Sequential Mapping: Using Sequential Rhetoric and Comics Production to Understand UX Design

References

• Abel, J., & Madden, M. (2008). Drawing words & writing pictures: A definitive course from concept to comic in 15 lessons. New York, NY: First Second.
   Google Scholar
• Agile Alliance. (n.d.). User stories. Agilealliance.org. Retrieved from https://www.agilealliance.org/glossary/user-stories/#q=~(infinite~false~filters~(postType~(~’page~’post~’aa_book~’aa_event_session~’aa_experience_report~’aa_glossary~’aa_research_paper~’aa_video)~tags~(~’user*20stories))~searchTerm~’~sort~false~sortDirection~’asc~page~1)
   Google Scholar
• Altman, M., Nordgren, A., & Keyzer, J. (2011). Soldering is easy: Here’s how to do it. Retrieved from https://mightyohm.com/blog/2011/04/soldering-is-easy-comic-book/
   Google Scholar
• Arnheim, R. (1969). Visual thinking. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bahl, E. K. (2015). Comics and scholarship: Sketching the possibilities. Composition Studies, 43(1), 178–182.
   Google Scholar
• Bezemer, J., & Kruss, G. (2014). Writing in multimodal texts: A social semiotic account of designs for learning. In C. Lutkewitte (Ed.), Multimodal composition: A critical sourcebook (pp. 233–257). New York, NY: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
   Google Scholar
• Blythe, S., Lauer, C., & Curran, P. G. (2014). Professional and technical communication in a Web 2.0 world. Technical Communication Quarterly, 23(4), 265–287. doi:10.1080/10572252.2014.941766
   Google Scholar
• Bourelle, A., Bourelle, T., & Jones, N. (2015). Multimodality in the Technical Communication Classroom: Viewing Classical Rhetoric Through a 21st Century Lens. Technical Communication Quarterly, 24(4), 306–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2015.1078847
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brumberger, E. R. (2013). Teaching visual communication through community-based projects. In E. R. Brumberger & K. M. Northcut (Eds.), Designing texts: Teaching visual communication (pp. 98–116). Amityville, NY: Baywood.
   Google Scholar
• Bui, T. (2017). The best we could do. New York, NY: AbramsComicArts.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, K. K., & Jamieson, K. H. (1978/2019). Form and genre in rhetorical criticism: An introduction. In C. R. Miller, & A. J. Devitt (Eds.) Landmark essays on rhetorical genre studies. (pp. 17–35). New York, NY: Routledge (Original work published 1984).  (pp. 9–32). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Carrier, D. (2009). Caricature. In J. Heer & K. Worcester (Eds.), A comics studies reader (pp. 105–115). Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.
   Google Scholar
• Chong, F. (2016). The pedagogy of usability: An analysis of technical communication textbooks, anthologies, and course syllabi and descriptions. Technical Communication Quarterly, 25(1), 12–28. doi:10.1080/10572252.2016.1113073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Culkin, J. (2011). Introduction to Arduino. Retrieved from http://Jodyculkin.comhttp://www.jodyculkin.com/comics-2/introduction-to-arduino
   Google Scholar
• Duncan, R., & Smith, M. J. (2017). How the graphic novel works. In S. T. Tabachnick (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to the graphic novel (pp. 8–25). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Duncan, R., Smith, M. J., & Levitz, P. (2009). The power of comics: History, form, and culture. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Eisner, W. (1985). Comics and sequential art: Principles and practices of the world’s most popular art form. Temarac, FL : Poorhouse Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fickle, T., Fujiwara, L., Liu, C., Kerewsky, S., Rumbarger, L., Teo, T., & Wojick, A. (2018). The best we could do teaching guide. Retrieved from https://cpb-use1.wpmucdn.com/blogs. uoregon.edu/dist/0/310/files/2018/05/TBWCD-Curriculum-Guide-2018-19_v3a-1sqz8gq.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Figueiredo, S. (2011). Building worlds for an interactive experience: Selecting, organizing, and showing worlds of information through comics. Journal of Visual Literacy, 30(1), 86. doi:10.1080/23796529.2011.11674686
   Google Scholar
• Fukuoka, W., Kojima, Y., & Spyridakis, J. H. (2004). Illustrations in user manuals: Preference and effectiveness with Japanese and American readers. In J. M. Dubinsky (Ed.) Teaching technical communication: Critical issues for the classroom (pp. 458–473) Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
   Google Scholar
• George, D. (2014). From analysis to design: Visual communication in the teaching of writing.” In C. Lutkewitte (Ed.). Multimodal composition: A critical sourcebook (pp. 211–232). Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s
   Google Scholar
• Gravett, P. (2013). Comics art. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, R. C. (1994). The art of the funnies: An aesthetic history. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson-Sheehan, R. (2012). Technical communication today. Boston, MA: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Kashtan, A. (2015). Talismans: Using comics to teach multimodal writing. In Matthew L. Miller (Ed.), Class, please open your comics: Essays on teaching with graphic narratives (pp. 103–116). Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G. (1999). English as the crossroads: Rethinking curricula of communication in the context of the turn to the visual. In G. E. Hawiser & C. J. Selfe (Eds.), Passions, pedagogies, and 21st century technologies (pp. 66–88). Logan: Utah State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, C. C. (2011). Specific guidelines for creating effective visual arguments in technical handouts. Technical Communication, 58(2), 135–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levy, J. (2015). UX strategy: How to devise innovative digital products that people want. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly.
