on the educational use of MIM to support student learning.

Media synchronicity theory

Media Synchronicity Theory (MST) discusses the capability of media to support synchronicity, which is defined as “a state in which individuals are working together at the same time with a common focus” (Dennis et al., 2008 , p. 581). According to MST, one medium is no better than another; communication performance can be improved when the synchronicity of media can match the synchronicity required to complete the task. Dennis et al. ( 2008 ) defined two fundamental processes of all communication: conveyance and convergence. Conveyance refers to the transmission of new information to create new mental models. Convergence is the process of reaching mutual understanding based on sharing “known” knowledge (Dennis et al., 2008 ). Since conveyance involves more cognitive processing of new information, it typically requires longer periods of time characterized by a medium with low synchronicity. In contrast, because convergence typically requires rapid transmission of small amounts of known information, it benefits from a medium that supports high synchronicity (Dennis et al., 2008 ). In real-life scenarios, to improve the performance of a communicative task, we need to consider the task nature, the media features, and the maturity of grouping, in order to make strategic choices of selecting and combining multiple media types (Dennis et al., 2008 ).

Engagement as a multi-dimensional construct

Students engagement happens when they are motivated to devote time and efforts to the learning process (Wigfield et al., 2006 ). Engagement is the visible manifestation of motivation (Skinner et al., 2009 ). “Engagement is defined by an observable, action-oriented subtype (behavioral) and two internal ones (cognitive and emotional) but then is differentiated from motivation as engagement being action (observable behavior), motivation as intent (internal)” (Reschly & Christenson, 2012 , p. 14). Engagement is multi-dimensional (Appleton et al., 2008 ; Finn & Zimmer, 2012 ). Fredricks et al. ( 2004 ) proposed a three-construct typology consisting of behavioral engagement, emotional engagement, and cognitive engagement (see Fig. 2 , with two examples of indicative behaviors for each dimension).

Three dimensions of engagement and examples of indicators for each dimension

This typology is well grounded in the literature and has been widely cited across diverse disciplines (e.g., Balfanz et al., 2007 ; Brodie et al., 2011 ; Hidi & Renninger, 2006 ). Behavioral engagement refers to participation in academic, social, or extracurricular activities (Fredricks et al., 2004 ). Student participation in an online discussion can be evaluated by various factors, such as the number and type of discussion posts (Hew & Cheung, 2003 ). Emotional engagement refers to students’ affective reactions toward interactions with teachers, peers, and the learning environment (Fredricks et al., 2004 ). Emotional engagement is typically measured by self-reported data, such as questionnaire surveys and interviews. Cognitive engagement comprises thinking and understanding of the topic, as reflected by students’ task investment in terms of being strategic or self-regulating (Fredricks et al., 2004 ). There is a qualitative distinction between low-level and high-level cognitive engagement, observable from surface-level to deep-level strategy use (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990 ). Cognitive engagement can be assessed either subjectively with self-reported questionnaire surveys or objectively with test scores and choices of task difficulty levels (Hew et al., 2016 ; Pintrich & De Groot, 1990 ). It is also common to perform content analysis to examine cognitive engagement in online interactions (e.g., Wang et al., 2014 ; Xie & Ke, 2011 ; Zhu, 2006 ).

Education use of MIM

Previous studies have exploited the communicative functions of MIM and used it in dialogic activities. For example, Allagui ( 2014 ) asked students to accomplish structured conversation tasks (e.g., a role play) in WhatsApp groups to learn English. Over 80% of the students liked MIM and expressed willingness to continue using it. Similarly, Lai ( 2016 ) asked 45 seventh graders to use WhatsApp groups to practice English for three months and found a significant correlation between students’ chat frequency and vocabulary gain. Instructors also used MIM to deliver multi-modal messages or to provide out-of-class assistance in a timely manner. For example, Chai and Fan ( 2016 ) used WeChat to deliver texts, images, and videos about course content to support pre-class content delivery in a flipped classroom. Zhang and Xue ( 2015 ) allowed students to use WeChat and ask for help about their assignments or exam preparation. Aside from these two “transmission” and “helpline” functions, previous studies also used MIM to support other educational activities, such as to collaboratively complete a writing piece, to post a solution to an assignment, or to record students’ learning reflections (Tang & Hew, 2017 ). More recently, Xu et al. ( 2020 ) examined the effects of the teacher role on learner engagement in WeChat-based discussion.

MIM promotes a sense of collaboration among students (Robinson et al., 2015 ). Its quasi-synchronicity allows students to respond quickly, leading to an increased level of interactivity and the development of a social presence (Tu & McIsaac, 2002 ). Social presence refers to the ability of students “to project themselves socially and emotionally as real people” in mediated environment (Garrison et al., 1999 , p. 94). It can influence student learning in the aspects of motivation, activity participation, course satisfaction, perceived learning, and critical thinking (Richardson et al., 2017 ). Furthermore, the availability of non-verbal cues, such as emoticons, emojis, and stickers, can convey emotions in student interactions (Tang & Hew, 2019 ) and make online conversations livelier and friendlier (Wang et al., 2016 ). Recently, Tang and Hew ( 2020 ) compared the levels of social presence between students using MIM and those using AOD and found that MIM is particularly suited to promoting expressions of emotions (affective social presence), agreement (interactive social presence), as well as phatics and support (cohesive social presence). However, this study focused solely on the social aspect of MIM use but did not examine its influence on other dimensions of students’ learning.

The effect of using MIM on cognitive engagement is not conclusive, due to the limited number of comparative studies and insufficient methodological rigor in experimental studies. For instance, Andujar ( 2016 ) and Chai and Fan ( 2016 ) reported positive effects of MIM use compared with the use of other tools or no treatment, while Kim et al. ( 2014 ) and Lai ( 2016 ) reported either no effect or adverse effects. A recent study by Sun et al. ( 2018 ) compared interaction types, social network patterns, and participants’ attitudes between using an online discussion forum and an MIM app. The results show students were more involved in social interactions on MIM but were more involved in knowledge construction on the online forum (Sun et al., 2018 ). While MIM led to more interactions, students preferred using the online forum for collaborative learning (Sun et al., 2018 ). This study adopted a broad categorization of interaction types (social interaction vs. knowledge construction) and did not evaluate specific levels of thinking or knowledge construction. Moreover, it only reported descriptive statistical results but no measurable learning outcomes.

The educational use of MIM also has challenges. Pimmer and Rambe ( 2018 ) identified three interdependent pairs of affordances and constraints in temporal, relationship, and intellectual dimensions. To explain, its immediacy may increase interactivity but may pressure users to respond quickly. Ubiquitous interaction may increase perceived intimacy but may decrease the sense of privacy. Informal language use may be considered friendly but may not be always appropriate in formal educational contexts. The casual environment may increase the level of playfulness and participation but may distract students from task-oriented conversations (Pimmer & Rambe, 2018 ). Other challenges include technical problems such as insufficient smartphone ownership, unstable Internet connectivity, and small cellphone keyboards and screens (e.g., Allagui, 2014 ; Dambal et al., 2015 ).

We identified three major gaps regarding student engagement and the educational use of MIM. First, there is a lack of empirical study that examined the influence of MIM-supported activities on student engagement. Second, some engagement indicators, such as student participation and affective responses, have been sporadically presented by previous studies. However, without a comprehensive examination of engagement as a multi-dimensional construct, our understanding of the educational potential of MIM remains limited. Third, very few studies have compared the effectiveness of using MIM with other communication mode in influencing student learning. This study addresses these gaps by comparing the impacts of using MIM and using AOD in educational activities on student engagement. In the next section, we present more details of the research design.

