Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION
INTRODUCTION
Communication is the sharing of information through the use of signs and symbols. It
involves sending, receiving, coding, decoding, and interpreting meaning. It permeates all
levels of human interactions. Communication can be analysed at different levels of interaction.
These are:
Intrapersonal communication (how individuals communicate)
Interpersonal communication (how two individuals interact and ultimately influence
the other)
Group communication (the dynamics of team communication)
Organizational communication (the formal and informal structures required for effective communication in organizations)
Chapter 02.indd 33
Theories establish a basis for action. They can predict the direction
of communication.
Most theories have been derived from practice. A theory is an explanation of reality. Theories are to be viewed as accumulated experiences
and are to be supplemented with practice.
COUNTERPOINT
POINT
Many fields stress the importance of using communication theory to understand the nuances
of human behaviour. For example, empirically, the uses of perspectives of applied communication (applied communication is the relationship between communication theory and
its application in real life) are tested to prove behaviour changes as a result of a particular
communication campaign. Critical studies are also conducted to understand the basis of a
communication action.
6/7/2016 12:44:41 PM
34
This chapter briefly introduces the origins and highlights of communication theories
and demonstrates their relevance to the real world. The chapter does not seek to provide an exhaustive account of the development of communication theory. Only theories
that are relevant to organizational contexts have been discussed. Language, meaning, and
messages are the central themes in communication theory and are also the primary focus
of this chapter.
Chapter 02.indd 34
6/7/2016 12:44:41 PM
35
ATTRIBUTION THEORY
The attribution theory was first proposed by F. Heider3 and modified by Jones, Kannouse,
Kelley, Nisbett, Valins, and Weiner as a theoretical framework.4 The core essence of the theory
is that people attribute the results of their (or others) actions to certain internal and external
causes. Internal causes are the causes intrinsic to the person, such as their attitude, motivation, traits, or persona. External attribution is inherent in the situation. Thus, people can
choose to blame others or themselves for their misfortune and failures, or they can choose to
blame the situation they are in. People can adopt defensive or offensive strategies when faced
with a failure or loss. They can defend themselves against a perceived personal attack by
others, or they can launch an offensive against them. People also have a tendency to absolve
themselves of blame or guilt while blaming others.
Exhibit 2.1 explains this theory along with the interpersonal semantics used with reasoning. In communication, the language of attribution is important to understanding the
motivation of people. Weak phrases reveal a lack of confidence (e.g., I am weak in this subject) while a strong phrase (e.g., the weather played truant) implies that the person
is self-confident.
ARGUMENTATION THEORY
According to van Eemeren, Grootendorst, and Snoeck Henkemans5, argumentation is defined
as a verbal and social activity of reason aimed at increasing (or decreasing) the acceptability
of a controversial standpoint for the listener or reader, by putting forward a constellation of
propositions intended to justify (or refute) the standpoint before a rational judge.
This is a non-cognitive and non-truth conditional semantic theory that takes linguistic
utterances as its domain, especially the use of but and even. These utterances are used
either as premises or conclusions in arguments. This theory generally precludes the cognitive processes of decoding and inference that help to translate a mental proposition to a fully
propositional representation.
The argumentation theory describes how people argue (see Exhibit 2.2). It describes an
argument as movement from accepted data through a warrant to a claim. Thus the three
main elements of an argument are: data, warrant, and claim. The dependent construct is the
claim or the conclusion, and the main independent constructs are the data (facts and opinions) and the warrant (advancement of data). These lead to a claim or a conclusion.
Reaction 1
Event
Blame lack
of effort,
will, etc.
Loss
Misfortune
Failure
Reaction 2
Blame others
Blame situation
Blame luck/chance
Chapter 02.indd 35
I am too weak in
the subject
I did not try
hard enough
I lack the social skills
to network effectively
Exhibit 2.1
An Illustration Depicting
Attribution Theory in Action
6/7/2016 12:44:42 PM
36
Exhibit 2.2
The Process of Argumentation
Opening
Confrontation
Argumentation
Concluding
The warrant is described as the leap that advances data into a claim. Warrant, according
to Toulmin, is incidental and explanatory, its task being simply to register explicitly the
legitimacy of the step involved and to refer it back to the larger class of steps whose legitimacy is being proposed.6 Experts suggest three additional components: backing, rebuttal,
and qualifier. Backing is the evidence or support for assumptions in the warrant. Rebuttal
recognizes the conditions under which the claim will not be true. And finally, the qualifier is
the probability or level of confidence of the claim.
