To identify or not to identify: A theoretical model of receiver responses to anonymous communication

Communication Theory

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 61-91

  Rains, Stephen A ^a   Scott, Craig R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION; MODEL; THEORETICAL STUDY;

EID: 33847021482     PISSN: 10503293     EISSN: 14682885     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00288.x     Document Type: Article

References (101)

1. Anonymous [Author is C. R. Scott]. (1998). To reveal or not to reveal: A theoretical model of anonymous communication. Communication Theory, 8, 381-407.
2. Antonioni, D. (1994). The effects of feedback accountability on upward appraisal ratings. Personnel Psychology, 47, 349-356.
3. Antonioni, D. (1996). Designing an effective 360-degree appraisal feedback process. Organizational Dynamics, 25, 24-38.
4. Bagdikian, B. H. (2005). When the Post banned anonymous sources. American Journalism Review, 27, 33.
5. Berger, C., & Calabrese, R. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1, 99-112.
6. Berger, C. R. (1987). Communicating under uncertainty. In M. E. Roloff & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Interpersonal processes: New directions in communication research (pp. 39-62). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
7. Bischof, D. (2001). Appeals court affirms right to anonymity online. News Media & the Law, 25, 18.
8. Bornstein, R. F. (1993). Costs and benefits of reviewer anonymity: A survey of journal editors and manuscript reviewers. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 83, 355-370.
9. Bowman, L. M. (2001, August 13). Online anonymity wins again. Retrieved August 16, 2001, from http://news.cnet.com.
10. "Bronco,"a.k.a. Scott, C. R. (2004). Benefits and drawbacks of anonymous online communication: Legal challenges and communicative recommendations. In S. Drucker (Ed.), Free speech yearbook (Vol. 41, pp. 127-141). Washington, DC: National Communication Association.
11. Cho, M. K., Justice, A. C., & Winker, M. A. (1998). Masking author identity in peer review. What factors influence masking success? Journal of the American Medical Association, 280, 243-245.
12. Cline, R. J., & Haynes, K. M. (2001). Consumer health information seeking on the Internet: The state of the art. Health Education Research, 16, 671-692.
13. Dennis, A. R. (1996). Information exchange and use in small group decision making. Small Group Research, 27, 532-550.
14. Dennis, A. R., Hilmer, K. M., & Taylor, N. J. (1998). Information exchange and use in GSS and verbal group decision making: Effects of minority influence. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14, 61-88.
15. DeSanctis, G., & Gallupe, R. B. (1987). A foundation for the study of group decision support systems. Management Sciences, 33, 589-609.
16. DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5, 121-147.
17. Diener, E., Fraser, S. C., Beaman, A. L., & Kelem, R. T. (1976). Effects of deindividuation variables on stealing among Halloween trick-or-treaters. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 178-183.
18. Dubrovsky, V. J., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B. N. (1991). The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision-making groups. Human-Computer Interaction, 6, 119-146.
19. Dutton, W. H. (1992). The social impact of emerging telephone services. Telecommunications Policy, 16, 377-387.
20. El-Shinnawy, M., & Vinze, A. S. (1997). Technology, culture, and persuasiveness: A study of choice-shifts in group settings. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 47, 473-496.
21. Erickson, K. V., & Fleuriet, C. A. (1991). Presidential anonymity: Rhetorical identity management and the mystification of political reality. Communication Quarterly, 39, 272-289.
22. Froomkin, A. M. (1999). Legal issues in anonymity and pseudonymity. Information, Computers, & Technology, 14, 79-88.
23. Furtwangler, A. (1984). The authority of Publius: A reading of the Federalist Papers. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
24. Gundlach, M., Douglass, S., & Martinko, M. (2003). The decision to blow the whistle: A social information processing framework. The Academy of Management Review, 28, 107-123.
25. Harrison, T. R., & Morrill, C. (2004). Ombuds processes and disputant reconciliation. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 32, 318-342.
26. Hayne, S. C., Pollard, C. E., & Rice, R. E. (2003). Identification of comment authorship in anonymous group support systems. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20, 301-329.
27. Hayne, S. C., & Rice, R. E. (1997). Attribution accuracy when using anonymity in group support systems. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 47, 429-452.
28. Hiltz, R. S., & Turoff, M. (1978). The network nation: Human communication via computer. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
29. Hopkins, T. (1889). Anonymity? New Review, 1, 513-531.
30. Hopkins, T. (1890). Anonymity? II. New Review, 2, 265-276.
31. Johnston, D. (2001, October 26). A nation challenged: The investigation. The New York Times, p. 6.
32. Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 177-193.
33. Justice, A. C., Cho, M. K., & Winker, M. A. (1998). Does masking author identity improve peer review quality? A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280, 240-242.
34. Kashy, D. A., & Kenny, D. A. (2000). The analysis of data from dyads and groups. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 451-477). New York: Cambridge University Press.