We conducted a quasi-experimental research involving a historical cohort control group. When random assignment of participants is not possible for practical and ethical reasons in educational research, a quasi-experimental study allows researchers to conduct comparative study in its natural setting (Campbell & Stanley, 1966 ). In addition, use of a historical cohort control group design provides a viable option for conducting quasi-experiments in outcome evaluation, with minimal resource requirements and disruption to school routines (Walser, 2014 ). To manage the comparability of treatment and control conditions, in this study, we chose two classes taught by the same instructor with identical syllabi, course materials, and class activities in two consecutive semesters. Students in the experimental group (hereinafter: MIM group) used WeChat for course-related discussion, while those in the control group (hereinafter: AOD group) used the asynchronous Moodle forum for the same activities. Moodle is the learning management system used on the university campus.

This study was conducted in an ecologically valid real classroom setting where WeChat and Moodle were adopted in natural educational practices, instead of a laboratory setting where strict controls of experiment conditions to investigate the different influences of mobile versus non-mobile, and synchronous versus asynchronous communication were imposed. In this study, we did not impose any restrictions on how participants should use MIM or AOD services. All students in the MIM group naturally used the MIM service via the mobile app on their mobile phones while all students from the AOD group naturally used Moodle forum via their personal computers. This allowed us to better understand what was going on in real classrooms and derive insights from authentic use cases. Moreover, although we chose these two tools for this study, our focus was not to merely compare these tools, but to evaluate the impacts of different modes (quasi-synchronous communication and mobility presented by MIM versus asynchronous communication and non-mobility represented by Moodle forum) on student engagement. MIM and AOD forum are both widely adopted to support student learning activities. Understanding which communication mode can better promote student online engagement is particularly important during the current widespread use of online learning. Our goal was to empirically investigate which one of the communicative modes can better support student engagement in real classroom settings.

To further improve the validity of comparison, since students with a better understanding of the content knowledge typically participate more actively (Tinto, 1987 ), we controlled the influence of students’ initial content knowledge by administering a pre-class assessment on the main knowledge unit covered in this course. 26 students from the MIM group and 28 from the AOD group completed the quiz. Since the data significantly deviated from a normal distribution, we compared the difference with a Mann–Whitney U -test. The results showed no significant difference ( U = 337.5, p = 0.63) in student prior knowledge between the two groups (MIM group: M = 1.19, SD = 1.44; AOD group: M = 1.21, SD = 1.13) (See Table 1 ).

Research context

Participants were enrolled in an educational course at a large university in Hong Kong in the 2016–2017 school year. The class met once a week, three hours each week, and for eight weeks in total. The instructor taught the course in a flipped approach, by disseminating instructional videos before each class and guiding students to apply what they had learned in class (see Fig. 3 for a visual illustration of the learning process). The first four weeks covered content knowledge, and the last four weeks were for student-led group presentations. In the first four weeks, students completed six online discussion tasks (see Table 2 ) on the designated platforms. The MIM group was enrolled in 2016 Fall, involving 26 students (23 females and three males). All the students were from mainland China or Hong Kong. The AOD group was enrolled in 2017 Spring, involving 29 students (21 females and eight males). One student was from Thailand, and the others were from mainland China or Hong Kong.

The learning activities and process of a flipped learning approach adopted in this study

Students understood that their participation in the discussion was completely voluntary and would not be counted toward their grades. Students were encouraged to provide feedback to others’ comments, and they were allowed to use the discussion platform in any way that might help them learn with no prescribed regulations. For example, they could ask assignment-related questions or share internship information. The instructor did not participate unless students specifically sought his help.

Data collection and analysis

Figure 4 summarizes the ways in which we measured how behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement happened in the learning process, and how we collected the data.

The measurements and data sources of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement

To measure behavioral engagement , we collected students’ online interaction records after the course ended, and analyzed the data using a content analysis method (Holsti, 1969 ). Specifically, we counted the number of participants and their posts, as well as calculated the number of posts per individual and discussion task. We categorized postings as on-task and off-task messages. On-task messages were posts that directly contributed to the discussion topics, while off-task messages were not directly related to the topics. On-task messages were further grouped into two types: task completion (messages intended to complete the task) and interaction (messages as responses). One message could contain components of both task completion and interaction.

To compare emotional engagement , we interviewed 20 students, 10 from each group, to understand their affective responses toward the course content, participation, resources, and interaction. These interviews were semi-structured, wherein we asked elaboration and clarification questions as needed to gain more insight. Each interview lasted about 30 min. All interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and double-checked for accuracy. We also administered a Likert-style survey anonymously via Google Forms upon the course completion. The 15-item survey was adapted from Bailey ( 2002 ) to measure student attitude towards peer interaction, student–instructor interaction, and course satisfaction. We compared students’ responses with the Mann–Whitney U -test, as the data significantly deviated from a normal distribution. Significance was accepted at the level of 0.05.

The aforementioned interviews also helped identify students’ learning strategies and perceived learning outcomes, as indicators of cognitive engagement . We analyzed the interview data with a grounded theory approach (Glaser & Strauss, 1967 ) to allow categories to emerge from the data. This involved generating a series of codes and successively refining them through an iterative process, until no more new codes could be identified.

In addition to the interview data, we adopted Wang et al. ( 2014 ) framework of cognitive engagement in connected learning contexts and analyzed on-task messages as an externalization of learning-related thought. The unit of analysis was the thematic unit because our focus was the “communication of meaning” (Merriam, 1998 ). One message might contain several units of analysis. The framework includes four levels (from low to high) of cognitive engagement:

Operation . Learners operate technologies to help with their personal learning and mainly interact with the interface to facilitate idea expression. This stage does not involve interaction with other participants.

Wayfinding . Learners identify resources and opportunities contributed by others in the network. Learners interact with the content and other learners to aggregate more information to enhance their understanding.

Sense-making. Learners bring together different information and critically evaluate and negotiate a viewpoint.

Innovation. Learners construct new understanding and artifacts, such as changes to one’s personal opinions or behaviors and new suggestions or resources to extend the existing discussion.

Guided by this framework, we adopted the constant comparison method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985 ) to identify specific indicators of cognitive engagement. Ten codes emerged inductively from the data corpus. The operationalization of each code was reviewed and refined iteratively. To increase the consistency of the analysis, we identified exemplary posts to illustrate each code. The final codebook is shown in Table 3 . Twenty percent of the qualitative data were randomly selected and analyzed by two independent researchers to ascertain coding reliability, which yielded an agreement rate of 92%. All disagreement was resolved through discussion.

Behavioral engagement

Table 4 summarizes the differences in behavioral engagement of the two groups.

The MIM group produced more messages than the AOD group, including more on-task and interactive messages, while the AOD group wrote longer messages than MIM students. All MIM students participated in the out-of-class discussions, producing 473 messages with 22,489 words. A total of 321 messages were on-task, among which 186 (57.9%) were interactive. Each student produced 865 words, and each message contained an average of 47.5 words. On the other hand, 28 of the 29 students from the AOD group participated in the tasks, producing 169 messages with 17,289 words. All the messages were on-task, and 47 (27.8%) were interactive. The average number of words per student was 617.5 and per message was 102. We further analyzed the following aspects of participation and interaction.

Participation rate

Measured by dividing the number of students who participated by the total number of students enrolled. The average participation rate of the MIM group across all six tasks was 88.5% and that of the AOD group was 69.5%. The MIM group demonstrated a higher participation rate.

Task completion rate

Measured by dividing the number of students who completed the tasks by the total number of students enrolled. In the MIM group, the average number of students who completed the tasks was 21.2, with a completion rate of 81.4%. In the AOD group, the average number of students who completed the tasks was 20.2, with a completion rate of 69.5%. The MIM students demonstrated a higher task completion rate.

Interaction rate

Measured by dividing the number of interaction posts by the total number of posts. The MIM group’s interaction rate reached 51.68%, while the AOD group’s interaction rate was 23.13%. In the AOD group, two tasks did not have any interactive posts. The MIM students demonstrated a higher interaction rate.

Emotional engagement

According to the interviews, both MIM and AOD helped students create a sense of group and connectivity. Both technologies improved an awareness of peer presence. However, while most MIM interviewees explicitly acknowledged the positive impact of using WeChat on their feelings, hardly any AOD interviewees recognized the effect of the forum on their emotional engagement. Students mentioned the following reasons why they felt WeChat enhanced their emotional engagement.