Van Eemeren and R. Grootendorst identify various stages of argumentative dialogue:
Confrontation: Confrontation is the explanation of the problem, the type of disagreement between the opposing parties.
Opening: Opening is the presentation of evidence, interpretations, and rules.
Argumentation: Argumentation is the substantiation of the problem, further clarification, interpretation, and association with events.
Conclusion: The concluding part includes adhering to limitations of time and conditions imposed by the arbiter, agreement on the issue, and a desire to carry it forward.
Schellens explains three types of arguments:7
Regularity-based argumentation: Regularity-based argumentation is used in support
of a descriptive statement about something that is happening in the present or future,
or has happened in the past. The proposition can be factual or descriptive and is based
on events that have occurred with regularity. For example, the argument that we must
support the anti-corruption movement as it is a scourge that destroys a country.
Rule-based argumentation: Rule-based argumentation is used in support of a normative statement about the value of a situation or process. Arguments are given for the
validity or invalidity of rules and procedures or are based on norms about certain situations or processes. For example, the argument that office norms state that all speakers
must stay at the guest house.
Pragmatic argumentation: Pragmatic argumentation is used in support of promoting
desired behaviour. A position on the desirability of a given action, behaviour, or measure
is advocated on the basis of its merits and demerits. For example, the argument that you
must resign if you feel humiliated at the office.
To summarize, it would be right to say that argumentation is a verbal activity, most often
in simple language. Though people use words and sentences to argue, state, deny, and explain,
non-verbal communication plays an important part too. It is also worthwhile to remember
that argumentation is an activity of reason and is mostly a social activity, directed at other people.
It is always related to a standpoint. Merely having a difference of opinion is not sufficient for
Chapter 02.indd 36
6/7/2016 12:44:42 PM
37
CLASSICAL RHETORIC
Classical rhetoric combines the theories of argumentation as well as persuasion. The works of
three ancient Greek philosophers, Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates, constitute the elements of the
classical theory. These philosophers recognized that language was an influential tool and that
the primary political skill of the people in those times lay in effective oratory and persuasion.
The classical rhetoric theory provides a theory of composition and communication for
both oral and written discourse as well as persuasion. The principles of rhetoric include
invention, arrangement, syllogistic logic, and proof through ethos, logos, and pathos. These
concepts have been refined as well as redefined in tune with changing social as well as
business milieus.
Ethos is the use of an appeal to credibility by the speaker. The speakers credibility is
reflected in a number of ways such as age, experience, status, position, and reputation. The
acceptability of the speakers ideas and influence is perceived to be more if the audience
believes that the speaker has a high credibility. An effective way to create ethos in a short
period of time is by building a rapport and highlighting ones achievements to the audience.
Conversely, a good speaker may lose ethos with the audience merely by a disparate remark,
condescension, and insulting behaviour.
Pathos is the use of emotional appeal to influence the audience. Emotions may range from
fear to love. Speakers use similes, metaphors, and adjectives to stimulate the senses of the
audience. It is generally perceived that emotional appeals affect the right brain of the audience, who would like to take a balanced approach to decisions.
Logos is the use of logical appeal in an argument. Facts, figures, graphs, charts, examples, illustrations, evidence, and statistics are presented to the audience to influence their
left brain. Effective use of logos helps make a judicious decision; it also positively affects the
speakers ethos.
Chapter 02.indd 37
6/7/2016 12:44:42 PM
38
Contagion theory postulates that people are influenced by group behaviour and tend to act and behave in ways similar to their group members.
They feel and express emotions almost mirroring those of the group.
The basic principles of rhetoric are that rhetoric considers both form as well as content as
important components of influence, and the emotional impact is as important as the content.
The former addresses not only the how of communication, but also the what.
CONTAGION THEORY
Derived from emotional contagion, contagion theory postulates that people are influenced by
group behaviour and tend to act and behave in ways similar to those of their group members.
They feel and express emotions almost mirroring those of the group. Thus body language
characteristics such as facial expressions, posture, and gestures are synchronized to match
with group members.