35. Kellermann, K., & Reynolds, R. (1990). When ignorance is bliss: The role of motivation to reduce uncertainty in uncertainty reduction theory. Human Communication Research, 17, 5-75.
36. Kenny, D. A., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., Livi, S., & Kashy, D. A. (2002). The statistical analysis of data from small groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 126-137.
37. Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123-1134.
38. Klein, J. (1996, July 29). A brush with anonymity. Newsweek, 128, 76.
39. Lea, M., Spears, R., & de Groot, D. (2001). Knowing me, knowing you: Anonymity effects on social identity processes within groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 526-537.
40. LeBon, G. (1896). The crowd: A study of the popular mind. New York: Macmillan.
41. Lievrouw, L., & Finn, T. A. (1990). Identifying the common dimensions of communication: The communications systems model. In B. Ruben & L. Lievrouw (Eds.), Mediation, information, and communication: Information and behavior (Vol. 3, pp. 37-65). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
42. Lorne, M. (2005, May 23). Big news media join in push to limit use of unidentified sources. New York Times, C1, -C4.
43. Marx, G. T. (1999). What's in a name? Some reflections on the sociology of anonymity. Information Society, 15, 99-112.
44. Marx, G. T. (2004). Internet anonymity as reflection of broader issues involving technology and society. Asia-Pacific Review, 11, 142-166.
45. Marx, G. T. (2006). Varieties of personal information as influences on attitudes toward surveillance. In K. Haggerty & R. Ericson (Eds.), The new politics of surveillance and visibility (pp. 79-110). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
46. McDowell, S. R. (2004). Legal: Understanding Sarbanes-Oxley's whistle-blower provisions. Association Management, 56, 23.
47. McGrath, C. (1996, August 18). My tryst with anonymous. The New York Times, p. 35.
48. McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (1998). Coming out in the age of the Internet: Identity "de-marginalization"from virtual group participation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 681-694.
49. Miceli, M. P., Roach, B. L., & Near, J. P. (1988). The motivations of anonymous whistle-blowers: The case of federal employees. Public Personnel Management, 17, 281-296.
50. Mostyn, M. M. (2000). The need for regulating anonymous remailers. International Review of Law, Computers, & Technology, 14, 79-88.
51. Myers, D. (1987). "Anonymity is part of the magic": Individual manipulation of computer-mediated contexts. Qualitative Sociology, 10, 251-266.
52. Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1995). Effective whistle-blowing. Academy of Management Review, 20, 679-709.
53. O'Brien, J. (2002). Putting a face to a (screen) name: The first amendment implications of compelling ISPs to reveal the identities of anonymous Internet speakers in online defamation cases. Fordham Law Review, 70, 2745-2776.
54. O'Sullivan, P. B. (1999). Bridging mass and interpersonal communication: Synthesis scholarship in HCR. Human Communication Research, 25, 569-588.
55. Pinsonneault, A., & Heppel, N. (1997). Anonymity in group support systems research: A new conceptualization, measure, and contingency framework. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14, 89-108.
56. Poole, M. S., & DeSanctis, G. (1990). Understanding the use of group decision support systems: The theory of adaptive structuration. In J. Fulk & C. Steinfield (Eds.), Organizations and communication technology (pp. 173-193). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
57. Postmes, T., & Lea, M. (2000). Social processes and group decision making: Anonymity in group decision support systems. Ergonomics, 43, 1252-1274.
58. Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1998). Deindividuation and anti-normative behavior: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 238-259.
59. Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1998). Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 25, 689-715.
60. Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (2000). The formation of group norms in computer-mediated communication. Human Communication Research, 26, 341-371.
61. Price, A. R. (1998). Anonymity and pseudonymity in whistleblowing to the U.S. Office of Research Integrity. Academic Medicine, 73, 467-472.
62. Rains, S. A. (2005). What's in a name: Two studies examining the impact of anonymity on perceptions of source credibility and influence. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
63. Rains, S. A. (2007). The impact of anonymity on perceptions of source credibility and influence in computer-mediated group communication: A test of two competing hypotheses. Communication Research, 34, 955-970.
64. Ramirez, A., Jr., Walther, J. B., Burgoon, J. K., & Sunnafrank, M. (2002). Information seeking strategies, uncertainty, and computer-mediated communication: Toward a conceptual model. Human Communication Research, 28, 213-228.
65. Reicher, S., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena. European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 161-198.
66. Rodriquez, A., & Clair, R. P. (1999). Graffiti as communication: Exploring the discursive tensions of anonymous texts. Southern Communication Journal, 65, 1-15.
