Thoughts on the Development of the Communication Discipline in the United States and Russia

References

• Arnold, C. C. & Bowers, J. W . (Eds.) (1984). Handbook of rhetorical and communication theory. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon
   Google Scholar
• Barnlund, D. C. (1968). Introduction. In D. C. Barnlund (Ed.), Interpersonal communication: Survey and studies (pp. 3-14). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Barnouw, E., Gerbner, G., Schramm, W., Worth, T. L. & Gross. L. (Eds.) (1989). International Encyclopedia of Communication (4 vols.). New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, C. A. (2006). Editor’s introduction. In C. A. Beck (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 30 (pp. xixvi). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Beebe, S. A. & Matyash, O. (2004). Making global links with Russian communication educators: Establishing networks between Russian and non-Russian communication educators and researchers. Vestnik: Theory and Practice of Communication, II, 12-32.
   Google Scholar
• Beebe, S. A., Kharcheva, M., & Kharcheva, V. (1998). Speech communication in Russia. Communication Education 47, 261-273.
   Google Scholar
• Berelson, B. (1959). The state of communication research. Public Opinion Quarterly 23, 1-6.
   Google Scholar
• Berger, C. R. & Chaffee, S. H. (Eds.) (1987). Handbook of communication science. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Berlo, D. K. (1960). The process of communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Bochner, A.P. & Eisenberg, E. M. (1985). Legitimizing speech communication: An examination of coherence and cohesion in the development of the discipline. In T. W. Benson (Ed.), Speech communication in the 20 century (th pp. 299-321). Carbondale & Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bryant, J. & Miron, D. (2006). Historical contexts and trends in development of communication theory. In B. B. Whaley & W. Samter (eds.). Explaining communication (pp. 403-431). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J. H. (1964). Russian rhetoric: A discipline manipulated by communism. Quarterly Journal of Speech 3 (October), 229-239.
   Google Scholar
• Carbaugh, D. C. (2005). Cultures in conversation. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, H. (1994). History of speech communication: The emergence of a discipline, 1914-1945. Annandale, VA: The Speech Communication Association.
   Google Scholar
• Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory 9, 119-161.
   Google Scholar
• Dance, F. E. X. (Ed.) (1967). Human communication theory: Original essays. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Dance, F. E. X. (1970). The “concept” of communication. The Journal of Communication, 20, 201-210.
   Google Scholar
• Dance, F. E. X. (Ed.) (1982). Human communication theory: Comparative essays. New York: Harper and Row.
   Google Scholar
• Dance, F. E. X. (2004). Selective reflections: Contributions of Soviet/Russian scholars to human communication theory in the twentieth century. Vestnik: Theory and Practice of Communication, II, 52-56.
   Google Scholar
• Delia, J. (1987). Communication research: A history. In C. R. Berger and S. H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 20-98). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Donsbach, W. (Ed.) (2008). The International Encyclopedia of Communication (12 vols.). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Eadie, B. (2004, April 16). Embodying “communication.” Crtnet News, Communication #8067.
   Google Scholar
• Ekman, P. (2003). Emotions revealed: Recognizing faces and feelings to improve communication and emotional life. New York: Times Books.
   Google Scholar
• Feeley, T. H. (2008). A bibliometric analysis of communication journals from 2002 to 2005. Human Communication Research, 34, 505-520.
   Google Scholar
• Garrett, M. M. (1993). Classical Chinese conceptions of argumentation and persuasion. Argumentation & Advocacy 29, 105-115.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, E. (1993). Battle cry for a unified discipline. APS Observer, July/August, 12-13.
   Google Scholar
• Griffin, E. (2000). Communication: A first look at communication theory, Fourth Ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F., Slater, M. D. & Snyder, L. B. (Eds.) (2008). The SAGE sourcebook of advanced data analysis methods for communication research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hazen, M. D. (2006). Argument and culture: Seeing one while seeing the other. In van Eemeren, F. M., Hazen, M. D., Houtlosser, P. & Williams, D. C. (eds.). Contemporary perspectives on argumentation: Views from the Venice argumentation conference (pgs. 127-150). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
   Google Scholar
• Hazen, M. D. & Keele, L. M. (1991). International debate exchange: Bridges, not walls. In F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, & C. A. Willard (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Argumentation, 1B (pp. 1219-1225). Amsterdam: SIC SAT.
   Google Scholar
• Inkeles, A. (1950). Public opinion in Soviet Russia: A study of mass persuasion. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jarausch, K. H. (1985). Comparing higher education—historically? History of Education Quarterly, Spring-Summer, 241-252.
   Google Scholar
• Kibler, R. J. & Barker, L. L. (Eds.) (1969). Conceptual frontiers in speech communication. New York: Speech Association of America.