Contagion happens in situations involving crowd fear, disgust, negotiation, and persuasion.
The theory thus explains attitudes and behaviours of members in networks to which they
are linked. Contagion theory is related to a number of theories that relate in some way to the
social construction process, such as structurational theory, symbolic interaction, gate keeping,
network theory and analysis, and hypodermic needle theory. Factors such as frequency of
contact, multiplicity of contact situations, strength of the relationship, and asymmetry can
shape the extent to which others influence individuals in their networks.
Networks are increasing in importance and, therefore, the relationships between members and networks can be explained by these theories. Applications are very broad, since
organizations, governments, and certain interest groups all depend on networks.
Organizational employees bound by a common network may, for instance, share similar
attitudes towards recently introduced computerized access systems for attendance and security.
Chapter 02.indd 38
6/7/2016 12:44:42 PM
39
Action:
Purchase of a
latest gizmo
Violation:
Of the belief that
it is Wi-fi-enabled
Change in attitude or
change in behaviour
Chapter 02.indd 39
Exhibit 2.3
The Process of DissonanceAn
Illustration
Managing dissonance
by any of the following ways:
Consoling self by rationalizing that Wi-fi
can be accessed from elsewhere
Focusing on the other strengths of the
gadget
Getting rid of the gizmo and buying
another
6/7/2016 12:44:43 PM
40
central route to persuasion, that is, being persuaded by the actual content of the message.
Conversely, dull, unenthusiastic, and uninterested audiences may be persuaded by indirect
means or the peripheral route to persuasion, namely, being persuaded by factors not
pertaining to the actual content of the message. Several factors influence the thought process
of the recipient:
Involvement of the audience: A highly involved audience will process the message
centrally and act accordingly.
Ability of the audience to comprehend the message: Words incomprehensible to the
audience will not enable them to centrally process the message. Persuaders would then
need to apply peripheral appeals.
Motivation of the audience: A highly motivated audience will support the message/
messenger much more than a less motivated one.
The ELM theory asserts that there two routes to persuasion; in reality, these are degrees
of persuasion. At times the central route of persuasion may not yield resultsthe participant
may be indifferent, unhappy, and dissatisfied. In that case, the alternate persuasion route may
have to be adopted. It includes aspects such as authority, liking, reciprocity, and so on. Both
the routes require some processing of thoughts by the intended recipient Thus listeners can
engage in both central processing as well as peripheral processing simultaneously.
ENACTMENT THEORY
Organizations are composed of complex systems where individuals interact in many
ways. These interactions are often unplanned. Various events occur at different levels in
the organization; these constitute enactments at the macro as well as micro level, where
ideas and thoughts intersect, assemble, and influence each other to enable organizational
learning, knowledge-sharing, innovation, and change. According to Karl Weick, enactment has results because people are conscious about initiating, building, and maintaining
relationships.10
Enactment theory provides a rationale for differentiating between routine behaviour and
scripted behaviour. Moment-to-moment interactions influence each other to generate novel
outcomes. Theorists suggest that these exchanges by individuals can be coded into discrete
information packets and that each of these discrete information sets have a beginning, middle, and end. Each packet may have elements of both verbal and non-verbal communication,
with symbols and affective content.
As individuals in organizations move from self-centered activity to group-focused activities to garner collective interest, they behave in either of the following ways with respect
to an espoused course of action: initiating, accepting, negotiating, questioning/synthesizing,
rejecting, imitating, or ignoring/defecting.
Initiating: Initiating might involve simple acts of communication such as sharing information, advocating action, or undertaking a discussion.
Accepting: Accepting participants may accept the enactment of another by agreeing
to an idea or certain points of discussion. It implies acknowledgment and validation.
It is essentially a passive act, where the participant accepts the idea and there is tacit
knowledge-sharing.
Negotiating: Negotiating involves participants reaching a compromise when there is
a disagreement. This could be with respect to the terms and conditions of work, team
performance, and so on.
Questioning/Synthesizing: Participants may seek answers to questions that they put
forward to clarify other micro-enactments. They may question assumptions, beliefs,
ideas, and notions. This approach is akin to transformational learning.
