--------------------------------------------------------------
####### ######## ######## ###########
### ### ## ### ## # ### #
### ### ## ### ## ###
### ### ## ### ###
### ######## ### ###
### ### ### ###
### ### ### ## ###
### ### ### ## ###
####### ### ######## ###
--------------------------------------------------------------
Published by the Center for Teaching and Technology,
Academic
Computing Center, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C.
This article is archived as CALDWELL IPCTV1N1 on
LISTSERV@GUVM
(LISTSERV@GUVM.GEORGETOWN.EDU)
--------------------------------------------------------------
---
STARVING AT THE BANQUET: SOCIAL ISOLATION IN
ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATION MEDIA
Barrett S. Caldwell and Lilas H. Taha
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of
Wisconsin
Madison, WI, USA
ABSTRACT
The rise in use of electronic computer-mediated
communications systems (CMCS) has been suggested to provide
benefits for members of small groups in increasing the amount
of
communication and reducing social isolation in organizational
and
other settings. However, social and technological issues
related
to CMCS use may in fact increase the perceived social
isolation
experienced by users of CMCS. This paper defines isolation in
the context of communication access and information exchange.
Included in this context are characteristics of communications
media and organizational tasks which vary in amount and
content
of communication supported. CMCSs vary in their ability to
support these communications, and use of a system which cannot
adequately support the communications needs of the group will
fail to allow efficient and successful use of the CMCS in the
group process. Suggestions are provided for future research
and
for relevant criteria to establish bases of CMCS requirements
to
support productive group process.
INTRODUCTION
By definition, any communication technology or medium acts to
produce contact between persons through the sharing of ideas
and
symbols. This contact can be immediate, reciprocal, and
evident,
such as a face-to-face meeting, or it can be very distant in
time
and place, and unidirectional in effect, such as a journal
article or recorded television program. Advanced
communication
technologies, particularly computer-based electronic
communications, seek to increase the amount of contact, and
therefore decrease "distance" between persons--either
physical,
temporal, or social--through the communications medium.
Interpersonal communications play an especially strong
role
in organizations, as a method of sharing and maintaining
organizational culture (Schein, 1990), organizing and
clarifying
work group tasks (Sundstrom, DeMeuse, and Futrell, 1990), and
reducing work stress (Bradley, 1989; Sauter, Murphy, &
Hurrell,
1990). In particular, the lack of appropriate social support
and
communication is seen as a primary source of work stress (see
Sauter et al., 1990), and that improved support is related to
resistance to stress, illness, or pain (see, for example,
Feuerstein, Sult, & Houle, 1985; Ouellette Kobasa & Puccetti,
1983).
The social, organizational, and technological barriers to
implementing and evaluating a computer-mediated communication
system (CMCS) or other electronic medium provide significant
social as well as technical problems for system designers and
administrators, managers of organizations, and behavioral
researchers (Bradley, 1989; Eason, 1988; Olson, 1989). Some
researchers suggest that as few as 20% of system
implementations
are successful (Eason, 1988). Major factors contributing to
system failures and reduced productivity include poor
integration
of the CMCS into organizational activities, or cultural
resistance to CMCS adoption (Caldwell, 1992b; Eason, 1988; T.
Lowry, personal communication, October 15, 1992). Inadequate
advance planning or system installation also lead to limited
CMCS
use (Maryniak(Nelson) & Caldwell, 1992).
If, then, a majority of new CMCS implementations result
in
partial or major failure, organizations may actually increase,
rather than decrease, communication distances between members
of
the organization by forcing inappropriate CMCS use. An
understanding of the uses, requirements and capabilities of
electronic communication between group members is essential to
understanding the role of CMCS in social and organizational
behavior.
DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNICATION MEDIA INDICES
Communications media provide varying amounts of
information
content due to the restrictions in the modes or
types of information which can be shared through the medium
(Daft
& Lengel, 1984; Rice, 1984; Short, Williams, & Christie,
1976).
For instance, written messages fail to communicate many non-
verbal cues such as intonation, body posture, or facial
expression. A number of indices have been proposed to
quantify
the capability of various communication media to support the
communication process. Short, Williams, and Christie (1976)
discuss media in terms of "social presence," which relates to
perceptual and affective characteristics such as warmth and
support for personal and sensitive interaction (see also Fulk,
Steinfield, Schmitz, & Power, 1987). An alternative view
characterizes media in terms of "information richness" (Daft &
Lengel, 1984, 1986; Trevino, Lengel, & Daft, 1987); Rice
(1984)
uses the term "bandwidth" to describe similar concepts.