Instructor being approachable

Students appreciated the instructor’s attempt to use this social tool in an academic context. According to one interviewee, “It shows he is willing to know us and mingle with us. I do not know any other teachers who are using WeChat. Maybe they do, but they don’t share it with us.”

Inclusive, relaxing, and interactive

Students frequently used inclusive pronouns, such as “we, us, our” to address the group, which gave them a sense of belonging. In addition, the message notifications prompted them to get engaged and contributed to an interactive learning environment. One student noted, “You know others are participating, and you want to be a part of it too. It is not like Moodle, where you post your answer and leave. I seldom read what others say, and I don’t think others care that much about what I say.”

Easy emotional expression

The convenient use of emojis and stickers helped with emotional expression and added some fun to the conversation. One student said, “If someone knows how to use stickers, they are more likely to be an easygoing and interesting person. I would want to know them and make friends with them.”

Social interaction

The social nature of WeChat increased a sense of intimacy. Students would use social phatics, such as greetings or holiday wishes, to improve the level of positivity and friendliness. Students were also connected with the social sharing function, which allowed them to know their classmates as unique individuals outside of the classroom. One student commented, “You get to know them better through what they share and how they describe their posts.”

However, some students still preferred limiting the use of MIM to social conversations. They felt awkward to intentionally use MIM for academic posts. Further, students sometimes thought the notifications pushed by MIM were distracting, even annoying. Messages could also be obstructive to one’s private life. Students also disliked the pressure to participate only because their classmates were active, even though the discussions were voluntary. One student said, “Sometimes I forced myself to comment, because others would have a better impression of me, including the teacher.”

On the other hand, most AOD interviewees showed a neutral attitude toward the impact of using forum on their affective involvement. Their responses were comparatively succinct, such as “I could not say it had a strong influence,” or “It was not obvious.” Two main uninviting features of Moodle forum were (1) the lack of interaction, and (2) the pressure of being formal. Most students would just post their own answers but did not bother to comment on others’ postings. When they wrote their own responses, students felt the pressure to provide in-depth responses. One student said, “I always wrote an essay in a Word document, double-checked the grammar, and read it several times before posting it. I had to make sure that everything was up to academic expectations.”

Regarding the survey results, 20 MIM students and 27 AOD students responded on their attitudes towards the course interaction and satisfaction. The score of each construct was obtained by summing the scores of each item in that construct, and the overall score was obtained by adding the scores of all constructs. The results showed no significant difference in any surveyed aspects (see Table 5 ).

Cognitive engagement

We measured cognitive engagement based on students’ online interaction records and interviews about their learning strategies and perceived learning outcomes. Table 6 summarizes the coding results of students’ interaction records.

Both technologies supported student cognitive engagement in a variety of ways. A stark difference was in the wayfinding dimension. MIM students were most involved in wayfinding interaction, while the AOD students showed the least involvement in this category. This indicates MIM was more facilitative to interaction, as wayfinding indicates bidirectional communication. Regarding specific indicators, both groups were more frequently engaged in sharing information, although the AOD group demonstrated a higher percentage. Between groups, MIM students demonstrated higher frequencies of all individual indicators, indicating that more cognitively engaging communication was present in the MIM group. Particularly, MIM students demonstrated more instances of the highest level of cognitive engagement indicator “creating” than their AOD peers (32 vs. 8).

According to the interviews, students in the MIM group attributed their improved cognitive engagement to increased interactivity, class preparation, just-in-time learning opportunities, connected learning resources, and succinct language use.

Learning facilitated by increased interactivity

The mobility and synchronicity of MIM increased the level of interactivity and allowed students to seize just-in-time learning opportunities. They were able to co-produce knowledge in peer interactions, which prompted them to think more deeply about the discussion topics. One student said, “I would have more opportunities to ask questions and receive answers from my classmates. Reading my classmates’ answers also helped me learn.”

Better class preparation

Students actively utilized the MIM group to prepare for the course. “We basically explored the course content together before class. Unsolved questions could then be addressed by the instructor in class.”

Connected learning resources

The MIM group established an easy conversation channel, whereby they could navigate learning resources and have direct contact with their classmates to ask for clarification and elaboration. “If I am interested in a particular idea and would love to have more discussions, I could just @ the sender and ask them directly. It is convenient and efficient.”

However, some students from the MIM group complained about the size of keyboard and screen, which limited them to fully elaborate on ideas. Another negative factor was the chronological display of messages, which made group conversations difficult to follow. Students found it hard to engage in in-depth discussions if they were always catching up on the most recent messages. “If you are not following the interactions all the time, there is no easy way to read all the messages.”

As for AOD, students appreciated using it for academic discussions, mainly due to the following factors.

Extended processing time

Students took advantage of the asynchronous feature of the online forum to really think about their ideas and carefully put them into words. Extra processing time helped develop higher-order thinking, as one student said, “I can take my time to think carefully about what I want to say and how to support my ideas. I might spend several days on the draft.”

Searching while writing

All students used the online forum on their personal computers. The ease of searching and writing at the same time was one outstanding affordance of using Moodle forum. This feature was particularly facilitative of idea development, especially as academic posting tended to be complex and often required searching for extra information.

Easy editing and revision

It was easy to refine the content and insert more information on the forum. This allows for more critical thinking and language processing. “I can revise my posting when I have new ideas or supporting materials. It’s nice that Moodle allows editing.”

Organized threaded format

The threaded format of forum posts allowed students to organize relevant posts and easily search for content. Students considered this feature helpful for information retrieval and idea development.

What students disliked about AOD are its low interactivity and long formal responses. Like many other learning management systems, Moodle forum was not mobile-friendly, as it required students to take multiple steps to login, navigate to the right course, find the discussion board and the right topic, and then write their responses. One student said, “It is hard to use. That’s why I did not interact much. It was a headache to find the right place.” Additionally, students did not enjoy reading long posts or providing responses to such posts. The low interactivity and difficulty of use prevented students from actively participating in discussion tasks and thus limited the development of high-level cognitive engagement.

Discussion and implications

Revisiting the major findings.

In this study, we compared the engagement levels of two groups of students using MIM and AOD to conduct same course-related discussions in a flipped learning setting. Behaviorally, MIM seems to have contributed to a higher level of engagement than AOD in terms of the total number of posts, the total number of words and of each student, the participation rate, the task completion rate, and the interaction rate. However, the messages tended to be longer on the forum than those in the MIM group, as shown by the number of words per message.

Emotionally, although the survey results showed no significant differences in student peer interaction, teacher–student interaction, or course satisfaction between the two groups, the interview results revealed more nuance. MIM established a friendly and interactive environment, which helped develop positive interpersonal relationships among participants. In contrast, students found little impact of AOD communication on their affective feelings toward the course and other students. On the negative side, some students disliked using WeChat for academic purposes, and some from the AOD group did not like the lack of interaction and lengthy essay-like responses on Moodle forum.

Cognitively, both technologies supported student cognitive engagement. AOD seemed more facilitative of individual sharing, while MIM contributed to a higher level of interactive idea exchange. The MIM group was also involved in more “creating” activities. Based on the interview results, students identified multiple facilitative and inhibitive features of both technologies. The MIM students enjoyed the increased interactivity, better class preparation, just-in-time learning opportunities, connected learning resources, and succinct language use, but they were also bothered by the device limitations and information disorganization. In the AOD group, students liked the structured discussion, extended processing time, and the ease of multi-tasking and editing, but they did not enjoy reading or responding to lengthy posts, which limited their desire for interaction.

