Annotated bibliography
[Insert APA-style Cover Sheet Here]
How can an understanding of interpersonal communication theory supplement your skills and the insights you will need to succeed in your future work?
Interpersonal communication theory can vastly improve productivity and relationships in the work environment. I chose to study into Social Exchange Theory, as I felt that that theory can best help the workplace achieve better productivity, increase social interaction and open up communication that will better the overall workplace. By having more meaningful and open communication; groups can solve problems, troubleshoot and easily come up with fresh ideas to improve work flow and manage issues that can arise in a product or implementation. An open and comfortable forum enables us to not be afraid to bring up new and interesting ideas. It also enables us to speak candidly, addressing issues that may arise from either personal or departmental mistakes. Without a level of comfortability in communication, such topics can easily escalate into a "pointing of fingers" match, upon which productivity is thrown out the window. In Social Exchange Theory, it states that the "major force in personal relationships is the satisfaction of both people's self interest" (West & Turner, 2010). If these guidelines are followed in professional communication, both parties will express concerns and/ or praise and can from that point achieve a mutual conclusion that is all around better for the company. If I enter a meeting expecting answers about an issue, and a colleague enters a meeting expecting answers about another issue, if both parties are acceptably answered to the satisfaction of each, they can then proceed to better assess conclusions for those issues and future issues. Communication theory has amazing potential in the workplace meeting environment, and can be used to increase productivity, which in turn can increase income for both the person and the company as a whole. Incentive for all.
Reference West, R., & Turner, L. (2010). Introducing communication theory: Analysis and application. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Annotated Bibliography
Source One
Database: EBSCOhost
Subject Area: Computers and Applied Sciences
Search Parameters: "Social Exchange" AND Workplace AND VTC
Reference
Warkentin, M., & Beranek, P. M. (1999). Training to improve virtual team communication. Information Systems Journal,9(4), 271-289. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2575.1999.00065.x
Warkentin and Beranek tackle the issue of interpersonal communication through the medium of electronic communication (ie. Video Tele-conferencing (VTC), E-mail, Web Based applications, Audio and Video) and how such a new medium of communication can have adverse affects on team communication due to a lack of physical interaction. They propose that VTC communication will only continue to grow due to "increased globalization of organizations" (Beranek & Warkentin, 1999). Beranek and Warkentin coin the term "Virtual Teams", which they coin as being a "group of people engaged in a common task or goal communicating through electronic means" (Beranek & Warkentin, 1999). They postulate that over time, with constant use, electronic communication can evolve and accelerate the users in "relationship development" (Beranek & Warkentin, 1999). They ascertain the importance of "fostering interaction, inclusion and participation" (Beranek & Warkentin, 1999)while communicating with these multitudes of electronic communications being used today. They also maintain that user interaction and attention can be completely lost the more impersonal such communications become. They quote Mabry and Barnes as saying "Group cohesiveness has been linked to a number of positive outcomes, such as enhanced motivation, better decisions and more open communication" (Mabry & Barnes, 1980).
I feel that this is a very reliable source, not only from personal experience, but mostly because of this articles background and resources. This is a well thought-out and organized journal that was released by the College of Business Administration at Northeastern University, which is a prestigious University. The article is well cited with documents ranging from the 1950's all the way up until just before the article was written. The authors support all their findings, assumptions and theories with well documented resources and known academics. They provide samples and display tests that show just how their theories pan out when implemented. Warkentin and Beranek even had open-ended questioning to a control group, and stated those. Both are holders of a Ph. D. and have authored numerous books and journals pertaining to the subject matter.
This source was extremely helpful in gaining an understanding of just how electronic communication can be used with Social Exchange Theory to better workplace communication. By showing that communication is improved when the user is entertained and included in the communication method, we see that it is imperative that self-interest is very important in communication. By simply ignoring the user, they will immediately disconnect from the communication and will not be an active part in the productivity taking place. If everyone takes an active role in the communication method, they are all gaining something, and therefore are likely to be more inclusive in the conversation.
References
Mabry, E.A. & Barnes, R.E. (1980) The Dynamics of Small Group Communication. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,NJ
Warkentin, M., & Beranek, P. M. (1999). Training to improve virtual team communication. Information Systems Journal,9(4), 271-289. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2575.1999.00065.x
Source Two
Database: EBSCOhost
Subject Area: Computers and Applied Sciences
Search Parameters: "Social Exchange" AND Workplace AND Interaction
Reference
Staples, D., & Webster, J. (2008). Exploring the effects of trust, task interdependence and virtualness on knowledge sharing in teams. Information Systems Journal, 18(6), 617-640. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00244.x
Staples and Webster argue that knowledge sharing within teams is critical to team functioning and attempt to use Social Exchange Theory to model knowledge sharing, over electronic platforms, to increase trust (Staples & Webster, 2008). They postulate that sharing knowledge among other team members via this electronic platform will increase the capabilities of the "virtual team" in the areas of creating, acquiring and integrating knowledge (Staples & Webster, 2008). They state that such interactions are commonplace and proven effective in face to face communication, so it should only stand that it should also be the same in any kind of virtual communication. The basis for their research model is Blau's social exchange model, which was developed within the Social Exchange Theory (Staples & Webster, 2008). This model has been used to study a wide sweeping array of social exchanges. These include "relationships, work relations, friendships and love" (Staples & Webster, 2008). By utilizing this model, with their hypothesis' they air to prove that knowledge sharing and following the Social Exchange Theory through virtualization is just as important as through a face to face communication.