Richness
is defined primarily by objective and technical medium
characteristics, including speed of feedback and information
transmission capacity of communication channels available with
the medium.
Several authors (for instance, Allen & Hauptman, 1987;
Daft
& Lengel, 1986; Fulk, et al., 1987; Trevino, et al., 1987)
discuss aspects of social presence and information richness as
distinctions between objective and subjective media
characteristics. Although there may be some logical
dependence
between these characteristics, it may be more profitable to
conceive of objective and subjective characteristics as
complementary but different dimensions of communications media
The authors' research (Taha & Caldwell, 1992) has shown that
acceptability of 12 communications media with increasing
transmission delay was significantly related to information
richness, but not social presence as originally defined by
Short,
Williams, and Christie (1976).
An important factor in perceived acceptability was the
objective medium characteristic of whether the medium was
synchronous (interactive) or asynchronous (sequential)
(Caldwell,
1992b; Taha & Caldwell, 1992). An additional issue is that
task
requirements and types of interactions vary in the level and
type
of information required for effective performance of a task in
an
organizational setting. Some relevant task variables
differing
in required characteristics of information exchange include
task
ambiguity, immediacy, and information channels required
(Trevino
et al., 1987); or task structure, organizational goals, and
task
duration (Allen & Hauptman, 1987; Keen, 1987). Research on
group
process feedback and CMCS use in group task performance
(Losada,
S nchez, & Noble, 1990) indicated that a lack of group process
feedback to group members led to a reduction in social
exchanges
in the CMCS. This reduction in social information was not
offset
by increases in task-related information. Therefore, the lack
of
group process feedback led to an overall decline in CMCS use
(communication exchange) by group members.
COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL ISOLATION
The lack of appropriate communication can be considered
characteristic of social isolation. As defined by Altman
(1975),
isolation is the state where one's achieved level of social
contact is lower than one's desired level of contact.
Isolation
differs from privacy in that privacy occurs when desired and
achieved interpersonal contact match (Altman, 1975; Altman &
Taylor, 1973). In Altman's view, social invasion occurs when
actual or perceived contact exceeds desired contact.
Individuals
vary in their requirements for communication based on
personality, situational, and task demand variables (Altman &
Taylor, 1973; McGrath, 1984; Rice, Hughes, & Love, 1989;
Sundstrom, 1987/1991; Sundstrom et al., 1990). If the
individual's information exchange or social contact demands
exceed the capability of the medium, a case of relative
isolation
will result.
The emphasis of desired contact by an individual and
environmental allowances to achieve contact, described by
Altman
(1975), is also seen in Murray's (1938) elaboration of
manifest
or latent needs and environmental "press". Altman (1975)
and Murray (1938) discuss social contact at the level of an
individual interacting with other individuals. Other research
(Bechtel & Ledbetter, 1980; Caldwell, 1992a) has discussed
social
contact and isolation at the group level. A group is
considered
isolated when the number of contacts with persons outside the
group is small relative to the number of contacts with other
members of the group. Bechtel and Ledbetter (1980) describe a
group contact ratio of within group contacts to total
contacts:
complete group isolation would occur with a contact ratio of
1.0.
Research in social networks and social support (Rice,
Grant, Schmitz, & Torobin, 1990; Rice et al., 1989) has
demonstrated that persons with broader and more varied social
contacts are shown to be more resistant to stress. (More
varied
contacts would be demonstrated by low group contact ratios for
any group of which the person is a member). Such research
suggests that social isolation (either as an individual not in
contact with anyone, or as a member of a group with limited
contact outside of the group) has significant health
detriments.
CMCS AND ISOLATION IN THE ORGANIZATION
Substantial research has addressed where and how CMCS is
used in organizations, and the effectiveness of CMCS
technologies
(see, for example, Balasubramanian, 1987; Hiltz & Johnson,
1990;
Papa & Papa, 1990; Rice, 1984; Rice & Williams, 1984; Rice et
al., 1990). In the context of reducing social isolation, a
CMCS
is effective to the extent that it allows persons to achieve
desired levels of contact relative to their needs for
information
and social or professional interaction.