The mobility, quasi-synchronicity, and casualness of MIM reduced students’ anxiety about being perfect and promote spontaneous discussion (Rambe & Bere, 2013 ). Studies have suggested that the increased interactivity would lead to a higher level of intimacy (Tu & McIsaac, 2002 ), which is a key factor of student affective feelings toward and satisfaction with completely online learning (Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997 ). However, our survey results revealed no significant difference in the emotional engagement between the two groups, although the MIM group demonstrated a higher level of interactivity. This might be due to the course nature, which in this study operated in a blended format. Therefore, the results may be different from completely online courses examined in previous studies. This course prioritized face-to-face meetings and included online discussions as supplementary and voluntary activities. As a result, online interaction might have less impact on student affective engagement than face-to-face meetings. Because both groups took the course with the same instructor and the same activities, their evaluation of the course might be very similar.

The differences in cognitive engagement presented a complex picture. Previous studies found that threaded AODs might better support higher-order thinking compared with chronologically organized discussions in instant messages (Kim et al., 2014 ; Sun et al., 2018 ). Our results suggested otherwise. One explanation of this incongruity may be that in both Kim et al. ( 2014 ) and Sun et al. ( 2018 ), the instructors assigned discussion activities as mandatory tasks. These activities were designed purposefully as collaborative projects, in which students had to either collaboratively find solutions to an ill-structured problem or co-develop a lesson plan based on peer feedback. According to the media synchronicity theory, when a large amount of information is to be exchanged in the communication, media that afford low synchronicity (AOD in this case) may facilitate better communication performance, as it allows more time to read, understand, and process information transmitted (Dennis et al., 2008 ). However, in our study, participating in the discussions was voluntary, and collaboration was not necessary. When students were given the choice to participate, MIM seemed to have afforded higher levels of interaction and more opportunities to share ideas. Such frequent “give and take” is favorably supported by a medium that supports high synchronicity (in this case, MIM) (Dennis et al., 2008 ). The increased level of interaction may have contributed to higher cognitive engagement, especially more “creating” indicators. The creation of new ideas or artifacts does not occur in an individual but through interaction between the individual and the social–cultural context (Csikszentmihályi, 1990 ). Pi et al. ( 2019 ) also found if students were exposed to a high rate of peers’ original ideas and paid more attention to those ideas, they would be more creative. Therefore, using MIM to boost students’ interaction might be a useful strategy for improving creative thinking.

Instructional design suggestions

According to the media synchronicity theory, no medium is better than the other. Communicators should choose appropriate media based on the task requirements, the media features, and the maturity of grouping (Dennis et al., 2008 ). Based on our observation and analysis, we provide the following suggestions for instructors who wish to incorporate MIM or AOD to improve student engagement and learning. These suggestions aim to utilize the affordances of MIM or AOD and to address their challenges.

Set clear goals for using technologies for learning

Different communicative modes and tools are suitable to serve different learning purposes. To address students’ complaints over the confusion between casual and academic interactions, instructors should clearly communicate the purposes and expectations of using MIM or AOD for communication and learning activities. Instructor can also encourage students to design and implement MIM-supported learning activities themselves. Giving students the freedom of choice will enhance their sense of autonomy, leading to higher levels of behavioral and emotional engagement. Our study also shows that clear communication of the expectations will help students to be more intentionally focused of academic conversations.

Start with the whole-class MIM group first, but reconsider group size in discussion activities

The MIM group helps students to stay connected, assist one another with content learning, and exchange ideas to facilitate higher-level thinking. It is therefore beneficial to have a group to improve relatedness and competence. However, as indicated by some participants in this study, too many members in a group will lead to information overload and message disorganization. We thus suggest starting a whole-class group first to establish a sense of community but breaking up into smaller groups for discussion activities. For example, students could have internal discussion within small groups. Each group then selects a representative to summarize and present group ideas to the whole class to further facilitate exchange of thoughts.

Develop schedules for discussion

Instructor can develop a schedule with students to address student concerns about messaging being distractions and invasion of privacy, but still maintain flexibility and connectivity (Tu et al., 2014 ). For example, a discussion schedule can be set between 9 am and 5 pm each weekday. The schedule should be a collective decision of all participants. In addition, instructors can remind students to mute their MIM notifications when they do not want to be disturbed (Tang & Hew, 2019 ). AOD, on the other hand, due to its asynchronous nature, does not create any distraction or obtrusive feelings.

Design activities catering to device limitations

Students in this study complained about the low input ability and readability of long messages on MIM apps. They did not enjoy reading long messages on their cellphone screens and had difficulty typing long messages with small cellphone keyboards. Therefore, discussion activities should be designed purposefully with comparatively short answers that are easy to summarize. A task with multiple questions, or a topic requiring students to share anecdotal experiences in extensive narration, may be more suitable for AOD-based communication.

Cultivate a constructive knowledge sharing environment

High level of interaction is beneficial for enhancing both competence and relatedness. Instructors should actively cultivate a constructive knowledge exchange environment in MIM-supported interactions. For example, instructors can demonstrate how to provide constructive comments and build on one another’s ideas. To address information disorganization of MIM communication, in addition to managing group size, instructors could also assign student facilitators to summarize the highlights and manage conversations, which could help students to grasp crucial information and facilitate follow-up interactions. As for AOD, because of its asynchronous nature and comparatively low interactivity, instructors could consider providing rewards, incentives, or other positive stimuli to encourage students to participate in the knowledge co-construction process through interactions, in addition to their own sharing.

Limitations and future work

There are some limitations of this study which point to an array of possibilities for future research. First, the study was conducted in a graduate-level education course. These contextual factors might limit the generalizability of our results to other contexts such as undergraduate and K-12 settings. Future studies could investigate other disciplinary and geographical areas and in non-higher educational contexts. Second, the study examined student use of one technology over one semester (eight weeks). There might be a novelty effect on the results—the tendency of an initial improvement in student performance when a new technology is introduced to the learning environment (Clark, 1983 ). Researchers might wish to examine the long-term adoption of MIM and its influence on student learning and engagement. Third, this study suggests that discussion tasks with shorter answers could cater to the strengths of mobile devices. However, it is beyond our scope to investigate what types of activities are most suited to an MIM-based discussion. Future research could explore the influence of different discussion activities. Fourth, this study does not demonstrate that how different levels of engagement eventually lead to qualities of learning outcomes. Further studies should examine the relationship between student engagement and learning outcomes. Finally, we were unable to isolate the possible individual influences of mobility and synchronicity on the reported results. To determine the possible individual influences of mobility and synchronicity, future research may consider having different experiment conditions while controlling for the confounding variable. For instance, one group may use quasi-synchronous communication (MIM) via mobile phones versus another group using asynchronous online discussion also via mobile phones.

Our main motivation for this study is to understand the extent to which MIM, as a social tool, can facilitate student engagement. We compared the use and effects of MIM and AOD on students’ behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement. Our findings showed that using MIM could better facilitate interaction and the development of interpersonal relationships. A learning environment with higher levels of intimacy and interactivity can help meet the psychological need for motivation. We also found that when MIM was used in optional tasks, in which the students could choose whether and how they want to participate in the discussion, MIM seemed to afford a higher level of cognitive engagement, as shown by more indicators of idea exchange and creativity. MIM emerges as a promising tool for engaging students in social learning activities and fostering higher-level thinking through interaction. Our findings provide evidence to improve the instructional design of MIM-supported learning experiences and promote our theoretical understanding of student engagement.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are not publicly available under the university IRB guidelines. Other materials are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Allagui, B. (2014). Writing through WhatsApp: An evaluation of students’ writing performance. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 8 (3–4), 216–231.

Article Google Scholar

Andujar, A. (2019). Evaluating mobile instant messaging for L2 development: A longitudinal investigation. In M. Kruk (Eds.), Assessing the effectiveness of virtual technologies in foreign and second language instruction (pp. 191–215). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7286-2.ch008

Andujar, A. (2016). Benefits of mobile instant messaging to develop ESL writing. System, 62 , 63–76.

Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45 (5), 369–386.

