Communication studies and deliberative democracy: Current contributions and future possibilities

Journal of Public Deliberation

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2010, Pages

  Carcasson, Martn ^a   Black, Laura W ^b   Sink, Elizabeth S ^a  

^a Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

^b OHIO UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

argumentation; computer mediated communication; dialogue; environmental communication; group communication; intercultural communication; Rhetoric

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956363214     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (194)

1. Abigail, Ruth Anna, and Cahn, Dudley D. (2010). Managing conflict through communication (4th Ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn.
2. Anderson, R., Cissna, K. N., & Clune, M. K. (2005). The rhetoric of public dialogue. Communication Research Trends, 22(1), 1-43.
3. Anderson, R., Baxter, L.A., Cissna, K. N. (Eds.) (2004). Dialogue: Theorizing difference in communication studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4. Aristotle. (2006). On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse (2d. ed.) Trans. George A. Kennedy. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Arnett, R. & Arneson, P. (1999). Dialogic Civility in a Cynical Age. Albany: State University of New York.
6. Arnett, R. C. (1986). Communication and community: Implications of Martin Buber's dialogue. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
7. Asante, M.,K., Gudykunst, W., & Newmark, E. (2001). Handbook of international and intercultural communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Asen, Robert. (1999). Toward a normative conception of difference in public deliberation. Argumentation and advocacy 35, 115-129.
9. -(2002a). Imagining in the public sphere. Philosophy and Rhetoric 35(4), 345-367.
10. -(2002b). Visions of poverty: Welfare policy and political imagination. East Lansing: Michigan State University.
11. -(2004). A discourse theory of citizenship. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 90(2), 189-211.
12. -(2009). Invoking the invisible hand: Social Security and the privatization debates. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
13. -(2010). Reflections on the role of rhetoric in public policy. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 13, 121-144.
14. Asen, Robert & Brouwer, Daniel C. (Eds.). (2001). Counterpublics and the state. Albany: SUNY press.
15. Aune, Jim. (2007). "Only connect": Between morality and ethics in Habermas' communication theory. Communication Theory 17(4), 340-347.
16. Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction problem analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.
17. Barge, J. Kevin (2002). Enlarging the meaning of group deliberation: From discussion to dialogue. In L.R. Frey (Ed.), New directions in group communication (pp. 159-177). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18. -(2006). Dialogue, conflict, and community. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of conflict communication : Integrating theory, research, and practice (pp. 517-544). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
19. Barnlund, Dean, & Haiman, Franklyn S. (1960). Dynamics of Discussion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
20. Bizzell, Patricia, & Herzberg, B. (2001). Rhetorical tradition: Readings from classical times to the present (2nd ed.). Boston: Bedford Books of St. Martin's Press.
21. Black, L. W. (2008). Deliberation, storytelling, and dialogic moments. Communication Theory, 18, 93-116.
22. -(2009). Listening to the city: Difference, identity, and storytelling in online deliberative groups. Journal of Public Deliberation, 5, 1-35.
23. Black, L. W., Burkhalter, S., Gastil, J., & Stromer-Galley, J. (In Press, 2010). Methods for analyzing and measuring group deliberation. In L. Holbert & E. Bucy (Eds.), Sourcebook of political communication: Methods, measures, and analytic techniques. New York: Routledge.
24. Booth, Wayne. (2004). The rhetoric of rhetoric: The quest for effective communication. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
25. Borisoff, Deborah, & Victor, David A. (1998). Conflict management: A communication skills approach (2d ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
26. Bone, Jennifer E., Griffin, Cindy L., and Scholz, T. M. Linda. (2008). Beyond traditional conceptualizations of rhetoric: Invitational rhetoric and a move toward civility. Western Journal of Communication, 72, 434-462
27. Bostdorff, Denise M. (2008). Preparing undergraduates for democratic citizenship: Upholding the legacy of William Norwood Brigance through rhetorical education. In T.F. McDorman and D. M. Timmerman (Eds.). Rhetoric and Democracy: Pedagogical and Political Practices (pp. 39-74). East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
28. Broda-Bahm, Ken, Kempf, Daniela, and Driscoll, William. (2004). Argument and audience: Presenting debates in public settings. New York: International Debate Education Association.
29. Burkhalter, S., Gastil, J., & Kelshaw, T. (2002). A conceptual definition and theoretical model of public deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Communication Theory, 4, 398-422.