Webster and Staples use very valid and organized reasoning in their assessments on virtualized communication. Both authors are Ph.D. holders from prestigious universities and are Senior Editor's for MIS Quarterly, as well as board members to other journals. The research was published through Information Systems Journal, which is an awarded and respected scientific journal. The two authors also have written affiliation with Queen's School of Business in Ontario Canada. They have well organized and meticulously formulated references, which date from the 1950's until just before the article was written, all from respected and academic sources.
This article from Webster and Staples greatly and directly pertains to my study of Social Exchange Theory in the workplace environment, especially when it comes to electronic communication mediums. The article goes into vast background detail on how Social Exchange Theory is used in normal face to face interactions in the workplace, which gives a good basis on my postulation. After giving an extensive background, it goes on to present theories into why that same kind of interaction should be used through electronic communication mediums. Not only that, but it proposes hypothesis with detailed experimentation to prove/ disprove this theory. By providing a firm and secure background and then providing an extending branch on that background, this article is invaluable to my research.
Reference
Staples, D., & Webster, J. (2008). Exploring the effects of trust, task interdependence and virtualness on knowledge sharing in teams. Information Systems Journal, 18(6), 617-640. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00244.x
Source Three
Database: EBSCOhost
Subject Area: Computers and Applied Sciences
Search Parameters: "Social Exchange" AND Workplace AND Computer* AND "Information Technology" OR IT
Reference
Chidambaram, L. (1996). Relational Development in Computer-Supported Groups. MIS Quarterly, 20(2), 143-165.
Chidambaram uses a newly developing theory at the time of his article being published called Social Information Processing (SIP) theory, which states that intimacy within a group will most likely take longer to develop while using an electronic communication method (Chidambaram, 1996). He postulates that if given adequate time, these intimacy gaps can become very strong relational bonds (Chidambaram, 1996). His basic premise is that once comfortability and social interaction bonds are solidified within an electronic interaction medium, social growth and personal bonds will be stimulated and grow. That it is only through constant support and cohesiveness/ perception that the user will be satisfied with the communications outcome.
Chidambaram is a Ph.D. holder with a double major in Information Systems and International Business. He is an associate professor and faculty director at Hawaii's College of Business Administration. He is also a well awarded teacher with many published research publications. He is very thorough in his methodology and research, and meticulous in his references and appendix. He formulates a theory and well documents any assumed/ known facts with documented and respected resources. The age of the article is a point of concern though, as it was published in 1996, 17 years prior to today. Although it seems to be completely objective and still relevant, although lacking in modern technology. The basis still seems to hold true.
As stated, the only major down fall to this article is it's age, although I feel that it creates a very good basic premise for my argument, and helps steer my research down a tied theoretical path with Social Processing Theory (SIP), which I was not aware of prior to the reading of this article. By seeing just how social exchange works and how it can directly correlate into electronic communication methods, and seeing this additional theory on how overtime, this will naturally evolve if given some guidance, I can certainly use this source to give valid and fresh perspective on my argument (disregarding it's age). It certainly has changed how I think about my topic and gives new ideas for new approaches to just how Social Exchange Theory can affect a workplace environment, especially with the use of electronic communication.
Reference
Chidambaram, L. (1996). Relational Development in Computer-Supported Groups. MIS Quarterly, 20(2), 143-165.
Rubric
1. Choose a communication theory from the following chapters in the course text:
· Anything in the Groups and Organizations chapters EXCEPT Groupthink
· Cultural Studies, Cultivation Analysis, Spiral of Silence and Media Ecology theories but NOT Uses and Gratifications
· Any of the Culture and Diversity theories
· Any of the Relationship Development theories
2. Click on Resources > Library in our classroom navigation bar or go to the UMUC Library at http://www.umuc.edu/library/library.html.
3. Click on Resources in the toolbar to the left of the library portal screen, then click on Subject Guides. Find the subject area that is most closely related to your major or your planned career in the list. Click on it and familiarize yourself with the materials available in your field of study or planned line of work.
4. Click on the button for databases in the Subject Guide.
5. Using one or more of the databases for your field of study or planned line of work, search for peer-reviewed journal articles about the communication theory or by the name of the person you selected to see if communication research on that theory has been applied to your area. You may also want to limit the search by using other keywords for your specific area of study or career interest.