In some cases, the difficulty of access to or use of the
system may be a barrier to appropriate use of the CMCS (Eason,
1988; Rice & Shook, 1988); social and organizational support
for
the CMCS also significantly influence CMCS use (Blomberg,
1987;
Rice et al., 1990; Taylor, 1987). Research has shown that
processes of developing group norms and group decision making
are
affected by the cues transmitted through the medium (Archer,
1990; Spears, Lea, & Lee, 1990).
A necessary fraction of communications between group
members, even in task-oriented groups, is social or
emotionally-
based communication (McGrath, 1984; Parsons, 1955; Radloff &
Helmreich, 1968). When adequate feedback about the group
interaction is not given to group members, the amount of
social
information exchanged in the CMCS is reduced, without an
increase
in the amount of task information exchanged (Losada et al.,
1990). It is clear that CMCS as a sole method of interaction
will not be acceptable for many workers, as is seen by the
difficulties in implementing full telecommuting (Mokhtarian,
1991). A major reason for this lack of universal acceptance
is
the social isolation which results from the restrictions in
unplanned, informal face-to-face contact with coworkers (BYTE
Roundtable, 1991; Sproull & Kiesler, 1991).
CMCS AND CONTACT REQUIREMENTS IN THE ORGANIZATION
Considering Altman's (1975) view of isolation in terms of
desired vs. achieved contact, isolation in the organization
can
have social and technological origins, and not simply physical
distance characteristics. In a survey of perceived isolation
among 137 National Park rangers, ratings of perceived physical
isolation of park areas were very clearly related to objective
characteristics of park use and distance to urban centers of
varying sizes. Approximately 64% of differences in physical
isolation ratings was explained by distance and park use
variables. Ratings of perceived social isolation, however,
were
only partially explained by objective physical
characteristics.
Only 36% of variations in social isolation ratings were
explained
by distance to cities or park use variables (Caldwell, 1990).
As
the use of CMCS and other electronic media expands to
increasing
numbers of remote areas and telecommuters, physical distance
is a
less effective parameter in explaining characteristics of an
individual's perceived isolation from the organization.
Research by Spears, Lea & Lee (1990) suggests that groups
formed through CMCS may not prefer face to face interaction,
due
to the conflicts in cues between the CMCS experience and more
visual or spontaneous interaction. In addition, anonymous
CMCS
interactions often generate more critical comments and less
personal satisfaction with group process (Jessup, Connolly, &
Tansik, 1990). The greater ability to control interactions
and
impressions other group members have of the individual may
lead
some individuals to prefer to interact solely through CMCS
(Sproull & Kiesler, 1991). Social contact for those persons
would then be limited to the information and interactions
permitted through that technology. Paraverbal or nonverbal
cues
that are not available in text-based CMCS are less effectively
transmitted. This absence of cues forces users to attempt
activities inadequately which rely on such cues, or not
attempt
them at all (IPCT, 1992).
Restricting communications to these relatively sparse
types
will not sufficiently address the span of tasks and
information
cues required of the small group in the organization.
Researchers such as Daft and Lengel (1984, 1986; Trevino,
Lengel,
& Daft, 1987), M. Papa (Papa & Papa, 1990; Papa & Tracy,
1988),
and Rice (1984; Rice, et al., 1990) point out that much of the
communication in organizations depends on these paraverbal or
nonverbal cues and that individuals prefer to use media which
can
transmit those cues. Promoting CMCS technologies for broad
ranges of group interactions and decision-making will not
benefit
all types of group processes (Archer, 1990; Kiesler, Siegel, &
McGuire, 1984; Smolensky, Carmody, & Halcomb, 1990), and will
not
be equally appropriate or efficient for all individuals in the
organization (Papa & Tracy, 1988; Rice et al., 1989; Rice et
al.,
1990).