30. Campbell, John Angus (1996). Oratory, democracy, and the classroom. In Roger Soder (Ed.) Democracy, Education, and the Schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
31. Cappella, J. N., Price, V., & Nir, L. (2002). Argument repertoire as a reliable and valid measure of opinion quality: Electronic dialogue during campaign 2000. Political Communication, 19, 73-93.
32. Conley, Thomas M. (1990). Rhetoric in the European Tradition. White Plains, NY: Longman.
33. Cox, J. R. (1999). Reclaiming the "indecorous" voice: Public participation by low-income communities in environmental decision making. In C. B. Short & D. Hardy-Short (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 21-31). Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University School of Communication.
34. (2006). Environmental communication and the public sphere. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35. Cox, Robert, & Foust, Christina R. (2006). Social movement rhetoric. In A. Lunsford (Ed.) The SAGE Handbook of Rhetorical Studies (pp. 605-62). Los Angeles: Sage.
36. Crick, Nathan. (2010). Democracy & rhetoric: John Dewey on the arts of becoming. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
37. Cronen, V. (1995). Practical theory and the tasks ahead for social approaches to communication. In L. Leeds-Hurwitz (Ed.) Social Approaches to Communication (pp. 217-242). New York: The Guilford Press
38. Czubaroff, Jeanine. (2007). Justice and argument: Toward development of a dialogical argumentation theory. Argumentation and Advocacy, 44, 18-35.
39. Dahlberg, L. (2001). The internet and democratic discourse: Exploring the prospects of online deliberative forums extending the public sphere. Information, Communication, & Society, 4, 615-633.
40. -(2007). Rethinking the fragmentation of the cyberpublic: From consensus to contestation. New Media & Society, 9, 827-847.
41. Dahlgren, P. (2005). The internet, public spheres, and political communication: dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication, 22, 147-162.
42. Daniels, S. E., & Walker, G. B. (2001). Working through environmental conflict: The collaborative learning approach. Westport, CT: Praeger.
43. Danisch, Robert. (2007). Pragmatism, democracy, and the necessity of rhetoric. Columbia, SC: South Carolina Press.
44. Deetz, S. A. (1992). Democracy in an age of corporate colonization: Developments in communication and the politics of everyday life. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
45. -(1999). Participatory democracy as a normative foundation for communication studies. In T.L. Jacobson & Jan Servaes (Eds.), Theoretical approaches to participatory communication (pp. 131-167). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
46. Depoe, S. P., Delicath, J. W., & Elsenbeer, M-F. A. (Eds.). (2004). Communication and public participation in environmental decision making. Albany: State University of New York Press.
47. Eberly, R. (2000). Citizen critics: Literary public spheres. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
48. -(2002) Rhetoric and the anti-logos doughball: Teaching deliberating bodies the practices of participatory democracy. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 5, 287-300;
49. Ehninger, D., & Hauser, G. (1984). Communication of values. In C.C. Arnold and J.W. Bowers (Eds.), Handbook of Rhetorical and Communication Theory (pp. 720-748). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
50. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of facebook "friends:" Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12 (4).
51. Escobar, Oliver. (2009). The dialogic turn: Dialogue for deliberation. In-Spire Journal of Law, Politics and Societies, 4 (2), 42-70.
52. Ewbank, H. L., & Auer, J.J. (1951). Discussion and Debate. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
53. Farrell, T. (1993). Norms of rhetorical culture. New Haven: Yale University Press.
54. Fincham, F.D., Paleari, F.G., & Regalia, C. (2002). Forgiveness in marriage: The role of relationship quality, attributions, and empathy. Personal Relationships, 9, 27-38.
55. Fischer, F. (2009). Democracy and expertise: Reorienting policy inquiry. New York: Oxford University Press.
56. Fishkin, J. S. (1991). Democracy and deliberation: New directions for democratic reform. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
57. Fishkin, J. S., & Farrar, C. (2005). Deliberative polling: From experiment to community resource. In J. Gastil, & P. Levine (Eds.), The deliberative democracy handbook: Strategies for effective civic engagement in the 21st century (pp. 68-79). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
58. Fishkin, J. S. & Luskin, R. C. (1999). Bringing deliberation to the democratic dialogue. In M. McCombs and A. Reynolds (Eds.), The poll with a human face: The National Issues Convention experiment in political communication (pp. 3-38). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
59. Fontana, B, Nederman, C. J. & Remer, G. (Eds.). (2004). Talking democracy: Historical perspectives on rhetoric and democracy. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
60. Foss, S. J., & Griffin, C. L. (1995). Beyond persuasion: A proposal for an invitational rhetoric. Communication Monographs, 62, 2-18.
