Statistical Genre Analysis: Toward Big Data Methodologies in Technical Communication

REFERENCES

• Abramson, J. & Starfield, B. (2005). The effect of conflict of interest on biomedical research and clinical practice guidelines: Can we trust the evidence in evidence-based medicine? Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 18, 414–418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aho, K. (2008). Medicalizing mental health: A phenomenological alternative. Journal of Medical Humanities, 29, 243–259.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Arnold, M. (2011, August). Watchdogs bark as FDA relaxes rules on conflicts of interest. Medical Marketing and Media. Retrieved from http://www.mmm-online.com/watchdogs-bark-as-fda-relaxes-rules-on-conflicts-of-interest/article/209334
   Google Scholar
• Bakeman, R. & Gottman, J. M. (1986). Observing Interaction An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bamford, J. (2012, March 15). The NSA is building the country's biggest spy center (watch what you say). Wired Magazine. Retrieved from: http://www.wired.com/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/1.
   Google Scholar
• Bawarshi, A. S. & Reiff, M. J. (2010). Genre: An introduction to history, theory, research, and pedagogy. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press and the WAC Clearinghouse.
   Google Scholar
• Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bazerman, C. (2004). Speech acts, genres, and activity systems: How texts organize activity and people. In C. Bazerman & P. Prior (Eds.), What writing does and how it does it: An introduction to analyzing texts and textual practices (pp. 309–340). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Biber, D., Conrad, S. & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, D. & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data. Information, Communication & Society, 15, 662–679.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callon, M., Lascoumes, P. & Barthe, Y. (2011). Acting in an uncertain world: An essay on technical democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carpenter, D. (2012). Strengthen and stabilize the FDA. Nature, 485, 169–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ceccarelli, L. (2011). Manufactured scientific controversy: Science, rhetoric, and public debate. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 14, 195–228.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, H. M. & R. Evans, R. (2002). The third wave of science studies: Studies of experience and experience. Social Studies of Science, 32, 235–296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elliott, C. (2003). Better than well. New York, NY: Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Finkelstein, J. B. (2006). FDA revamps committee conflict-of-interest rules. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 98, 1354–1355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fontanarosa, P. B., Rennie, D. & DeAngelis, C. D. (2004). Postmarketing surveillance: Lack of vigilance, lack of trust. JAMA, 292, 267–2650.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (n.d.) FDA patient representative program. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ForConsumers/ByAudience/ForPatientAdvocates/PatientInvolvement/UCM143432.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (2010). Patient representative program. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/byaudience/forpatientadvocates/patientinvolvement/ucm123858.htm
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, P. (2003). Distorted packaging: Marketing depression as illness, drugs as cure. Journal of Medical Humanities, 24, 105–130.
   Google Scholar
• Gieryn, T. F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48, 781–795.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gieryn, T. F. (1999). Cultural boundaries of science: Credibility on the line. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S. S. (2011). Dis-ease or disease? Ontological rarefaction in the medical-industrial complex. Journal of Medical Humanities, 32, 167–187.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gulbrandsen, K. (2012). Revising the technical communication service course. Programmatic Perspectives, 4, 243–254.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. J. (1997). Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium.FemaleMan©_ Meets_OncoMouse™. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. & Krippendorr, A. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 77–89.
   Google Scholar
• Herndl, C. (1991). Writing ethnography: Representation, rhetoric, and institutional practices. College English, 53, 320–332.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesla, L. (2012). Particle physics tames bit data. Symmetry Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/august-2012/particle-physics-tames-big-data
   Google Scholar
• Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. (1990). The fifth branch: Science advisers as policymakers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. A. & Wichern, D. W. (2007). Applied multivariate statistical analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Keppel, G. (1991). Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Koerber, A. (2006). Rhetorical agency, resistance, and the disciplinary rhetorics of breastfeeding. Technical Communication Quarterly, 15, 87–101.
   Google Scholar
• Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (2004). The politics of nature: How to bring the sciences into democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (2009). Why has critique run out of steam? From matters of fact to matters of concern. Critical Inquiry, 30, 225–247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, B. E. (2003). Prozac and the post-human politics of cyborgs. Journal of Medical Humanities, 24, 49–63.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, C. (2009). Advisory committees: FDA's primary stakeholders have a say. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ByAudience/ForPatientAdvocates/PatientInvolvement/ucm123870.htm
   Google Scholar
• Lurie, P., Almeida, C. M., Stine, N., Stine, A. R. & Wolfe, S. M. (2006). Financial conflict of interest disclosure and voting patterns at Food and Drug Administration drug advisory committee meetings. JAMA, 295, 1921–1928.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majdik, Z. (2009). Judging direct-to-consumer genetics: Negotiating expertise and agency in public biotechnological practice. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 12, 571–606.
   Google Scholar
• Manovich, L. (2011). Trending: the promises and the challenges of big social data. In M. K. Gold (Ed.), Debates in the digital humanities (pp. 460–475). Minneapolis, MN University of Minnesota Press. Retrieved from http://www.manovich.net/DOCS/Manovich_trending_paper.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Markel, H. (2005). Why American needs a strong FDA. JAMA, 204, 2498–2491.
   Google Scholar
• McNely, B. (2012). Big data, situated people: Humane approaches to communication design. Communication Design Quarterly Review, 1, 27–30.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, C. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 151–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, G. & McTigue, K. (2012). Translation through argumentation in medical research and physician-citizenship. Journal of Medical Humanities, 33, 83–107.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Paroske, M. (2012). Overcoming burdens of proof in science regulation: Ephedra and the FDA. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 15, 467–497.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson, T. R. & Horton, C. C. (1995). Rooted in the soil: How understanding the perspectives of landowners can enhance the management of environmental disputes. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 81, 139–166.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roebber, P. J., Westendorf, M. & Meadows, G. R. (2010). Innovative weather: A new strategy for student, university and community relationships. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 91, 877–888.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, N. (2007). The politics of life itself: Biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Salvo, M. (2012). Visual rhetoric and big data: Design of future communication. Communication Design Quarterly Review, 1, 37–40.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarze, S. (2003). Juxtaposition in environmental health rhetoric: Exposing asbestos contamination in Libby, Montana. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 6, 313–336.
   Google Scholar
• Segal, J. (2005). Health and the rhetoric of medicine. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Starr, P. (1982). The social transformation of American medicine: The rise of a sovereign profession and the making of a vast industry. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Teston, C. B. & Graham, S. S. (2012). Stasis theory and meaningful public participation in pharmaceutical policy-making. Present Tense: A Journal of Rhetoric in Society, 2. Retrieved from http://www.presenttensejournal.org/volume-2/stasis-theory-and-meaningful-public-participation-in-pharmaceutical-policy-making
   Google Scholar
• Teston, C. B., Graham, S. S., Baldwinson, R., Li, A. & Swift, J. (2014). Ontological multiplicity: Negotiating “clinical benefit” in the FDA's Avastin Hearing. Journal of Medical Humanities, 35, 149–170.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wall Street Journal/Harris Interactive. (2008). Confidence in FDA hits new low, according to WSJ.com/Harris Interactive study. Retrieved from http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=1301
   Google Scholar
• Wynia, M. K. (2007). Public health, public trust and lobbying. American Journal of Bioethics, 7, 4–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynne, B. (1989). Sheep farming after Chernobyl: A case study in communicating scientific information. Environment, 31, 10–15, 33-39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar