The Cultural Perspective: New Wave, Old Problems

References

• Albrecht, T. L., & Ropp, V. A. (1982). The study of network structuring in organizations through the use of method triangulation. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 46, 162–178.
   Google Scholar
• Bochner, A., & Kelly, C. (1974). Interpersonal competence: Rationale, philosophy, and implementation of a conceptual framework. Speech Teacher, 23, 279–301.
   Google Scholar
• Bochner, A. P., & Kreuger, D. L. (1979). Interpersonal communication theory and research: An overview of inscrutable epistemologies and muddled concepts. In D. Nimmo (Ed.), Communication yearbook 3 (pp. 197–212). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
   Google Scholar
• Brockriede, W. (1978). The research process. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 42, 21–40.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, D., & Fiske, D. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–104.
   Google Scholar
• Compton, C., Hendricks, G., White, K., & DeWine, S. (1986, May). Techno-sense: Interpretive methods of studying technological impacts on organizational communication. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Compton, C., Ugbah, S., & DeWine, S. (1986, May). New technology: The domino effect on information adequacy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Deal, T., & Kennedy, A. (1982). Corporate culture. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Deetz, S. (1982). Critical interpretive research in organizational communication. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 46, 131–149.
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• DeWine, S. (1986, November). Female leadership in male-dominated organizations. Paper presented to the Association for Communication Administrators at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• DeWine, S., Alspach, S., Branch, A., Labiano, A., Liston, S., & McDaniel, N. (1985, April). Women and power in the male-dominated organization: An interpretive study. Paper presented at the Interdisciplinary Conference on “Organizational Policy and Development,” Louisville, KY.
   Google Scholar
• DeWine, S., Brammer, C., Lukens, L., Rauschenberg, G., Shatto, M., & Walence, W. (1984, November). The communication of organizational myths: Creating order out of chaos and confusion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• DeWine, S., James, A., & Walence, W.(1985, May). Validation of organizational communication audit instruments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Honolulu.
   Google Scholar
• DeWine, S., & Pearson, J. (1985a, May). State of the art: Self-report paper and pencil instruments reported in communication journals. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Honolulu.
   Google Scholar
• DeWine, S., & Pearson, J. (1985b, May). The most frequently used self-report instruments in communication. Paperpresented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Honolulu.
   Google Scholar
• Dickens, M. (1983). Laws of experimental research. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 11, 69–73.
   Google Scholar
• Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Farino, G. (1987). Reversal of causal order between organizational communication variables in a field-setting: A replication of Staw’s (1975) laboratory study. Unpublished thesis, Ohio University.
   Google Scholar
• Faules, D. (1982). The use of multi-methods in the organizational setting. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 46, 150–161.
   Google Scholar
• Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 602–610.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, G. (1983). Taking stock of a discipline. Journal of Communication, 33, 31–41.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, G., & Sunnafrank, M. J. (1984). Theoretical dimensions of applied communication research. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 255–263.
   Google Scholar
• Monge, P., Farace, R., Eisenberg, E., Miller, K., & White, L. (1984). The process of studying process in organizational communication. Journal of Communication, 34, 22–43.
   Google Scholar
• Pacanowsky, M. E., & O’Donnell-Trujillo, N. (1982). Communication and organizational cultures. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 46, 115–130.
   Google Scholar
• Perotti, V. (1986). Communicative competence in the organization: Multiple methods toward a viable construct. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio University.
   Google Scholar
• Perotti, V., Lukens, L., & DeWine, S. (1985, May). Management of cultures in emerging organizations: The comparison of two field studies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Honolulu.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, T., & Waterman, R. (1982). In search of excellence: Lessons from America’s best-run companies. New York: Warner.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, M., Reindl, R., & DeWine, S. (1986, May). Electronic mail vs. traditional methods of information dissemination. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, L., & Pacanowsky, M. (1983). Communication and organizations: An interpretive approach. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Rauschenberg, G. (1986). Reducing equivocality and assembling summaries: A Weickian analysis of the information-organizing processes of a North Central Association on-site visitation team. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio University.
   Google Scholar
• Smircich, L. (1983). Concepts of culture and organizational analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 339–358.
   Google Scholar
• Spindler, G. (1982). Doing ethnography of schooling. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Staw, B. M. (1975). Attribution or the “causes” of performance: A general alternative interpretation of cross-sectional research on organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 414–432.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, K. W., & Tymon, W. G. (1982). Necessary properties of relevant research: Lessons from recent criticisms of the organizational sciences. Academy of Management Review, 7, 345–352.
   Google Scholar
• Tompkins, P. K., & Cheney, G. E. (1982). Unobtrusive control decision-making and communication in contemporary organizations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Louisville, K.Y.
   Google Scholar
• Ugbah, S., Brammer, C., Compton, C., Ray, G., & DeWine, S. (1985, November). Organizational mavericks and innovation: A triangulation study of culture. Paper presented at the Speech Communication Association, Denver.
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K. (1979). The social psychology oforganizing (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K. (1980). Blind spots in organizational theorizing. Group and Organization Studies, 5, 178–188.
   Google Scholar
• White, K., Flint, L., & DeWine, S. (1986, May). High-tech, low touch: Nonverbal dependency and technological aversion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Chicago.
   Google Scholar