61. Fraser, N. (1992). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 109-142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
62. Frey, L. R. (1995). Innovations in group facilitation: Applications in natural settings. Creskill, NJ: Hampton.
63. (1999). Handbook of group communication theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
64. (2002). New directions in group communication research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
65. -(2006). Facilitating group communication in context: Innovations and applications with natural groups (Vol. 1 and 2). Creskill, NJ: Hampton.
66. Frey, L. R., & Cissna, K. (Eds.). (2009). The Routledge handbook of applied communication research. New York: Routledge.
67. Gastil, J. & Dillard, J. P. (1999). The aims, methods, and effects of deliberative civic education through the national issues forums. Communication Education 48, 179-192;
68. Gastil, J. (1992). A definition of small group democracy. Small Group Research, 23, 278-301.
69. -(1993). Democracy in small groups: Participation, decision making, & communication. Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers.
70. -(2000). By popular demand: Revitalizing representative democracy through deliberative elections. Berkeley: University of California Press.
71. -(2004). Adult civic education through the National Issues Forums: Developing democratic habits and dispositions through public deliberation. Adult Education.
72. (2008). Political communication and deliberation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
73. (2009). The group in society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
74. Gastil, J., & Black, L.W. (2008). Public deliberation as the organizing principle in political communication research. Journal of Public Deliberation, 4.
75. Gastil, J., & Levine, P. (Eds.). (2005). The deliberative democracy handbook: Strategies for effective civic engagement in the 21st century. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
76. Gastil, J., Black, L. W., & Moscovitz, K. (2008). Ideology, attitude change, and deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Political Communication, 25, 23-46;
77. Gastil, J., Black, L. W., Deess, P., & Leighter, J. (2008). From group member to democratic citizen: How deliberating with fellow jurors reshapes civic attitudes. Human Communication Research, 34, 137-169.
78. Gastil, J., Burkhalter, S., & Black, L. (2007). Do juries deliberate? A study of deliberation, individual difference, and group member satisfaction at a municipal courthouse. Small Group Research, 38, 337-359.
79. Gastil, J., Deess E.P., & Weiser, P. (2002). Civic Awakenings in the Jury Room: A Test of the Connection between Deliberation and Political Participation. Journal of Politics 64, 585-94.
80. Gehrke, Pat. J. The Ethics and Politics of Speech: Communication and Rhetoric in the Twentieth Century. Carbondale: Southern Illinois Press, 2009.
81. Glenn, Cheryl, & Carcasson, M. (2008). Rhetoric as pedagogy. In Andrea A. Lunsford. (Ed.), Sage Handbook of Rhetorical Studies (pp. 285-92). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
82. Goldzwig, Steven R. (2006). Demogoguery, democratic dissent, and 'revisioning' democracy. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 9 (3), 471-478.
83. Goodnight, G. Thomas. (1982) The personal, technical, and public spheres of argument: A speculative inquiry into the art of public deliberation. Argumentation and Advocacy 18, 214-227.
84. -(1991). Controversy. In D. W. Parson (Ed.), Argument in controversy: Proceedings of the seventh SCA/AFA conference on argumentation (pp. 1-13). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
85. -(2005). Science and technology controversy: A rationale for inquiry. Argumentation and advocacy, 42, 26-29.
86. Goodnight, Thomas G. & Hingstman, David B. (1997). Studies in the public sphere. Quarterly Journal of Speech 83, 351-399.
87. Gravel, A. (2001). Power and change in the 21st century: An exploration of the Industrial Areas Foundation as a model of theory and pedagogy in the persuasion course. Communication Education, 50, 177-186.
88. Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. Cambridge: MIT Press
89. Halloran, S. M. (1982). Rhetoric in the American college curriculum: The decline of public discourse. Pre/Text, 3, 245-269;
90. Haslett, B. B., & Ruebush, J. (1999). What differences do individual differences in groups make? The effects of individuals, culture, and group composition. In L. R. Frey (Ed.) The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 115-138). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
91. Hauser, G. A. (1998). Civil society and the principles of the public sphere. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 31(1), 19-31.
92. (1999). Vernacular voices: The rhetoric of publics and public spheres. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
93. - (2004). Teaching rhetoric. Or why rhetoric isn't just another kind of philosophy or literary criticism. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 34, 39-53.
94. Hauser, G. A. & Benoit-Barne, C. (2002). Reflections on rhetoric, deliberative democracy, civil society, and trust. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 5(2), 261-275;
95. Hauser, G. A., & Grim, A. (Eds.) (2004). Rhetorical democracy: Discursive practices of civic engagement. Mahwah, J: Lawrence Erlbaum.