   Google Scholar
• Kienpointer, M. (1995). Rhetoric. In J. Verschueren, J-O. Ostman & J. Blommaert (eds.). Handbook of Pragmatics: Manual (pp. 453-461). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, M-S., Hunter, J. E., Miyahara, A., Horvath, A-M., Bresnahan, M. & Yoon, H-J. (1996). Individual- vs. culture-level dimensions of individualism and collectivism: Effects on preferred conversational styles. Communication Monographs, 63, 29-49.
   Google Scholar
• Kluckhohn, C. (1955). Recent studies of the ‘national character’ of Great Russians. In R. Kluckhohn (Ed.), Culture and behavior: Collected essays of Clyde Kluckhohn (pp. 210-243). New York: Free Press of Glencoe.
   Google Scholar
• Knower, F. H. (1966). The present state of experimental speech-communication research. In P. E. Reid (Ed.), The frontiers in experimental speech communication research (pp. 15-24). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse U. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Koerner, K. (1997). Linguistics vs philology: Self-definition of a field or rhetorical stance? Language Science, 19, 167-175.
   Google Scholar
• Korn, C. J., Morreale, S. P. & Boileau, D. M. (2000). Redefining the field: Revisiting the ACA 1995 definition of communication studies. Journal of the Association for Communication Administration, 29, 40-52.
   Google Scholar
• Krause, J. (2001). Slavic rhetoric. In T. Sloane (ed.). Encyclopedia of Rhetoric (pp. 716-720). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leontovich, O. A. (2002). Intercultural communication theory in Russia: Present and future. Bulletin of the Russian Communication Association: Theory of Communication and Applied Communication, 1, 44-47.
   Google Scholar
• Leontovich, O. A. (2008). Controversial issues in Russian communication study. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Convention, Montreal, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Lu, X. (1998). Rhetoric in ancient China, fifth to third century B.C.E.: A comparison with classical Greek rhetoric. Charleston, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
   Google Scholar
• McGinnies, E., Ward, C.D. (1980). Better liked than right: trustworthiness and expertise as factors of credibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 467-472.
   Google Scholar
• Manusov, V. (Ed.) (2005). The sourcebook of nonverbal measures. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Matsumoto, D. (2006). Culture and cultural worldviews: Do verbal descriptions about culture reflect anything other than verbal descriptions of culture? Culture & Psychology,12, 33-62.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, G. R. (1981). ‘Tis the season to be jolly’: A yuletide 1980 assessment of communication research. Human Communication Research 7, 371-377.
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, R. (1971). Communication and culture in Ancient India and China. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M. & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3-72.
   Google Scholar
• Pearce, W. B. and Foss, K. A. (1990). The historical context of communication as a science. In Dahnke, G. L. and Clatterbuck, G. W. (eds.). Human communication: Theory and research (pp. 1-19). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, J. D. (1999). Speaking into the Air: A history of the idea of communication. Chicago: U. of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Privalova, I. (2006). Ethnoculturally marked linguistic minds interaction as intercultural communication. Vestnick: Communication Theory and Practice, 4,40-48.
   Google Scholar
• Privalova, I. (2008). Communicating worldviews: Linguistic, cultural and social interaction. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Convention, Montreal, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Remington, R. F. (1988). The truth of authority: Ideology and communication in the Soviet Union. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ries, N. (1996, June 17). Russian mentality. Message posted to [email protected]
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. M. (1994). A history of communication study: A biographical approach. New York: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. M. & Chaffee, S. H. (1993). The past and future of communication study: Convergence or divergence? Journal of Communication, 43, 125-131.
   Google Scholar
• Rozina, I. N. & Tuzlukova, V. (2008). Social and cultural contexts of internet-based research communities. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Communication Association Convention, Montreal, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Schramm, W. (1983). The unique perspective of communication: A retrospective view. Journal of Communication 33, 6-17.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, J. C. (2006). The mission of the University: Medieval to postmodern transformations. Journal of Higher Education 77, 1-39.
   Google Scholar
• Shannon, C. E. & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: U. of Illinois Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sinekopova, G. V. (2008). The discipline of communication in US and Russia: Field notes. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Communication Association Convention, Montreal, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Smelser, N. J. (1988). Introduction. In N. J. Smelser (Ed.). Handbook of sociology (pp. 9-19). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sola Pool, I. & Schramm, W. (Eds.) (1973). Handbook of communication. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally College Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Sproule, M. J. (2008). Peroration on “A discipline for all seasons.” Spectra, 44:1, 1(4).
   Google Scholar
• Tolz, V. (2008). European, national, and (anti-) imperial: The formation of academic oriental studies in late Tsarist and early Soviet Russia. Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, 9, 53-91.
   Google Scholar
• Zarefsky, D. (1995). On defining the communication discipline. In J. T. Wood & R. B. Gregg (Eds.), Toward the 21 century: Future of speech communication st (pp. 103-112). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
   Google Scholar