Bailey, K. D. (2002). The effects of learning strategies on student interaction and student satisfaction [doctoral dissertation]. The Pennsylvania State University. Retrieved from https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/catalog/5922

Balfanz, R., Herzog, L., & Mac Iver, D. J. (2007). Preventing student disengagement and keeping students on the graduation path in urban middle-grades schools: Early identification and effective interventions. Educational Psychologist, 42 (4), 223–235.

Bowman, L. L., Levine, L. E., Waite, B. M., & Gendron, M. (2010). Can students really multitask? An experimental study of instant messaging while reading. Computers & Education, 54 (4), 927–931.

Brodie, R. J., Hollebeek, L. D., Jurić, B., & Ilić, A. (2011). Customer engagement: Conceptual domain, fundamental propositions, and implications for research. Journal of Service Research, 14 (3), 252–271.

Butgereit, L. (2007). Math on MXit: Using MXit as a medium for mathematics education . Paper presented at Meraka INNOVATE Conference for Educators, CSIR, Pretoria. Retrieved from https://researchspace.csir.co.za/dspace/handle/10204/1614 .

Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research . Rand McNally.

Google Scholar

Chai, J. X., & Fan, K.-K. (2016). Mobile inverted constructivism: Education of interaction technology in social media. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12 (5), 1425–1442.

Chang, C., Hurst, B., & McLean, A. (2016). How fast is fast enough? Education students’ perceptions of email response time in online courses. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 9 (1), 1–11.

Chen, Q., & Yan, Z. (2016). Does multitasking with mobile phones affect learning? A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 54 , 34–42.

Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53 (4), 445–459.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). The domain of creativity. In M. A. Rum & R. S. Albert (Eds.), Theories of creativity (pp. 190–212). Sage.

Dambal, A., Nimbal, N., Kalsad, S., Rajashekhar, R., Bhavane, A., Pise, G., Halki, S., & Dhaduti, S. (2015). Perceptions of interns towards a module for teaching medical ethics using the android smartphone application WhatsApp. Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences, 4 (82), 14270–14277.

Dennis, A. R., Fuller, R. M., & Valacich, J. S. (2008). Media, tasks, and communication processes: A theory of media synchronicity. MIS Quarterly, 32 (3), 575–600.

Dhir, A., Kaur, P., & Rajala, R. (2020). Continued use of mobile instant messaging apps: A new perspective on theories of consumption, flow, and planned behavior. Social Science Computer Review, 38 (2), 147–169.

Farrell, O., & Brunton, J. (2020). A balancing act: A window into online student engagement experiences. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17 , 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00199-x

Finn, J. D., & Zimmer, K. S. (2012). Student engagement: What is it? Why does it matter? In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 97–131). Springer.

Chapter Google Scholar

Fox, A. B., Rosen, J., & Crawford, M. (2009). Distractions, distractions: Does instant messaging affect college students’ performance on a concurrent reading comprehension task? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12 (1), 51–53.

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74 (1), 59–109.

Garcia, A. C., & Jacobs, J. B. (1999). The eyes of the beholder: Understanding the turn-taking system in quasi-synchronous computer-mediated communication. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 32 (4), 337–367.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2 (2–3), 87–105.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research . Aldine.

Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11 (3), 8–26.

Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2003). Models to evaluate online learning communities of asynchronous discussion forums. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 19 (2). Retrieved from https://ajet.org.au/index.php/AJET/article/view/1714

Hew, K. F., Huang, B., Chu, K. W. S., & Chiu, D. K. (2016). Engaging Asian students through game mechanics: Findings from two experiment studies. Computers & Education, 92 , 221–236.

Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41 (2), 111–127.

Holsti, R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities . Addison-Wesley.

Jeong, A., & Frazier, S. (2008). How day of posting affects level of critical discourse in asynchronous discussions and computer-supported collaborative argument. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39 (5), 875–887. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00789.x

Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39 (10), 1123–1134.

Kim, H., Lee, M., & Kim, M. (2014). Effects of mobile instant messaging on collaborative learning processes and outcomes: The case of South Korea. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17 (2), 31–42.

Lai, A. (2016). Mobile immersion: An experiment using mobile instant messenger to support second-language learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 24 (2), 277–290.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry . Sage Publications.

Book Google Scholar

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education . Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Pew Research Center. (2019, December). Social media and young adults. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2010/02/03/social-media-and-young-adults-3/

Pi, Z., Hong, J., & Hu, W. (2019). Interaction of the originality of peers’ ideas and students’ openness to experience in predicting creativity in online collaborative groups. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50 (4), 1801–1814.

Pimmer, C., & Rambe, P. (2018). The inherent tensions of “instant education”: A critical review of mobile instant messaging. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning , 19 (5). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/3765

Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (1), 33–40.

Rambe, P., & Bere, A. (2013). Using mobile instant messaging to leverage learner participation and transform pedagogy at a South African university of technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44 (4), 544–561.

Rennecker, J., & Godwin, L. (2003). Theorizing the unintended consequences of instant messaging for worker productivity. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Environments, Systems and Organizations, 3 (3), 137–168.

Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 3–19). Springer.

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 Behavior, 71 , 402–417.

Robinson, L., Behi, O., Corcoran, A., Cowley, V., Cullinane, J., Martin, I., & Tomkinson, D. (2015). Evaluation of WhatsApp for promoting social presence in a first-year undergraduate radiography problem-based learning group. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, 46 (3), 280–286.

Rosenfeld, A., Sina, S., Sarne, D., Avidov, O., & Kraus, S. (2018). WhatsApp usage patterns and prediction of demographic characteristics without access to message content. Demographic Research, 39 (22), 647–670.

Skinner, E., Kindermann, T. A., Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (2009). Engagement as an organizational construct in the dynamics of motivational development. In K. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 223–245). Erlbaum.

Statista. (2021). Retrieved Dec 8, 2021 from https://www.statista.com/statistics/258749/most-popular-global-mobile-messenger-apps/ . Accessed 8 Dec 2021.

Sun, Z., Lin, C.-H., Wu, M., Zhou, J., & Luo, L. (2018). A tale of two communication tools: Discussion forum and mobile instant-messaging apps in collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49 (2), 248–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12571

Tang, Y., & Hew, K. F. (2017). Is mobile instant messaging (MIM) useful in education? Examining its technological, pedagogical, and social affordances. Educational Research Review, 21 , 85–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.05.001

Tang, Y., & Hew, K. F. (2019). Examining the utility and usability of mobile instant messaging in a graduate-level course: A usefulness theoretical perspective. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology . https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4571

Tang, Y., & Hew, K. F. (2020). Does mobile instant messaging facilitate social presence in online communication? A two-stage study of higher education students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17 (1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00188-0

Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of college attrition . University of Chicago Press.

Tu, C. H., & McIsaac, M. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16 (3), 131–150.

Tu, C., McIsaac, M. S., Sujo-Montes, L. E., & Armfield, S. (2014). Building mobile social presence for U-learning. In F. Neto (Ed.), Technology platform innovations and forthcoming trends in Ubiquitous learning (pp. 77–93). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-4542-4.ch005 .

Unuth, N. (2020). Why whatsapp is so popular? LifeWire. Retrieved Dec 8, 2021 from https://www.lifewire.com/reasons-why-whatsapp-is-popular-3426372 .

Walser, T. M. (2014). Quasi-experiments in schools: The case for historical cohort control groups. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 19 , Article 6. https://doi.org/10.7275/17hj-1k58

Wang, Y., Fang, W.-C., Han, J., & Chen, N.-S. (2016). Exploring the affordances of WeChat for facilitating teaching, social and cognitive presence in semi-synchronous language exchange. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology . https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2640

Wang, Z., Chen, L., & Anderson, T. (2014). A framework for interaction and cognitive engagement in connectivist learning contexts. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15 (2), 121–141.

Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Schiefele, U., Roeser, R. W., & Davis-Kean, P. (2006). Development of achievement motivation. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 933–1002). Wiley.