96. Hauser, G.A., & Hegbloom, M. T. (2009). Rhetoric and critical theory: Possibilities for reapproachment in public deliberation," in Andrea A. Lunsford (Ed.) The SAGE Handbook of Rhetorical Studies. Los Angeles: Sage.
97. Haythornthwaite, C. (2005). Social networks and Internet connectivity effects. Information, Communication & Society, 8, 125-147.
98. Hegstrom, T. G., & Spano, S. (1997). Providing focus on participatory democracy in academic departments of communication. Journal of the Association for Communication Administration, 3, 180-189.
99. Heidlebaugh, N. (2008). Invention and public dialogue: Lessons from rhetorical theories. Communication Theory, 18, 27-50.
100. Herrick, James A. (2001). The history and theory of rhetoric: An introduction (2nd ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
101. Hickerson, A., & Gastil, J. (2008). Assessing the difference critique of deliberation: Gender, emotion and the jury experience. Communication Theory, 18, 281-303.
102. Hicks, Darrin. (2002). The promise(s) of deliberative democracy. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 5(2), 223-260.
103. Hicks, Darrin, & Langsdorf, Lenore. (1999). Regulating disagreement, constituting participants: A critique of proceduralist theories of democracy. Argumentation, 13, 139-160.
104. Hirokawa, R. Y., & Salazar, A. J. (1999). Task-group communication and decision-making performance. In L. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole, (Eds.) The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 167-191). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
105. Hogan, J.M. (2008). Rhetorical pedagogy and democratic citizenship: Reviving the traditions of civic engagement and public deliberation. In T.F. McDorman, & D. M. Timmerman (Eds.). Rhetoric and Democracy: Pedagogical and Political Practices (pp. 75-97). East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
106. -(2010). Public address and the revival of American civic culture. In S.J. Parry-Giles, & J.M.Hogan. (Eds.), The handbook of rhetoric and public address (pp. 422-447). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
107. -(1994). The Nuclear Freeze Campaign: Rhetoric and Foreign Policy in the Telepolitical Age. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
108. Hogan, J. M. & Tell, D. (2006). Demagoguery and democratic deliberation: The search for rules of discursive engagement. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 9 (3), 479-487.
109. Hyde, B., & Bineham, J. (2000). From debate to dialogue: Toward a pedagogy of nonpolarized public discourse. The Southern Communication Journal, 65, 208-223.
110. Ivie, Robert L. (1998). Democratic deliberation in a rhetorical republic. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 84, 491-530.
111. Janis, I. (1983). Groupthink: Psychological studies of political decisions and fiascos. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
112. Keith, W. M. (2007). Democracy as discussion: Civic education and the American forum movement. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
113. Kelshaw, T. (2006). Community issues forum facilitation. In L. W. Hugenberg & B. Hugenberg (Eds.), Teaching ideas for the basic course: Vol. 10 (pp. 197-204). Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.
114. -(2007). Understanding abnormal public discourses: Dialogue and deliberation defined. International Journal of Public Participation, 1(2), 69-90.
115. Kennedy, G. A. (1999). Classical rhetoric & its Christian & secular tradition from ancient to modern times (2nd ed.). Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
116. Keyton, J. (1999). Relational communication in groups. In L. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole, (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 192-222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
117. Kotthoff, H., & Spencer-Oatey, H. (2009). Handbook of intercultural communication. New York: Mouton de Guyter Press.
118. Kuhn, T. & Poole, M. S. (2000). Do conflict management styles affect group decision making? Evidence from a longitudinal field study. Human Communication Research, 26, 558-590.
119. Leighninger, Matt. (2010). Creating spaces for change: Working toward a "story of now" in civic engagement. Report from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Available online at http://www.deliberative-democracy.net.
120. Littlejohn, Stephen W., & Domenici, Kathy. (2001). Engaging communication in conflict: System practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
121. Lozano-Reich, Nina M., & Cloud, Dana L. (2009). The uncivil tongue: Invitational rhetoric and the problem of inequality. Western Journal of Communication, 73, 220-226.
122. Makau, J. M., & Marty, D. L. (2001) Cooperative argumentation: A model for deliberative community. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
123. Makau, J.M. (1990). Revisioning the argumentation course. Women's Studies in Communication, 15, 79-91.
124. Mallin, Irwin, & Anderson, Karrin Vasby. (2000). Inviting constructive argument. Argumentation and Advocacy, 36, 120-133.
125. McCormick, Samuel. (2003). Earning one's inheritance: Rhetorical criticism, everyday talk, and the analysis of public discourse. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 89, 109-131.