Chapter 02.indd 40
6/7/2016 12:44:43 PM
41
Rejecting: Participants may reject micro-enactments. They may refuse to agree to proposals
and ideas, and may refute certain actions. Even if one participant in a team disagrees on
some point, it can lead to poor team performance and conflict.
FRAMING
Framing means exercising control over content that has to be communicated. Accordingly,
content is framed keeping in mind the desired interpretations. It is akin to packaging wherein
certain aspects of the content are deliberately projected to the exclusion of others. The concept is generally attributed to the work of Erving Goffman.11 Framing consciously seeks to
draw the attention of the audience towards a particular rhetoric and its meaning embedded
in a particular sociological, organizational, or even political context. It is similar to setting an
agenda for others to get inspired and construct meanings from. Framing is not a slogan, as a
slogan is rather populist and temporary in nature.
Framing is essentially related to the media. The media selects the news that has to be projected
and frames it around certain core issues, and the audience then interprets what is provided. Thus
the media plays the role of a gatekeeper of information for the general audience. The audience
formulates their perceptions about the event based on the cues provided by the media.
In an organizational context, framing is a skill that leads the audience to consider one
meaning over another. It is a valuable leadership trait. According to G.T. Fairhurst and
R. Star, framing consists of three elements: language, thought, and forethought.12 Language
is the means of expression. It is used to bring alive the message or the rhetoric. Metaphors,
analogies, and similes are ways in which an expression can be made memorable. To use language, people must have thought. Thought emerges from reflection and hindsight. Leaders
must also learn to frame spontaneously in certain circumstances. This requires the skill of
foresight or forethought. They must be able to visualize framing opportunities. For example,
the Green Revolution was anything but a revolution. It was a sustained campaign to boost
agriculture in India. The term War against Terror is similar. These phrases elicit widely
shared images and meanings.
Experts suggest the following ways to improve framing skills:
Metaphor: A metaphor gives an idea a new meaning by comparing it with something else.
Stories (myths and legends): Myths and legends involve framing a subject by recounting an anecdote in a vivid and memorable way. For instance, some managers tell and
retell stories of how teamwork helped pull their organization through in a tough time.
Traditions (rites, rituals, and ceremonies): Traditions are used to define and reinforce
organizational cultural values. An example may be certain activities (some humourous
and some serious) traditionally done during annual strategic planning conferences.
Slogans, jargon, and catchphrases: Slogans and catchphrases are used to frame a subject in a memorable and familiar way.
Artifacts: Artifacts illuminate corporate values through objects that strike a chord with
employees. An example may be a current best-selling product compared with an outmoded product from an earlier time.
Contrast: Contrast is to describe a subject in terms of what it is not.
Spin: Spin involves talking about a concept in a way that gives it a positive or negative
connotation.
GROUPTHINK
Groupthink is defined as the tendency to seek consensus within groups such that the possibility of dissension within the group is minimal. The concept was developed by Janis Irving in
1972. It implies that the group considers cohesiveness and solidarity as more important than
Chapter 02.indd 41
6/7/2016 12:44:43 PM
42
Communication
Bytes 2.1
the discussion of facts relevant to the situation. At times the group leader makes his or her
wishes known to team members, who take care not to contradict the leader. The theory aims
to sensitize the group towards the perils of groupthink.
The disadvantages of groupthink are:
Chapter 02.indd 42
6/7/2016 12:44:43 PM
43
Negatively evaluated sources conform more closely than expected to cultural values or
situational norms. This can result in overly positive evaluation of the source and change
promoted by the actor.
Negative violations, resulting from language choices that lie outside socially acceptable
behaviour in a negative direction, produce no attitude or behavioural change in receivers.
For instance, faced with a financial crisis, firm XYZ has issued an advisory to employees,
urging them to quit on their own (see Exhibit 2.4). However, not many employees responded
to the message. The corporate office then used linguistic strategy to influence the employees.
Employees received messages (e-mail, newsletters, letters, face-to-face meetings) that varied
in intensity and style. Employees receiving messages with high-intensity language as opposed
to low-intensity language complied relatively easily with the employment advice.
By carefully adjusting the message and its features, professionals can obtain further compliance beyond that produced by educating people and creating favourable attitudes and self-efficacy
expectations. Highly intense language may be a good general strategy in prevention messages.