67. Roffman, R. A., Picciano, J., Wickizer, L., Bolan, M., & Ryan, R. (1998). Anonymous enrollment in AIDS prevention telephone group counseling: Facilitating the participation of gay and bisexual men in intervention and research. Journal of Social Service Research, 23, 5-22.
68. Sassenberg, K., & Boos, M. (2003). Attitude change in computer-mediated communication: Effects of anonymity and category norms. Group Processes &Intergroup Relations, 6, 405-422.
69. Scott, C. R. (1999). The impact of physical and discursive anonymity on group members' multiple identifications during computer-mediated decision making. Western Journal of Communication, 63, 456-487.
70. Scott, C. R. (2005). Anonymity in applied communication research: Tensions between IRBs, researchers, and human subjects. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 33, 242-257.
71. Scott, C. R., Quinn, L., Timmerman, C. E., & Garrett, D. (1999). Ironic uses of group communication technology: Evidence from meeting transcripts and interviews with group decision support system users. Communication Quarterly, 46, 353-374.
72. Scott, C. R., & Rains, S. A. (2005). Anonymous communication in organizations: Assessing use and appropriateness. Management Communication Quarterly, 19, 157-197.
73. Scott, C. R., Sage, D. M., Timmerman, C. E., & Quinn, L. (1997, May). When the virtual honeymoon is virtually over: Declining benefits associated with repeated usage of a computerized group decision support system. Paper presented at the International Communication Association's annual conference, Montreal, Canada.
74. Shenon. P., & Stolberg, S. G. (2001, November 18). A nation challenged: The anthrax inquiry. The New York Times, p. 1.
75. Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 157-187.
76. Simmel, G. (1971). The metropolis and metal life. In D. N. Levine (Ed.), On individuality and social forms (pp. 324-339). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1903)
77. Smolkin, R. (2005). 69% a source of encouragement. American Journalism Review, 27, 30-32.
78. Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or panopticon? The hidden power in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 21, 427-459.
79. Spears, R., Postmes, T., Lea, M., & Wolbert, A. (2002). The power of influence and the influence of power in virtual groups: A SIDE look at CMC and the Internet. The Journal of Social Issues, 58, 91-108.
80. Starkey, P. (1995). Can secrecy breed excellence? New Scientist, 146, 52-54.
81. Stein, E. (2003). Queers anonymous: Lesbians, gay men, free speech, and cyberspace. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 38, 159-203.
82. Steinmeyer, P. A. (2001). Anonymous speech. The National Law Journal, 23, B8.
83. Stewart, S. M., & McBride-Chang, C. (2000). Influences on children's sharing in a multi-cultural setting. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 333-348.
84. Sundar, S. S. (1998). Effect of source attribution on perception of online news stories. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 75, 55-68.
85. Sundar, S. S., & Nass, C. (2001). Conceptualizing sources in online news. Journal of Communication, 51, 52-72.
86. Tanis, M., & Postmes, T. (2007). Two faces of anonymity: Paradoxical effects of cues to identity in CMC. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 955-970.
87. Teich, A., Frankel, M. S., Kling, R., & Lee Y. (1999). Anonymous communication policies for the Internet: Results and recommendations of the AAAS conference. Information Society, 15, 71-77.
88. Tidwell, L. C., & Walther, J. B. (2002). Computer-mediated communication effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations: Getting to know one another a bit at a time. Human Communication Research, 28, 317-348.
89. Title, C. R. (1989). Influences on urbanism: A test of predictions from three perspectives. Social Problems, 36, 270-287.
90. Title, C. R., & Stafford, M. C. (1992). Urban theory, urbanism, and urban residences. Social Forces, 70, 725-744.
91. Walther, J. B. (1994). Anticipated ongoing interaction versus channel effects on relational communication in computer mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 20, 473-501.
92. Walther, J. B. (2002). Time effects in computer-mediated groups: Past, present, and future. In P. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds.), Distributed work (pp. 235-257). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
93. Walther, J. B., Slovacek, C. L., & Tidwell, L. C. (2001). Is a picture worth a thousand words? Photographic images in long-term and short-term computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 28, 105-134.
94. Wayner, P. (1999). Technology for anonymity: Names by other nyms. Information Society, 15, 90-97.
95. Williams, R. (1988). Reflections on anonymity. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 67, 763-766.
96. Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a way of life. The American Journal of Sociology, 44, 1-24.
97. Wright, T. J., & Orbe, M. (2003). Turning the tables of analysis in intercultural communication research: Studying the facework strategies used by "Anonymous"European American reviewers. The Howard Journal of Communications, 14, 1-14.
98. Wulfemeyer, K. T. (1985). How and why anonymous attribution is used by Time and Newsweek. Journalism Quarterly, 62, 81-86.
99. Wulfemeyer, K. T., & McFadden, L. L. (1986). Anonymous attribution in network news. Journalism Quarterly, 63, 468-473.
100. Zuboff, S. (1988). In the age of the smart machine: The future of work and power. New York: Basic Books.
101. Zuzel, M. (1998). Signed editorials: An end to anonymity? The Masthead, 50, 3-14.