Xie, K., & Ke, F. (2011). The role of students’ motivation in peer-moderated asynchronous online discussions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42 (6), 916–930.

Xu, B., Chen, N.-S., & Chen, G. (2020). Effects of teacher role on student engagement in WeChat-based online discussion learning. Computers & Education . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103956

Xue, S., & Churchill, D. (2019). A review of empirical studies of affordances and development of a framework for educational adoption of mobile social media. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67 (5), 1231–1257.

Zhang, Z., & Xue, Y. (2015). An investigation of how Chinese university students use social software for learning purposes. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186 , 70–78.

Zhu, E. (2006). Interaction and cognitive engagement: An analysis of four asynchronous online discussions. Instructional Science, 34 (6), 451–480.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank teachers and students who have made valuable contributions to this study.

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Education, Southwest University, 2 Tiansheng Road, Beibei, Chongqing, China

Ying Tang & Khe Foon Hew

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

YT conceived and designed the study, collected the data, performed the data analysis, drafted the manuscript, and critically revised the paper. KFH conceived and designed the study and critically revised the paper. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ying Tang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Tang, Y., Hew, K.F. Effects of using mobile instant messaging on student behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement: a quasi-experimental study. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 19 , 3 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00306-6

Download citation

Received : 26 May 2021

Accepted : 09 November 2021

Published : 11 January 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00306-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Mobile instant messaging
Asynchronous online discussion
Higher education
Quasi-experimental

Home — Essay Samples — Information Science and Technology — Text Messaging — Instant Messaging In A Business Performance

Instant Messaging in a Business Performance

Categories: Text Messaging

About this sample

Words: 885 |

Published: Jul 30, 2019

Words: 885 | Pages: 2 | 5 min read

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

Expert in: Sociology Information Science and Technology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

5 pages / 2618 words

2 pages / 835 words

3 pages / 1668 words

2 pages / 1062 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Text Messaging

Texting while driving has become a widespread issue in modern society, with countless individuals engaging in this dangerous behavior on a daily basis. The act of texting while driving poses significant risks to both the driver [...]

New communication methods have brought a change to how people are working, this includes the ways in which they work in and how they work together for instance, the facilities used by the employees and the technology being used [...]

In Michaela Cullington’sarticle “Does texting affect writing?” she talks about how texting can affect peoples writing skills. She talks about both sides of the argument some people think that it has negative effects and another [...]

With the passage of time, educators and parents have focused on literacy skills such as reading writing, and spelling and have worked very hard on developing these abilities for their children. Therefore, they are not happy with [...]

The use of self-balancing robots has become quite extensive in the modern world and they form the basis of numerous applications. The main reason why this robot has gained fame is that it is fundamentally based on the ideology [...]

Nick Bostrom in his book “Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies” asks what will happen once we manage to build computers that are smarter than us, including what we need to do, how it is going to work, and why it has to [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

IELTS Luminary - Free Tips, Strategies, eBooks and Detailed Essay Feedback . Overall, this is the best free IELTS and other test prep website.

Communication Through Text Messaging Is Short And Basic - IELTS Task 2 Band 9 Essay

Communication through text messaging and other instant forms of online communication is short and basic. Some people think this will be the death of grammar and spelling - IELTS Task 2 Band 9 Sample Essay

Get your personalised IELTS Essay Feedback from a former examiner

Download IELTS eBooks , get everything you need to achieve a high band score

Model Essay 1

The rise of instant messaging has sparked debates about its impact on language quality, with some fearing it signals the demise of traditional grammar and spelling. This essay disagrees with that perspective, arguing that while informal communication styles have become prevalent, they have not eradicated the fundamental aspects of language. The discussion will focus on the adaptability of language and the continued value of formal writing skills.

Text messaging and digital communication often employ a shorthand that omits traditional grammatical structures, leading to concerns about language degradation. However, the essence of communication—conveying meaning effectively—remains intact. Linguistic evolution is not a new phenomenon; just as Latin transformed into multiple Romance languages, informal digital communications represent another evolving phase, not a decline. Furthermore, the context-driven nature of language use means that while people may use abbreviations in casual texts, they can switch to more formal language when necessary, such as in academic or professional settings. This code-switching ability is a testament to the flexibility and resilience of language skills among modern communicators, demonstrating adaptability across different contexts and purposes.

Moreover, the educational system continues to uphold standard language rules, ensuring that formal writing and traditional grammar are not lost. Schools and universities still require essays, research papers, and exams to adhere to conventional language standards. This educational rigor helps maintain a balance between evolving informal communication and enduring formal standards. Additionally, professional environments demand high standards of communication, further preserving the structure and richness of the English language. In these settings, precise language is crucial for clarity and effectiveness, reinforcing the importance of traditional grammar and spelling. The influence of digital shorthand is thus confined to casual interactions, with formal communication remaining a stronghold of traditional grammar and spelling, showcasing the coexistence of both forms within society, and highlighting the ability to distinguish between contexts.

In conclusion, despite the prevalence of abbreviated communication forms, the fundamental structures of language persist through educational and professional standards. Language adapts and evolves without losing its core functions, ensuring that both informal and formal communications have their place in the linguistic landscape of modern society.

Model Essay 2

As instant messaging and other digital forms of communication dominate our daily interactions, concerns arise regarding their detrimental impact on traditional grammar and spelling. This essay fully supports the view that these modern communication methods are contributing to the degradation of language standards. It will elaborate on how the brevity and informality inherent in these platforms compromise grammatical rigor and spelling accuracy, and discuss the long-term implications for linguistic proficiency.

The pervasive use of text messaging and online communication platforms encourages a simplified language form that often neglects grammatical rules and proper spelling. This shift is particularly evident among younger generations who have grown accustomed to an abbreviated form of writing. Such habits are not confined to personal communication but have started to permeate educational and professional domains. As a result, there is a noticeable decline in the ability to write with the complexity and precision required for academic and professional success. The frequent use of emojis, acronyms, and incomplete sentences disrupts the learning and consistent application of correct grammar and spelling, fostering a culture of linguistic complacency.

Furthermore, the immediacy and convenience of digital communication tools have led to an undervaluing of traditional writing skills. The need for quick responses often prioritizes speed over accuracy, sidelining the meticulous attention to language details that was once standard. This erosion of language norms is increasingly visible in the workplace and educational outputs, where formal reports and assignments now often contain colloquialisms and errors once deemed unacceptable. Without rigorous interventions, this trend might render traditional grammar and spelling relics of the past, compromising our ability to communicate effectively and professionally in writing, and diminishing the richness of the English language.

In conclusion, the rapid adoption of instant messaging and digital communication is undeniably undermining the integrity of grammar and spelling. As these informal practices infiltrate more formal contexts, they diminish our linguistic capacity, threatening the future of clear and effective written communication. It is crucial to address these challenges to preserve the depth and clarity that characterize proficient language use.

Task 2 Essays

Best Practices for Instant Messaging at Work

by Dustin York

Summary .

The benefits of instant messaging tools like Slack, Microsoft Teams, and Zoom have become quickly obvious. There’s just one problem: We’re still figuring out how to properly, and professionally, communicate via IM. Organizations should begin to adopt best practices, such as carefully choosing which systems to use, ideally ones already favored by employees; setting ground rules around personal messages; respecting work-life balance by creating norms around appropriate response times; and encouraging face-to-face communication as well.

In these difficult times, we’ve made a number of our coronavirus articles free for all readers. To get all of HBR’s content delivered to your inbox, sign up for the Daily Alert newsletter.

“I’ll Slack you.” In workplaces around the world, the name of the popular online messaging system has become a verb, just like Google. Slack has been enthusiastically integrated into the day-to-day functions of legacy corporations and burgeoning startups: The company claims that, in 2019, it hosted 10+ million daily users . It has competitors, too, including Microsoft Teams and Zoom.

