Personal Report of Communication Apprehension Scale–Dyadic Subscale


5–Strongly agree
3–Neither agree nor disagree
1–Strongly disagree

1. While participating in a conversation with a new acquaintance, I feel very nervous.
2. I have no fear of speaking up in conversations. (R)
3. Ordinarily I am very tense and nervous in conversations.
4. Ordinarily I am very calm and relaxed in conversations. (R)
5. While conversing with a new acquaintance, I feel very relaxed.
6. I’m afraid to speak up in conversations. (R)
Note. (R) Items reverse coded. 

Spanish Version
Response set:
5–Estoy muy de acuerdo
4–Estoy de acuerdo
3–No estoy de acuerdo ni en desacuerdo
2–Estoy en desacuerdo
1–Estoy muy en desacuerdo

1. Cuando converso con alguien a quien acabo de conocer, me siento muy nervioso.
2. No siento ningún temor de participar en las conversaciones. (R)
3. Habitualmente, me siento muy tenso y nervioso durante las conversaciones.
4. Habitualmente, me siento calmado y relajado durante las conversaciones. (R)
5. Cuando converso con alguien a quien acabo de conocer, me siento relajado.
6. Temo expresar mi opinión durante las conversaciones en general. (R)

Spanish and English Measures Published In:

Guntzviller, L. M., Jensen, J. D., King, A. J., & Davis, L. A. (2011). The foreign language anxiety in a medical office scale: Developing and validating a measurement tool for Spanish-speaking individuals. Journal of Health Communication, 16, 849-869. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2011.561917

Description on p. 854:

“McCroskey, Beatty, and colleagues (1985) developed the PRCA-24 as a trait-based measure to measure communication apprehension in the four general communication situations: public speaking, group interactions, meetings, and dyadic interactions. Given that FLAMOS specifically refers to interpersonal interactions, the six-item interpersonal subscale was used to measure communication apprehension between dyads (see Appendix A). Participants answered each question on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Inconsistent with previous research, the scale did not exhibit adequate internal reliability (Cronbach’s α =.55). A principal components factoring with varimax rotation revealed that the three positively worded items and the three negatively worded items loaded on two separate factors. It is possible that when translated into Spanish, the negatively worded items did not represent the same construct to participants as the positively worded items. Thus, the three positively worded items were averaged to create a variable,
which is henceforth labeled communication apprehension. The three items did not show good internal reliability (Cronbach’s α = .67), but were retained to represent the communication apprehension construct.”