Exhibit 2.4
Linguistic Strategies Deployed
by an Organization to Influence
Employees
Non-compliance with
the preventive advice
Event:
Financial crisis
Employees advised
to apply elsewhere
Linguistic strategy
Non-compliance with
the advice
Chapter 02.indd 43
6/7/2016 12:44:43 PM
44
PRIMING
Priming in psychology is described as an increased sensitivity to a particular stimulus due
to a prior experience. It is different from memory in that memory relies on directly retrieving information stored in the brain, whereas priming is concerned with retrieving information outside the conscious awareness. Priming relies on implicit memory. Research has also
shown that the effects of priming can impact the decision-making process.17
Priming in the organizational context refers to providing a framework to the audience on
which they would base their inferences. It is, in effect, a part of agenda-setting. The audience
is given a prior context on the basis of which they can make decisions. While the agenda tells
us about the issue(s) at hand, priming elaborates on the issues and tells us whether they are
good or bad.
Chapter 02.indd 44
6/7/2016 12:44:43 PM
45
According to the media richness theory, face-to-face communication is the richest medium of communication.
a specific fit between task and medium.19 In other words, a managers choice of a particular
media for a certain task is governed by organizational constraints rather than the optimal fit.
In contrast, the media naturalness theory (propagated by Kock20) merits attention on
two counts. First, it proposes that communication in organizations can be understood by
understanding biological and evolutionary factors. Second, it says that people do manage to
overcome obstacles presented by media that is low on naturalness (such as e-mail). The theory
implies that people actively seek to improve the quality of exchange. Kock has compared
computer-mediated communication (CMC) and face-to-face interactions, and found that
people do adapt to communicating through different technologies as they become familiar
with them.
Previous research on the interpersonal effects of CMC reveals inconsistencies. In some
cases CMC has been found to be impersonal, task-oriented, and hostile. Other reports show
warm personal relations, and still others show gradual adjustments in interpersonal relations over time. Past research results are also difficult to compare as their research methods
reveal inconsistent approaches. These inconsistencies include the treatment of time limits on
group development, the ignoring of non-verbal behaviour in face-to-face communication,
comparison groups, and other measurement issues.
Chapter 02.indd 45
6/7/2016 12:44:44 PM
46
SEMIOTICS
Early work on communication theory was related to the study of language and how it
generates meaning. Meaning was said to be embedded in the words themselves. Ferdinand
de Saussure, a French linguist working in the early 1900s, was one of the first to develop
a semiotic theory. Working in the same domain and at much the same time was Charles
Sanders Peirce, an American philosopher and logician, who developed models that were
related to, but somewhat different from those of Saussure. Saussure developed the concept of
language as a system of signs where the words were used to signify objects. It was through the
signs that language systems were supposed to apply to real-life situations.
SENSE-MAKING
Sensemaking is essentially a socio-cognitive activity that institutionalizes brainstorming
about a current situation or event. The event is reconstructed by the actors or the participants
in a fairly systematic manner. They present thoughts on the following perspectives:
Information
Bytes 2.1
Chapter 02.indd 46
Semiotics is the theory of the production and interpretation of meaning. Its basic principle is that meaning is created by the effective use of signs and symbols in relation to other signs. These are deployed in space and time to
produce texts or scripts, the meaning of which was derived through sense-making. There are two major traditions in European semiotics: Saussures semiology and Peirces semiotics. Saussures approach was a generalization of formal structuralist linguistics; Peirces was an extension of reasoning and logic in the natural sciences.
Social semiotics examines semiotic practices specific to a culture and community for the making of various kinds of texts. It also looks for meanings in various specific cultural and situational contexts.
Language, gestures, and actions use signs that are construed in relation to more than one system of sign relations. An image is interpreted both visually and linguistically. Therefore, it becomes important to study how different sign systems are physically and semiotically integrated in texts and multimedia productions of various kinds.
6/7/2016 12:44:44 PM
47
SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM
Formulated by Herbert Blumer, symbolic interactionism is a sociological process that emphasizes interaction.25 It is based on the principle that people act on those beliefs, values, and
messages to which they can attach some meaning. The meaning is derived from social interaction and modified through interpretation.
