Shifting voices, oppositional discourse, and new visions for communication studies

Journal of Communication

Volumn 51, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 38-51

  Putnam, Linda L ^a  

^a TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0041077130     PISSN: 00219916     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/joc/51.1.38     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Atwood, R., & McAnany, E. G. (Eds.), (1986). Communication and Latin American society. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
2. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination (M. Holquist, Ed.; C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
3. Barbero, J. M. (1993). Latin America: Cultures in the communication media. Journal of Communication, 43(2), 18-30.
4. Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books.
5. Baxter, L. A., & Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues & dialectics. New York: Guilford.
6. Beniger, J. R. (1993). Communication - Embrace the subject, not the field. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 18-25.
7. Bennett, W. L. (1993). A policy research paradigm for the news media and democracy. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 180-189.
8. Berger, C. R., & Chaffee, S. H. (1988). On bridging the communication gap. Human Communication Research, 15, 311-318.
9. Burke, K. (1969). A grammar of motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.
10. Bulmer, M. (1984). The Chicago School of sociology: Institutionalization, diversity, and the rise of sociological research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11. Carey, J. W. (1989). Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
12. Cheney, G. E. (2000). Interpreting interpretive research: Toward perspectivism without relativism. In S. R. Corman & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational communication: Finding common ground, pp. 17-45. New York: Guilford.
13. Conrad, C. (2000). On the destiny of acceptance frames: Organizational communication discourse. In S. R. Corman & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational communication: Finding common ground, pp. 96-104. New York: Guilford.
14. Corman, S. R. (2000). The need for common ground. In S. R. Corman & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational communication: Finding common ground, pp. 3-13. New York: Guilford.
15. Craig, R. T. (1993). Why are there so many communication theories? Journal of Communication, 43(3), 26-33.
16. Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9, 119-161.
17. Deetz, S. A. (1994). Future of the discipline: The challenges, the research, and the social contribution. In S. A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication yearbook 17 (pp. 565-600). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18. Dervin, B. (1993). Verbing communication: Mandate for disciplinary intervention. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 45-54.
19. Dervin, B., Grossberg, L., O'Keefe, B. J., & Wartella, E. (Eds.). (1989). Rethinking communication. Vol. 1: Paradigm issues. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
20. Durham, F. D. (1998). News frames as social narratives: TWA Flight 800. Journal of Communication, 48(4), 100-117.
21. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Towards clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.
22. Freire, P. (1983). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum.
23. Ferment in the field [special issue]. (1983). Journal of Communication, 33(3).
24. Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory. London: MacMillan Press.
25. Giddens, A. (1991). Structuration theory: Past, present and future. In C. G. A. Bryant & D. Jary (Eds.), Giddens' theory of structuration: A critical appreciation (pp. 201-221). New York: Routledge.
26. Gronbeck, B. E. (1999). Paradigms of speech communication studies: Looking back toward the future. The Carroll G. Arnold Distinguished Lecture. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
27. Grossberg, L. (1993). Can cultural studies find true happiness in communication? Journal of Communication, 43(4), 89-97.
28. Grossberg, L., Nelson, C., & Treichler, P. (Eds.). (1992). Cultural studies. New York: Routledge.
29. Huesca, R., & Dervin, B. (1994). Theory and practice in Latin American alternative communication research. Journal of Communication, 44(4), 53-73.
30. Jackson, N., & Carter, P. (1991). In defense of paradigm incommensurability. Organizational Studies, 12, 109-127.
31. Jackson, N., & Carter, P. (1993). Paradigm wars: A response to Hugh Wilmot. Organizational Studies, 14, 721-725.
32. Jensen, K. B. (1993). The past in the future: Problems and potentials of historical reception studies. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 20-28.
33. Jensen, K. B., & Rosengren, K. E. (1990). Five traditions in search of the audience. European Journal of Communication, 5, 207-239.
34. Kaghan, W., & Phillips, N. (1998). Building the tower of Babel: Communities of practice and paradigmatic pluralism in organizational studies. Organization, 5(2), 191-215.
35. Krippendorff, K. (1989). On the ethics of constructing communication. In B. Dervin, L. Grossberg, B. O'Keefe, & E. Wartella (Eds.), Rethinking communication, Vol. 1: Paradigm issues (pp. 66-96). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
36. Livingstone, S. M. (1993). The rise and fall of audience research: An old story with a new ending. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 5-19.
37. Mancini, P. (1993). The legitimacy gap: A problem of mass media research in Europe and the United States. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 100-109.
38. Miller, K. I. (2000). Common ground from the post-positivist perspective: From "straw person" argument to collaborative coexistence. In S. R. Corman & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational communication: Finding common ground, pp. 46-67. New York: Guilford.
39. Miller, G. R. (1983). Taking stock of the discipline. Journal of Communication, 33(3), 31-41.
40. Monahan, J. L., & Collins-Jarvis, L. (1993). The hierarchy of institutional values in the communication discipline. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 150-157.
41. Mumby, D. K. (2000). Common ground from the critical perspective: Overcoming binary oppositions. In S. R. Corman & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational communication: Finding common ground, pp. 68-86. New York: Guilford.
42. O'Keefe, B. (1993). Against theory. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 75-82.
43. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10, 55-75.
44. Pearce, W. B. (1989). Communication and the human condition. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
45. Peters, J. D. (1986). Institutional sources of intellectual poverty in communication research. Communication Research, 13, 527-559.
46. Poole, M. S., Seibold, D. R., & McPhee, R. D. (1996). The structuration of group decisions. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision making (2nd ed., pp. 114-146). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47. Putnam, L. L. (1983). The interpretive perspective: An alternative to functionalism. In L. L. Putnam & M. E. Pacanowsky (Eds.), Communication in organizations: An interpretive approach (pp. 31-54). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
48. Putnam, L. L., & Holmer, M. (1992). Framing, refraining, and issue development. In L. L. Putnam & M. E. Roloff (Eds.), Communication perspectives on negotiation (pp. 128-155). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
49. Putnam, L. L., Phillips, N., & Chapman, P. (1996). Metaphors of communication and organization. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), The handbook of organizational studies (pp. 375-408). London: Sage.
50. Reardon, K. K., & Rogers, E. M. (1988). Interpersonal versus mass media communication: A false dichotomy. Human Communication Research, 15, 284-303.
51. Rogers, E. M., & Chaffee, S. H. (1993). The past and the future of communication study: Convergence or divergence. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 125-131.
52. Rosengren, K. E. (1993). From field to frog ponds. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 6-17.
53. Rowland, W. D., Jr. (1993). The traditions of communication research and their implications for telecommunications study. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 206-217.
54. Schultz, M., & Hatch, M. J. (1996). Living with multiple paradigms: The case of paradigm interplay in organizational culture studies. Academy of Management Review, 21, 529-557.
55. Shepherd, G. J. (1993). Building a discipline of communication. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 83-91.
56. Shoemaker, P. J. (1993). Communication in crisis: Theory, curricula, and power. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 146-153.
57. Stewart, J., & Zediker, K. (2000). Dialogue as tensional, ethical practice. Southern Communication Journal, 65, 224-242.
58. Streeter, T. (1995). No respect? Disciplinarity and media studies in communication. Introduction: For the study of communication and against the discipline of communication. Communication Theory, 5, 117-129.
59. Swanson, D. L. (1993). Fragmentation, the field, and the future. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 163-172.
60. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
61. Wiemann, J. M., Hawkins, R. P., & Pingree, S. (1988). Fragmentation in the field - and the movement toward integration in communication science. Human Communication Research, 15, 304-310.