Partner Center

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

Publications
Our Methods
Short Reads
Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

How Americans Use Instant Messaging
Part 1. Introduction: The basics of instant messaging

Acknowledgements
Part 2. Patterns of IM use: What IM users do online
Part 3. The IM gap: How different people use IM
Part 4. IM at work: Instant messaging has become a familiar reality in some offices
Part 5. Other ways people use IM
Methodology

How IM works.

Generally, instant messaging is a text-based tool that allows users to conduct conversations online by exchanging short messages in near synchronicity over the internet. Instant messaging, often abbreviated IM, allows users to know which other users are online and connected via a particular instant messaging program, (a feature known as presence), and depending on the system in use, gives details about others buddies’ availability.

IM software programs offer a number of features for users. Buddy lists, or contact lists, and away messages are the most common functions provided by all programs. Other special features include customizable backgrounds, environments, emoticons (symbols that convey the mood of an IM sender), and avatars (images created by the user as a representation of himself that are displayed while the user instant messages with others).

The most popular IM software programs such as AIM, Yahoo! Messenger, and MSN Messenger are mutually exclusive, meaning that users subscribing to a particular IM program can communicate only with instant messengers who use the same software. Contact lists, therefore, are limited to only those users who IM on the same network. In recent years, software developers have created IM programs, such as Trillian, Odigo, and Omni, that facilitate open instant messaging. Subscribers to open instant messaging programs can combine contact lists from different IM programs and communicate with all users.

Originally devised as a way for users to hold real-time conversations online, instant messaging software programs have expanded their repertoire to include file-sharing, playing games, streaming audio and video, avatar management, and sending text messages to cell phones.

Who uses IM.

The Pew Internet & American Life Project Tracking Survey of May-June 2004 finds that 42% of internet users have ever instant messaged. Of these 53 million American adults, 12% use IM on a typical day. 2

Online men and women use IM in equal proportion. Just over a third of each group have IM-ed. This is consistent with previous readings of IM use among genders.

In general, younger Americans tend to be the biggest IM-ers. Nearly two-thirds (62%) of Generation Y (18-27 year olds) internet users have sent instant messages, and 20% do it on a typical day. This reading is confirmed by other patterns found in a survey the Project conducted in February 2004. Americans with less than a high school degree compared to those with more education use IM in greatest proportion (64%). Although this pattern is directly opposite typical readings about internet application adoption and education, it confirms the findings that more young Americans, including students still in college, are using instant messaging.

While employment status and salary level are factors influencing whether people use the internet or not, the February 2004 survey data reveals that among internet users, people from households with modest incomes find IM appealing. Nearly half (49%) of the internet users with a household income of less than $30,000 use IM. Again, this is probably tied to age, as young adults starting their work lives do not necessarily earn high incomes.

Frequent internet users are likely IM-ers. Forty-three percent of internet users who go online daily have instant messaged. At the same time, years of internet experience seems to have little bearing on likelihood of IM-ing. This is a break with the pattern that Project surveys show in many other internet activities. Usually, experience is a strong predictor of whether someone does something online – including buying goods, listening to music, seeking information from government web sites, and banking online.

comScore Media Metrix data show the most popular applications.

AOL is a strong presence in the IM world, with its instant message service for subscribers and its free AOL Instant Messenger (AIM) and ICQ programs adding up to a dominant market presence, according to the most recent comScore data. At work places, Yahoo! Messenger is the single most popular application.

During a summer month, when most students are not at school, half of college students used IM applications.

July data on IM users and the most popular applications

There is notable variance among the users of different IM applications about the amount of time they spend online and the volume of IM-ers who use the applications on a typical day. Those who use Yahoo! Messenger spent more time during the month on IM – 423.7 minutes – than those who use other services. This might be the case because these IM users are the most likely to have an instant message application running while they are at work.

The people who use MSN Messenger are the least likely to be online and the spent the least amount of time with the application running on their computers during the month.

These figures were obtained from the May-June 2004 Tracking Survey. The remaining figures contained in this report come from the February 2004 Tracking Survey. ↩

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

Business & Workplace
Platforms & Services

A look at small businesses in the U.S.

A look at black-owned businesses in the u.s., 2023 saw some of the biggest, hardest-fought labor disputes in recent decades, do you tip more or less often than the average american, diversity, equity and inclusion in the workplace, most popular.

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 | Media Inquiries

Research Topics

Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan, nonadvocacy fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It does not take policy positions. The Center conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, computational social science research and other data-driven research. Pew Research Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts , its primary funder.

The Effects of Text Messaging and Instant Messaging on Literacy

August 2013
English Studies 95(4):582-602
95(4):582-602

Radboud University

Discover the world's research

25+ million members
160+ million publication pages
2.3+ billion citations

Hairunnisa Mohamad Ibrahim
Shaliza Alwi

Marci Prescott-Brown

Burhan Ozdemir

Brian V. Rusk

Paola Pascual-Ferrá
Sara Veronica Hinojos
Marisa Brook

Kristy Winzker

D. Massengill Shaw

Fiona Lyddy

Nenagh Kemp

J COMPUT ASSIST LEAR

Sarah De Jonge
Recruit researchers
Join for free
Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

6.3: Text, Instant Message, and Direct Message

Texts sent over Short Message Service (SMS) have been a convenient way to connect with others since the early 2000s. At first, many skeptics didn’t think the practice would catch on. English teachers who had struggled over and over to get their students to write anything never expected that those same students would choose to write when they could just phone someone.

Those English teachers were wrong.

In fact, so many users preferred text over speech that software developers began building their own versions of text-based communication. These messaging technologies operated over the internet rather than over SMS channels. Communication apps like Slack, WhatsApp, iMessage, and WeChat offer Instant Messages (IMs) as their primary feature. Other social media apps like Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, and Messenger offer Direct Messages (DMs) as a side feature. Even the text function on many Smartphones now defaults to Multimedia Message Service (MMS) as a way of trying to keep up software developers. Because MMS is web-based, texts allow a rich set of communication functions such as real-time groupchats and image sharing.

Expectations around the appropriate use of texts, IMs, and DMs is subject to change as the technology and social use of that technology evolves. For instance, at the time that this is being written, IM apps like Slack are a standard communication channel in professional organizations. The expression “sliding into someone’s DMs,” on the other hand, carries a much more personal–and unprofessional–implication. For this reason, you must always consider your audience and context before choosing your words. Put careful thought into choosing the appropriate channel as part of shaping your message.

Tips for Effective Messaging:

Know your recipient. “% off 1k for Z???” might make sense to a close co-worker, but if you are texting your supervisor, it looks clearer and more respectful to type out, “What percentage discount does Zayneb get on a $1K order?”
Avoid emojis. Tiny images in texts can create an adorable, hilarious, and even economical message. However, emojis can easily be misinterpreted. Even if their meaning is clear, emojis are informal signs in communication and are better reserved for social messages or a personal audience.
Re-read before clicking “send.” Texts, IMs, and DMs are designed to get us messaging very quickly. That can be a trap. There is no tone of voice or facial expression with these channels, so the intentions behind our word choices are at a higher risk of getting lost along the way. Writing a text, IM, or DM is no different from any other writing process. Think first about what you want to say, draft it, leave it for a minute or so, then re-read it, edit it, and only then hit send. It may feel like a lot of work, but once you hit send, you can’t take it back!
Use with restraint. Texting is a tool that is easily over-used when we mix professional communication with a social technology. We may get a spike of “feel-good” dopamine in our brains when we hear the “ding!” of a message notification, but you should only use message when you need to. Be careful not to cross boundaries by messaging too often or at inappropriate times of day or night.
Unplug yourself once in awhile. Do you feel constantly connected? Do you feel lost or left out if you don’t have your cell phone and cannot connect to people, even for fifteen minutes? Fear of missing out (FOMO) is is real. It’s a more powerful cultural force than ever before. Remember, protecting your personal space and peace of mind is a crucial part of mental health.
Don’t text and drive. Research shows that the likelihood of an accident increases dramatically if the driver is texting behind the wheel (Houston Chronicle, 2009). Being in an accident while conducting company business would reflect poorly on your judgment as well as on your employer ( Business Communication for Success , 2015, 9.1) .