   Google Scholar
• McCloud, S. (1993). Understanding comics: The invisible art. New York, NY: Harper.
   Google Scholar
• McCloud, S. (2006). Making comics: Storytelling secrets of comics, manga, and graphic novels. New York, NY: Harper.
   Google Scholar
• Meskin, A. (2007). Defining comics? The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 65(4), 369–379. doi:10.1111/j.1540-594X.2007.00270.x
   Google Scholar
• Miller, C. R. (1984/2019). Genre as social action. In C. R. Miller, & A. J. Devitt (Eds.) Landmark essays on rhetorical genre studies (pp. 36–54). New York, NY: Routledge (Original work published 1984).
   Google Scholar
• Moore, P., & Fritz, C. (1993). Using gestalt theory to teach document design and graphics. Technical Communication Quarterly, 2(4), 389–410. doi:10.1080/10572259309364549
   Google Scholar
• Northcut, K. (2011). Insights from illustrators: The rhetorical invention of paleontology representations. Technical Communication Quarterly, 20(3), 303–326. doi:10.1080/10572252.2011.578236
   Google Scholar
• Northcut, K. (2013). Evaluating visual communication. In E. R. Brumberger & K. M. Northcut (Eds.), Designing texts: Teaching visual communication (pp. 181–195). Amityville, NY: Baywood.
   Google Scholar
• Novitz, D. (1977). Pictures and their use in communication: A philosophical essay. The Hague, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhof.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, J. (2014). User story mapping: Discover the whole story, build the right product. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Pederson, K., & Cohn, N. (2016). The changing pages of comics: Page layouts across eight decades of American superhero comics. Studies in Comics, 7(1), 7–28. doi:10.1386/stic.7.1.7_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quimby, T. (n.d.). Comic books: An evolving multimodal literacy. Xchanges: An interdisciplinary. Journal of Technical Communication, Rhetoric, and Writing across the Curriculum, 7(1), online. Retrieved from http://www.xchanges.org/comic-books-an-evolving-multimodal
   Google Scholar
• Rawlins, J. D., & Wilson, G. D. (2014). Agency and interactive data displays: Internet graphics as co-created rhetorical spaces. Technical Communication Quarterly, 23(4), 303–322. doi:10.1080/10572252.2014.942468
   Google Scholar
• Redish, J. (2010). Technical communication and usability: Intertwined strands and mutual influences. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 53(3), 191–201. doi:10.1109/TPC.2010.2052861
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sauer, G. (2018). Applying Usability and User Experience within Academic Contexts: Why Progress Remains Slow. Technical Communication Quarterly, 27(4), 362–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2018.1521637
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schriver, K. A. (1997). Dynamics in document design. New York, NY: Wiley Computer Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Seanbaby. (2020). Stupid ways comic book covers can’t be trusted. Retrieved from Cracked.com. https://www.cracked.com/blog/6-ridiculous-ways-comic-book-covers-lie-to-us/
   Google Scholar
• Tungol, K. (2011). Provenance. Key terms: New and old media. Retrieved August 3, 2020, from depaul.digication.com/key_terms_new_media_old_media/provenance
   Google Scholar
• Watkins, R., & Lindsley, T. (2015). Sequential rhetoric: Using Freire and Quintilian to teach students to read and create comics. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 9(3).
   Google Scholar
• Watkins, R. D. (2014). Sequential rhetoric: Teaching comics as visual rhetoric. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Retrieved from https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/13940
   Google Scholar
• Watkins, R. D. (2018). Comic con(nection): Envisaging comics as a multimodal ensemble that teaches core visual writing. Journal of Teaching Writing, 33(2), 15–44.
   Google Scholar
• Watkins, R. D. (In press). Technical and sequential: Teaching comics production in the technical communication classroom. Programmatic Perspectives.
   Google Scholar
• Wolk, D. (2007). Reading comics: How graphic novels work and what they mean. Cambridge, United Kingdom : DaCapo Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yu, H. (2015). The other kind of funnies. Amityville, NY: Baywood.
   Google Scholar