FUTURE REQUIREMENTS AND CONSIDERATIONS
In order to maximize productivity, an effective CMCS
technology should fit appropriately into the communications
needs
of an organization, and allow for desired communications types
and modes with a minimum of perceived restrictions or
organizational or economic costs (Eason, 1988). However, CMCS
research often focuses on very restricted communications
modalities (McGrath, 1984; Taha & Caldwell, 1992), even though
some quantitative comparisons have been completed between
communications modes or media (see, for example, Caldwell,
Maryniak, & Taha, 1992; Rice, 1984; Rice & Williams, 1984;
Short
et al., 1976). The increased power of new computer hardware
and
software to provide additional information capabilities in
"groupware" contexts (see Michalski, 1991) may provide
additional
capability for providing richer and more diverse types of
interpersonal communication. Previous research in CMCS use,
however, has not evaluated groupware such as computer video
conferencing or group document preparation (Landow, 1990; Taha
&
Caldwell, 1992).
Research in examining CMCS acceptability has shown
significant influences of situational demands and system delay
on
medium acceptability (Caldwell, 1992b; Caldwell et al., 1992).
Perceived acceptability of transmission delays for 12 media in
three distinct survey groups was related to synchroneity
(capability for interactive, rather than sequential,
communication) and perceived information richness of the
media.
The relationships between delay and acceptability were
described
by a differential equation model also used to characterize
electronic and mechanical feedback systems (Caldwell, 1992b).
Coefficients of the equation corresponding to "costs"
(reducing
use of the CMCS) and "benefits" (increasing use of the CMCS)
were
both related to perceived information richness as defined by
Trevino, Daft, and Lengel (1987).
Further research into CMCS processes in organizations
should
address the impact of situational and technological variables
on
users' satisfaction with and use of the system. Additional
understanding of media delay and information exchange
influences
on perceived costs and benefits of CMCS use are also needed.
As
new communication media are developed and tested, data must be
integrated in a consistent and clear manner with the classic
social process and communication literature. In addition, the
knowledge gained by additional understanding of the influence
of
CMCS variables on group activity will also suggest the most
advantageous designs of CMCS technologies to pursue. These
contributions will enhance basic understanding of small group
interactions and permit empirical tests of previously
inseparable
variables. As use of CMCS continues to grow, transfer of
small
group and organizational behavior research to product design
will
permit greater satisfaction and more appropriate system
utilization by users of the CMCS. Improved use and
satisfaction
by users thereby allows them to partake of the banquet of
improved group interactions without losing their appetite for
a
range of social interaction or finding themselves weak and
ill-
fed by unused or inappropriate CMCS technology application.
REFERENCES
Allen, T. J., & Hauptman, O. (1987). "The Influence of
Communication Technologies on Organizational Structure: A
Conceptual Model for Future Research." Communication
Research,
14, (5), 575-587.
Altman, I. (1975). The Environment and Social Behavior:
Privacy
Personal Space Territory Crowding. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole
Publishing Company.
Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social Penetration: The
Development of Interpersonal Relationships. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.
Archer, N. P. (1990). "A Comparison of Computer Conferences
with
Face-to-face Meetings for Small Group Business Decisions."
Behaviour and Information Technology, 9 (4), 307-317.
Balasubramanian, J. (1987). "Influence of Status on Group
Interaction Processes: Electronic Mail versus Face-to-Face
Discussions." Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st
Annual Meeting, 1355-1359.
Bechtel, R. B., & Ledbetter, C. B. (1980). Post Occupancy
Evaluation of a Planned Community in Arctic Canada (Special
report No. 80-6). US Army Cold Regions Research and
Engineering
Laboratory.
Blomberg, J. L. (1987). Social Interaction and Office
Communication: Effects on User's Evaluation of New
Technologies.
In R. E. Kraut (Ed.), Technology and the Transformation of
White-
Collar Work (pp. 195-210). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Bradley, G. (1989). Computers and the Psychosocial Work
Environment. London: Taylor & Francis.
BYTE Roundtable (1991). "Is It Time To Telecommute?" BYTE,
16
(5: May), 121 ff.
Caldwell, B. S. (1990). "Development of Models for Park
Rangers'
Perceived Isolation of National Park Service Areas."
Environment
and Behavior, 22 (5), 636-649.
Caldwell, B. S. (1992a). Group Isolation and Performance
Factors
in Human-Environment Systems (AIAA Space Programs and
Technologies Conference No. 92-1530). Huntsville, AL: American
Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Caldwell, B. S. (1992b). The Role of Socio-Technical Systems
Engineering in Implementing Office Automation and Information
Technologies. Paper presented at IFAC Symposium on Automated
Systems Based on Human Skill. Madison, WI: International
Federation of Automatic Control.