6. Report the subject area.
7. Report the database(s) used for your search.
8. Report the key-words you used in your searches.
9. Write an introductory paragraph (~250-300 words) describing the reasons you chose that theory or researcher in the context of the following question:
How can an understanding of Communication Theory supplement your skills and the insights you will need to succeed in your future work?
10. Select three articles from the databases in your field of study or career interest that support your thesis in response to the question posed in Step 9.
11. Write an annotated bibliography for the three articles that best support your thesis. If you are unfamiliar with an annotated bibliography, click on Resources > Effective Writing Center in the classroom navigation bar to learn about them from our writing center, or go to the Purdue OWL. You need to write a complete APA citation for each article. Then write a summary of at least 150 words for each article that includes an explanation of how the article supports your thesis. Make sure each summary or “annotation” includes a specific quote that illuminates what you learned from the article.
12. Please be sure to write carefully and well, using good grammar and APA-style in-text citations for quotes, summaries and paraphrases.
Your annotated bibliography is due in the assignments area of the classroom by 11:59 p.m. Sunday in Week 3. (Worth 15% of your grade.) You can submit it through the link below or directly to your assignment folder through the Assignments link in the blue navbar above.
Annotated Bibliography Rubric
|
CATEGORY |
A |
B |
C |
D |
F |
|
Quality / Currency of Sources |
Sources reflect contemporary theoretical thinking. |
Sources reflect contemporary theoretical thinking. |
Only some sources reflect contemporary theoretical thinking. |
Sources may not reflect contemporary theoretical thinking. |
No sources reflect contemporary theoretical thinking. |
|
Quality / Relevancy of Sources |
All sources cited can be considered relevant. |
Most sources cited can be considered relevant. |
Only some sources can be considered relevant. |
Few sources cited can be considered relevant. |
Little or no relevant sources cited. |
|
Quality / Reliability of Sources |
All sources cited can be considered reliable and/or trustworthy, i.e. bibliography exceeds or meets minimum requirements for peer-reviewed sources. |
Most sources cited can be considered reliable and/or trustworthy, i.e. bibliography meets minimum requirements for peer-reviewed sources. |
Only some sources can be considered reliable and/or trustworthy i.e. bibliography comes close to meeting minimum requirements for peer-reviewed sources. |
Few sources cited can be considered reliable and/or trustworthy, i.e. bibliography falls well short of minimum requirements for peer-reviewed sources. |
Little or no reliable and/or trustworthy sources cited, i.e. bibliography does not meet minimum requirements for peer-reviewed sources. |
|
Quantity of Sources
|
Document cites the number of sources outlined in the assignment. |
Document cites the number of sources outlined in the assignment. |
Document cites the number of sources outlined in the assignment. |
Document is one source under the number of appropriate sources required by the assignment. |
Document does not contain appropriate sources to meet the number required by the assignment. |
|
Writing Fluency of Annotations |
All annotations are thoughtful, complete, and well written. |
Most annotations are thoughtful, complete, and well written. |
Some annotations are well written but some are lacking in completeness, thought, and /or writing quality. |
Most annotations are lacking in completeness, thought, and/or writing quality. |
All annotations are lacking in completeness, thought, and/or writing quality. |
|
APA and Documentation |
Citations are formatted correctly in the document. |
There are a few formatting errors in the document's citations. |
There are some formatting errors in the document's citations. |
There are many and/or frequent formatting errors in the document's citations. |
There is little or no adherence to APA format in the document. |
|
Overriding criterion: Originality and authenticity. If the essay is identified as not being original, and/or not done by the student, the instructor has the right to grade the paper as an F. |
|||||
|
Checkpoints: |
Yes / No |
||||
|
Report the subject area of your search (2 points) |
|
||||
|
Report the database(s) used for your search (2 points) |
|
||||
|
Report the keywords you used in your searches (2 points) |
|
||||
|
Use three scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles that reflect your thesis. (2 points ea. = 6 points) |
|
||||
|
Write an introduction (250-300 words) to your assignment that articulates the research question or hypothesis about comm theory that you developed in response to the assignment prompt. Explain how the three articles that you chose relate to your research question or hypothesis. (30 points) |
|
||||
|
Write three properly formatted APA-style bibliographic listings for the articles. (6 points ea. = 18 points). |
|
||||
|
Explain how each article supports your thesis (~150-200 words for each entry). Reference specific information in each article through summary, paraphrase, and/or at least one direct quote relevant to your thesis, which you support with a properly formatted, APA-style, in-text citation and bibliographic references. (10 points ea. = 30 points) |
|
||||
|
Use college-level grammar and mechanics. (5 points) |
|
||||
|
Edit/proofread work carefully to conform to APA manuscript rules. (5 points) |
|
||||
|
Submit completed work by deadline. (-10% for each day or portion of a day late, up to three days late) |
|
||||
|
Grade: |
/ 100% |
|
13 |
|