The theory asserts that people interpret messages and process meaning in their minds
before a response (see Exhibit 2.5). Thus, there is a stimulus in the form of an interpretation
(What does the situation mean? What past experiences do I have that can affirm my inferences?). This, in turn, is followed by a response. Symbolic interactionism is used to assess
interaction in a particular environment. The study of the concept of meaning is important, as
it explains many barriers of assumption, prejudices and culture.
The principles of this theory are:
Human beings are pragmatic actors who adjust their reactions to the behaviours of others.
This process is continuous. People do not always conform, but may respond proactively
to the world around them.
One should focus on easily observable face-to-face interactions rather than institutional
or societal structures.
One should build negotiation skills as opposed to socialization skills. This is because
relationships are constantly evolving and in a state of flux.
Human social behaviour is seen as a scripted role, and people are seen as actors who are
enacting a part.
People react to other people and situations based on what meaning they attach to them.
Meaning manifests in the form of symbols, signs, and stories.
Social interaction
Meaning
Interpretation
Response
Exhibit 2.5 How People Interpret Meaning and Respond to People and Situations
Chapter 02.indd 47
6/7/2016 12:44:45 PM
48
By engaging in a mental thought process, people construct a reality using these symbols.
They then imaginatively rehearse their lines before expressing them to others.
The medium of expression is language. People engage in speech to clarify or act on the meaning.
People arrive at a self-concept or self-image based on their perception of the situation.
There is the illusion of a social order even when people do not share similar concerns.
For instance consider the case of Rohit. Rohit was new at work. He had yet to understand
the ways of his supervisor. One day he received an e-mail from his supervisor asking him
to prepare the minutes of the previous meeting ASAP. Rohit took ASAP at face value.
Hethought that it meant as soon as possible, and, accordingly, let the day pass. His supervisor was furious at not getting the minutes by the end of that day. He had intended for Rohit
to send him the required data within an hour of receiving the e-mail. The miscommunication
resulted from the different meanings Rohit and his supervisor attached to ASAP.
Exhibit 2.6
Utterance and Their Many
Interpretations
Situation 1
Situation 2
Interpretation 1:
Threat
Utterance:
You should be
more careful in
future
Interpretation 2:
Prediction
Interpretation 3:
Advice
Utterance:
I advise you to be
more careful in
the future
Interpretation:
Advice
Interpretation 4:
Command
Chapter 02.indd 48
6/7/2016 12:44:45 PM
49
which the statement is made, as well as by audio-visual cues provided by the sender. However,
speech acts must emphasize the intent of the act as a whole. Without the speakers intention,
it is not possible to classify something as a speech act.
In Exhibit 2.6, the speaker says, You should be more careful in future. The utterance
is focused; the language is in the action (I advise); and the intent is clear. Thus there is a
difference between speech acts and acts of speech.
There are three stages to obtaining information about the other person. These are:
Entry stage: The entry stage is when information about demographic variables is
obtained. This information-gathering stage is characterized by high adherence to
communication norms and conventions. It is formal and tentative in nature.
Personal stage: The personal stage is when the actors begin to share attitudes, beliefs,
and feelings. They tend to communicate more freely with each other. Communication is
less restrained and freer.
Exit stage: At the exit stage, the actors decide on future interaction plans. They might
continue the relationship or choose to end it.
SUMMARY
Communication is an interdisciplinary field. It draws
from diverse disciplines such as psychology, sociology,
linguistics, and others.
There is a large body of literature on communication.
This chapter does not present critiques of the theories;
it merely explains the theories to present a contextual
background to the business reader.
Chapter 02.indd 49
6/7/2016 12:44:45 PM
50
Chapter 02.indd 50
9 I think that you are biased against her just because she
was promoted before you.
B (again interrupting harshly): You know, you are
crossing the line. I have never let professional issues
affect my work ethic.
A: I still feel that you are unnecessarily trying to sap the
equity of the brand.
B: Oh you never listen to me! (walks off)
Explain this type of argument according to the types
presented in the argumentation theory.
What stage of argumentative dialogue is depicted in
the example?
3. Interpret the following utterances in as many ways as
possible using the speech acts theory.
Utterance 1: Do it better next time.
Utterance 2: Her report is better than yours.
Utterance 3: With me you work according to the
adage, better late than never.
4. The phrase grabbing eyeballs has become quite a
buzzword. With reference to the theory of framing,
discuss how has this phrase been used in the corporate
world. Use examples from the real world.