Caldwell, B. S., Maryniak, J. A., & Taha, L. H. (1992).
Organizational Acceptance of Communications Media: Situational
and Technological Constraints in Stress Mediation Through
Electronic Social Interaction. Presented at Stress in the
90's: A
Changing Workforce in a Changing Workplace. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information Richness: A
New
Approach to Managerial Behavior and Organization Design. In L.
L.
Cummings & B. Staw (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior
(pp. 191-233). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). "Organizational
Information
Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design."
Management
Science, 32, (5), 554-571.
Eason, K. (1988). Information Technology and Organizational
Change. London: Taylor & Francis.
Feuerstein, M., Sult, S., & Houle, M. (1985). "Environmental
Stressors and Chronic Low
Back Pain: Life Events, Family and Work Environment." Pain,
22,
295-307.
Fulk, J., Steinfield, C. W., Schmitz, J., & Power, J. G.
(1987).
"A Social Information Processing Model of Media Use in
Organizations." Communication Research, 14, (5), 529-552.
Hiltz, S. R., & Johnson, K. (1990). "User Satisfaction with
Computer-Mediated Communication Systems." Management Science,
36, (6), 739-764.
IPCT (1992). Electronic messages (subjects: [CMC and] Online
Discrimination; Interpretation of Visual Images; CMC and
Language
[Learning]; New Language/Symbols in CMC), various authors.
IPCT-
L Electronic Discussion Group: IPCT-L@GUVM.GEORGETOWN.EDU.
Jessup, L. M., Connolly, T., & Tansik, D. A. (1990). "Toward
a
Theory of Automated Group Work: The Deindividuating Effects of
Anonymity." Small Group Research, 21 (3), 333-348.
Keen, P. G. W. (1987). "Telecommunications and Organizational
Choice." Communication Research, 14, (5), 588-606.
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). "Social
Psychological Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication."
American Psychologist, 39 (10), 1123-1134.
Landow, G. P. (1990). Hypertext and Collaborative Work: The
Example of Intermedia. In J. Galegher, R. E. Kraut, & C. Egido
(Eds.), Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technological
Foundations of Cooperative Work (pp. 407-428). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Losada, M., S nchez, P., & Noble, E. E. (1990). Collaborative
Technology and Group Process Feedback: Their Impact on
Interactive Sequences in Meetings. In Conference on Computer-
Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW '90, (pp. 53-64). Los
Angeles,
CA: Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group
on
Computer-Human Interaction (ACM SIGCHI).
Maryniak(Nelson), J. A., & Caldwell, B. S. (1992). Experience,
Utility and Situational Appropriateness: How Does
Organizational
Context Influence Usability of Electronic Communications
Media?
In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual
Meeting,
(pp. 876-880). Atlanta: Human Factors Society.
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Michalski, G. P. (1991). "The World of Documents." BYTE, 16
(4:
April), 159 ff.
Mokhtarian, P. L. (1991). Telecommuting and Travel: State of
the
Practice, State of the Art (No. UCD-ITS-RR-91-05). Davis, CA:
UCD
Institute of Transportation Studies.
Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in Personality. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Olson, M. H. (Ed.). (1989). Technological Support for Work
Group
Collaboration. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ouellette Kobasa, S. C., & Puccetti, M. C. (1983).
"Personality
and Social Resources in Stress Resistance." Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 45, (4), 839-850.
Papa, M. J., & Tracy, K. (1988). "Communicative Indices of
Employee Performance With New Technology." Communication
Research, 15 (5), 524-544.
Papa, M.J. & Papa, W. H. (1990). "Perceptual and
Communicative
Indices of Employee Performance with New Technology." Western
Journal of Speech Communication, 54 (1),21-41.
Parsons, T. (Ed.). (1955). Family, Socialization, &
Interaction
Process. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
Radloff, R., & Helmreich, R. (1968). Groups Under Stress:
Psychological Research in SEALAB II. New York:
Appleton-Century-
Crofts.
Rice, R. E. (1984). "Mediated Group Communication." In R.E.
Rice and Associates (Eds.), The New Media: Communication,
Research and Technology, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 129-156.