Key Takeaway

i. How old were you when you got your first mobile phone? ii. When did you send your first text? iii. How many texts do you send per day, on average, now? iv. How many times do you speak on the phone with the same device, on average, throughout your day? If you call (or receive calls) far less than text, why do you think that is? v. Is the first thing you look at when you wake up in the morning your smartphone notifications, and are they the last thing you look at before you go to sleep at night? If so, why? If not, why do you think it is for so many people? vi. Do you think it’s fair to say that your smartphone use can be characterized as an addiction? If so, how is it impeding you from living a more healthy and fulfilling life? Is there anything you are prepared to do about it? If not, do you see it as a problem for people around you? Do you challenge them on it? Do you find it a challenge to discipline yourself to prevent it from being an addiction in your case?

2. Identify three ways that you must change your texting and IM behaviour in professional—rather than purely social—contexts.

6.3: Text, Instant Message, and Direct Message Copyright © 2022 by John Corr; Grant Coleman; Betti Sheldrick; and Scott Bunyan is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

IMAGES

Advantage and Disadvantage Instant Messaging and Wikis Essay Example
Writing Instant Messages
Effective Use of Email, Instant Messaging and Text Messaging in
Solved 2. Workplace Messaging and Texting Instant messaging
⇉A Study on Instant Messaging and Workplace Interruption Essay Example
PPT

VIDEO

IELTS Essay writing sample
Paragraphs: Structure & Types| Instant Essay for Exam Success| English-Part-II #trending #trb #viral
How to make iMessage stories
IELTS Essay 5 Social media platforms allows people to vent their frustrations & complaints publicly
Dialogue Preparation For Exam
Instant Messaging Etiquette

COMMENTS

Instant Messaging Essay
Instant Messaging Essay. Instant messaging is a tool used by a vast majority of Internet users. This new tools has some advantages and some disadvantages. IM is used a lot of the time in education. It's used for recruiting and admissions, student-faculty communications, library consultations, group projects, and immediate feedback, and ...
Impact of Instant Messaging on Society
Most of the instant messenger has fundamental functions that include instant messages, file-sharing, voice conversations, sounds and streaming content. Instant messages allow two or more online parties to engage in correspondence. File-sharing allows people to share files with their peers by sending the files directly through IM windows.
Perceived Positive and Negative Effects of Instant Messaging on
The perceived negative effects of IM are as follows: Lack of organization: Instant messages are typically written in one "paragraph" that can contain unrelated ideas. This unorganized style is also apparent in academic writing, as noted by one student: "On my papers, I tend to have really bad organization—my thoughts are all spread out ...
Instant messaging
instant messaging (IM), form of text-based communication in which two people participate in a conversation over their computers or smartphones via an Internet -based chat room or application. Instant messaging (IM) platforms, generally referred to as messaging services or apps, often monitor for users' online presence and show an indication ...
Communication in Instant Messengers
Communication in Instant Messengers Essay. Exclusively available on IvyPanda®. The present research provides really interesting insights into the nature of human communication through such digital resources as instant messengers. Some note that face-to-face communication is richer due to non-verbal communication, and digital communication is ...
Effects of using mobile instant messaging on student behavioral
Mobile instant messaging (MIM) has become the most popular means for young people to communicate. MIM apps typically come with a myriad of features that educators may leverage to increase student learning. However, it remains poorly understood to what extent and in what aspect MIM can facilitate student engagement. We address the gap by comparing the effects of using MIM and asynchronous ...
Instant Messaging in a Business Performance
Instant Messaging (IM), in contrast, has become of great interest to the modern community because it is a tool that successfully supports informal communication. The modern workplace is inherently collaborative, and this collaboration relies on effective communication among co-workers. According to Woodard she noted that with the introduction ...
Instant Messaging Essay Samples
Information Technology Instant Messaging Internet. Major Uses of the Internet Essay Example. 465 words 2 pages. E-mail is private and goes from one user to another. Instant messaging (such as AIM or ICQ) Is similar to email, but allows two or more people to chat to each other much faster.
Communication Through Text Messaging Is Short And Basic
Explore how "Communication through text messaging and other instant forms of online communication is short and basic" impacts language in our detailed IELTS Band 9 sample essays. Uncover strategies to enhance your writing skills, maintain traditional grammar, and excel in crafting compelling, high-scoring essays. Perfect your approach to the IELTS writing section and impress examiners with ...
Instant messaging Essay
Instant messaging Essay. Instant messaging has revolutionized the way people communicate. It has become a reliable, quick, and convenient way to stay connected across the globe. This essay will explore the impact of instant messaging on communication, its effects on relationships, and its implications for our digital future. ...
PDF Introduction to Instant Messaging
Instant messaging (IM) is an Internet-based protocol application that allows one-to-one communication between users employing a variety of devices. The most popular form of IM is chatting, where short, text-based messages are exchanged among computers. With the advent of technologies such as Wireless Application Protocol (WAP) and the ...
Instant messaging Essays
Final Essay 1782 Words | 8 Pages. Introduction This is the first email that has changed the message that modern society conveys on computers, allowing people to send messages any day or night. Then it's instant messaging to help people communicate with other people, like SMS (short messaging service).
The Rise of Instant Messaging for Communication
The Rise of Instant Messaging for Communication. Decent Essays. 612 Words. 2 Pages. Open Document. Instant messaging (IM) is a rapid and on the rise communications medium trendy with both company and home users. From its commencement as easy peer-to-peer conversation service, instant messaging has developed to grow to be a staple mode of ...
Best Practices for Instant Messaging at Work
Best Practices for Instant Messaging at Work. Companies need ground rules around communication tools like Slack. Summary. The benefits of instant messaging tools like Slack, Microsoft Teams, and ...
Part 1. Introduction: The basics of instant messaging
The Pew Internet & American Life Project Tracking Survey of May-June 2004 finds that 42% of internet users have ever instant messaged. Of these 53 million American adults, 12% use IM on a typical day. 2. Online men and women use IM in equal proportion. Just over a third of each group have IM-ed.
The Effects of Text Messaging and Instant Messaging on Literacy
text messaging and instant messaging (IM or IMing) among the younger generations due to increased ownership of mobile phones and personal computers, even by school- aged children.
6.3: Text, Instant Message, and Direct Message
4.7 Writing Essays: Style, Strategy, and Structure. 4.7.1 The Introductory Paragraph; 4.7.2 The Body Paragraphs; 4.7.3 The Conclusion; 4.7.4 Essay Writing Tips; ... 6.3: Text, Instant Message, and Direct Message Texts sent over Short Message Service (SMS) have been a convenient way to connect with others since the early 2000s. At first, many ...
Essay: The Use Of Instant Messaging
This page of the essay has 568 words. Download the full version above. Instant Messaging is the most-used form of communication within society today. However, studies have shown that the new application, Snapchat, has rapidly been rising in numbers regarding users and every day usage. The purpose of this study was to look at the nature of ...
PDF David Craig's Research Essay (MLA Style)
Instant messaging allows two individuals who are separated by any distance to engage in real-time, written communication. Although IMing relies on the written word to transmit meaning, many messagers disregard standard writing conventions. For. Handbook, ed. (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2008) Name, instructor, course, and date aligned at ...
The Use of Online Messaging Apps Essay
The Use of Online Messaging Apps Essay. Online messaging apps are those apps which allow one to send and receive a message instantly. Popular messaging apps include Telegram, WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, Google Chats, WeChat and Viber. They come with multiple features like location sharing, contact sharing, photo sharing, document sharing, and ...
Young People's Everyday literacies: The Language Features of
of everyday literacy. Using an inductive approach developed from grounded theory, we ana. lyzed a 32,000-word corpus of college students' Instant Messaging (IM) exchanges. Through. our analysis of this corpus, we identify a fifteen-item taxonomy of IM language features and.