5. Compare two advertisements each of any two competing brands (Coca-cola and Pepsi, for example). What
persuasive appeals can you observe in each of these
advertisements? How can the speech act theory be
applied in audio-visual advertisements?
6/7/2016 12:44:45 PM
51
WEB-BASED EXERCISES
1. Refer to <http://www.cw.utwente.nl/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Organizational%20Communication/AST_theory.doc/> How can the adaptive
structuration theory help in analysing the structures
that actually emerge in human actions as people interact with new technologies?
2. Refer to <http://www.pitt.edu/~perfetti/PDF/Intro.%20
Advances%20in%20text%20comprehension-%20Verhoeven.pdf>Why does the author consider learning
from an even more extended problem?
FURTHER READING
A. Giddens, The Constitution of Society: Outline of the
Theory of Structuration (Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press, 1984).
B. Erickson, The Relational Basis of Attitudes, in
S.D. Berkowitz and B. Wellman, eds., Social Structures:
ANetwork Approach (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1988) 99121.
B. Weiner, Achievement Motivation and Attribution
Theory (Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press, 1974).
B. Weiner, An Attributional Theory of Motivation and
Emotion (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1986).
C. Haythornthwaite, Social Network Analysis: An
Approach and Technique for the Study of Information
Exchange, Library and Information Science Research
(1996) 18:323342.
C.R. Berger and N. Kellerman, Acquiring Social Information, in John Daly and John Wiemann, Strategic
Interpersonal Communication (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, 1994) 131.
C.R. Berger and R.J. Calabrese, Some Explorations in
Initial Interaction and Beyond: Toward a Developmental Theory of Interpersonal Communication, Human
Communication Theory (1975) 1:99112.
D.B. Buller, M. Burgoon, J.R. Hall, N. Levine,
A.M.
Taylor, B.H. Beach, C. Melcher, M.K. Buller,
S.L. Bowen, F.G. Hunsaker, and A. Bergen, Using
Language Intensity to Increase the Success of a Family
Intervention to Protect Children from Ultraviolet Radia
tion, a projectfunded by the National Cancer Institute,
USA.Accessed at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S009174359990600X#m4.1 on July 13, 2011.
E. Griffin, A First Look at Communication Theory
(Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 1991).
E.E. Jones, D.E. Kannouse, H.H. Kelley, R.E. Nisbett,
S.Valins, and B. Weiner, eds., Attribution: Perceiving the
Causes of Behavior (Morristown, NJ: General Learning
Press, 1972).
E.M. Rogers and D.L. Kincaid, Communication
Networks: Toward a New Paradigm for Research
Chapter 02.indd 51
6/7/2016 12:44:45 PM
52
Chapter 02.indd 52
6/7/2016 12:44:45 PM
53
Endnotes
1. E. Griffin, A First Look at Communication Theory
(Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 1991).
2. G. Gerbner, Field Definitions: Communication Theory,
in 19841985 U.S. Directory of Graduate Programs at
http://www.unm.edu/~werder/Documents/553readings/
Reading1.pdf. (1985). Programs
3. F. Heider, The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations
(New York: Wiley, 1958).
4. E.E. Jones, D.E. Kannouse, H.H. Kelley, R.E. Nisbett,
S. Valins, and B. Weiner, eds., Attribution: Perceiving the
Causes of Behavior (Morristown, NJ: General Learning
Press, 1972).
5. F.H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, and F. Snoeck
Henkemans, Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory:
AHandbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contempo
rary Developments. (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
and Associate, 1996).
6. Taken from http://www.unl.edu/speech/comm109/
Toulmin/index.htm, accessed on May 21, 2011.
7. P.J. Schellens, Redelijke Argumenten. Een Onderzoek
naar Normen Voor Kritische Lezers (Reasonable Arguments. A Study in Criteria for Critical Reading), Ph.D.
dissertation. Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht. Accessed from
http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/
Levels%20of%20theories/micro/Argumentation%20
Theory.doc/ on July 11, 2011.
8. A. Giddens, The Constitution of Society: Outline of the
Theory of Structuration. (Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press, 1984).
Chapter 02.indd 53
6/7/2016 12:44:45 PM
54
Chapter 02.indd 54
6/7/2016 12:44:46 PM