Rice, R. E. & Shook, D. E. (1988). "Access to, Usage of, and
Outcomes from an Electronic Messaging System." Association
for
Computing Machinery Transactions on Office Information
Systems,
6 (3: July), 255-276.
Rice, R. E., & Williams, F. (1984). "Theories Old and New:
The
Study of New Media." In R.E. Rice and Associates (Eds.), The
New
Media: Communication, Research and Technology, Beverly Hills,
CA:
Sage, 55-80.
Rice, R. E., Grant, A. E., Schmitz, J. & Torobin, J. (1990).
"Individual and Network Influences on the Adoption and
Perceived
Outcomes of Electronic Messaging." Social Networks, 12,
27-55.
Rice, R. E., Hughes, D., & Love, G. (1989). "Usage and
Outcomes
of Electronic Messaging at an R&D Organization: Situational
Constraints, Job Level and Media Awareness." Office:
Technology
and People, 5 (2), 141-161.
Sauter, S. L., Murphy, L. R., & Hurrell, J. J. Jr. (1990).
"Prevention of Work-Related Psychological Disorders: A
National
Strategy Proposed by the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH)." American Psychologist, 45, (10),
1146-1158.
Schein, E. H. (1990). "Organizational Culture." American
Psychologist, 45, (2), 109-119.
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The Social
Psychology of Telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons.
Smolensky, M. W., Carmody, M. A., & Halcomb, C. G. (1990).
"The
Influence of Task Type, Group Structure and Extraversion on
Uninhibited Speech in Computer-Mediated Communication."
Computers in Human Behavior, 6, 261-272.
Spears, R., Lea, M., & Lee, S. (1990). "De-individuation and
Group Polarization in Computer-mediated Communication."
British
Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 121-134.
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New Ways of
Working in the Networked Organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Sundstrom, E. (1987/1991). Work Environments: Office and
Factories. In D. Stokols & I. Altman (Eds.), Handbook of
Environmental Psychology (pp. 733-782). Malabar, FL: Krieger
Publishing Co.
Sundstrom, E., DeMeuse, K. P., & Futrell, D. (1990). "Work
Teams: Applications and Effectiveness." American
Psychologist,
45, (2), 120-133.
Taha, L. H., & Caldwell, B. S. (1992). Communication Media
Acceptance in Organizations: An Alternative Research Model. In
Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting:
Innovations for Interactions, (pp. 881-885). Atlanta, GA:
Human
Factors Society.
Taylor, J. C. (1987). Job Design and Quality of Working Life.
In
R. E. Kraut (Ed.), Technology and the Transformation of White-
Collar Work (pp. 211-235). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Trevino, L. K., Lengel, R. H., & Daft, R. L. (1987). "Media
Symbolism, Media Richness, and Media Choice in Organizations:
A
Symbolic Interactionist Perspective." Communication Research,
14, (5), 553-574.
-----------------------------------------------------
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE:
BARRETT S. CALDWELL received B.S. degrees in Aeronautics and
Astronautics, and Humanities, from M.I.T. in 1985, and M.A.
(1987) and Ph.D. (1990) degrees in Social Psychology from the
Univ. of California, Davis. He is an assistant professor in
Industrial Engineering at the University of Wisconsin,
Madison.
He studies environmental design, group communication, and
organizational factors affecting human performance, using a
sociotechnical systems engineering perspective.
Barrett S. Caldwell, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Industrial Engineering, Univ. of
Wisconsin-Madison
1513 University Ave., Rm 379, Madison, WI 53706-1572
VOICE: (608) 262-2414 FAX: (608) 262-8454
EMAIL:caldwell@engr.wisc.edu
alt: BSCALDWELL@WISCMACC, barrett@grouper.ie.wisc.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------
---
Copyright 1993 USA. All articles in this publication may be
cited
under the fair use provision, provided proper bibliographic
information is used including name of author, title of
article,
date and journal identification. Libraries may include this
publication, in paper or electronic form, in their collections
at no charge. Authors retain the copyright for all articles
in
this publication. Any commercial use of this journal in whole
or
in part by any means is strictly prohibited without written
permission
from the author(s) and IPCT-J.
Contributions to IPCT-J can be submitted by electronic mail in
APA style to: Gerald Phillips, Editor IPCT-J
GMP3@PSUVM.PSU.EDU