126. McDorman, T. F., & Timmerman, D. M. (Eds.) (2008). Rhetoric and democracy: Pedagogical and political practices. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
127. McMillan, J. J., & Harriger, K. J. (2002). College students and deliberation: A benchmark study. Communication Education, 51(3), 237-253.
128. Miller, Carolyn R. (2005). Risk, controversy, and rhetoric: Response to Goodnight. Argumentation and Advocacy, 42, 34-37.
129. Miller, G. R., & Knapp, M. L. (Eds.) (1994). Handbook of inter personal communication (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
130. Mitchell, Gordon R.(2000). Strategic deception : rhetoric, science, and politics in missile defense advocacy. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
131. -(2010). Switch-side debating meets demand-driven rhetoric of science. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 13, 95-120.
132. Mouffe, Chantal. (2000). The democratic paradox. New York: Verso.
133. Mudrack, P.E., & Farrell, G.M. (1995). An examination of functional role behavior and its consequences for individuals in group settings. Small Group Research, 26, 542-571.
134. Muhlberger, P. (2005). The Virtual Agora Project: A research design for studying democratic deliberation. Journal of Public Deliberation,1, 1-13.
135. Munksgaard, Jane, & Pfister, Damien. (2005). The public debater's role in advancing deliberation: Towards switch-sides public debate. In C. A. Willard (Ed.), Critical Problems in Argumentation: Selected Papers from the 13th Biennial Conference on Argumentation. Washington, D.C.: National Communication Association, 2005.
136. Murphy, T. A. (2004). Deliberative civic education and civil society: A consideration of ideals and actualities in democracy and communication education. Communication Education, 53(1), 74-91.
137. Nelson, John S., Allan Megill, & Donald N. McCloskey. (1990). The rhetoric of human sciences: Language and scholarship and public affairs. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
138. Nichols, Alan. (1941). Discussion and debate. New York, Harcourt, Brace and Company.
139. Oetzel, J.G., & Ting-Toomey, S. (2006). The SAGE handbook of conflict communication: integrating theory, research, and practice. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
140. Ono, K., & Sloop, J. (1995). The critique of vernacular discourse. Communication Monographs, 62, 19-46.
141. Osborn, M., & Osborn, S. (1991). Alliance for a better public voice. Dayton, OH: National Issues Forums Institute.
142. Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere. New Media & Society, 4, 9-27.
143. Papacharissi, Z. (2004). Democracy online: Civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of online political discussion. New Media & Society, 6, 259-283.
144. Pearce, K. A. (2000). Extending the theory of the coordinated management of meaning (CMM) through a community dialogue process. Communication Theory, 4(10), 405-423;
145. Pearce, K. A. & Pearce, W. B. (2001). The public dialogue consortium's schoolwide dialogue process: A communication approach to develop citizenship skills and enhance school climate. Communication Theory, 1, 105-123.
146. Pearce, K., S. Spano, W.B. Pearce (2009). The multiple faces of the Public Dialogue Consortium: Scholars, practitioners, and dreamers of better social worlds. In L.R. Frey and K. Cissna (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Applied Communication Research (pp. 611-632). New York: Routledge.
147. Pearce, W. B. (2008). Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
148. Pearce, W. B. & Pearce, K. A. (2000). Combining passions and abilities: Towards dialogic virtuosity. The southern communication journal 65(2/3), 161-175.
149. Perelman, C. & Obrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, trans. John Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
150. Peterson, T. R. (1997). Sharing the earth: the rhetoric of sustainable development. Columbia: University of South Carolina.
151. Peterson, T.R., & Horton, C.C. (1995). Rooted in the soil: How understanding the perspectives of landowners can enhance the management of environmental disputes. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 81, 139-166.
152. Phillips, Kendall R. (1996). The spaces of public dissension: Reconsidering the public sphere. Communication Monographs, 63, 231-248.
153. Poole, M. S., (1981). Decision development in small groups I: A comparison of two models. Communication Monographs, 48, 1-24.
154. -(1983). Decision development in small groups II: A study of multiple sequences in decision making. Communication Monographs, 50, 206-232.
155. Poole, M. S., & Holmes, M. E. (1995). Decision development in computerassisted group decision making. Human Communication Research, 22, 90-127.
156. Poulakos, T. (1997). Speaking for the Polis: Isocrates' rhetorical education. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
157. Putnam, L. L., & Stohl, C. (1990). Bona fide groups: A reconceptualization of groups in context. Communication Studies, 41, 248-265
158. Railsback, Celeste C. (1983). Beyond rhetorical relativism: A structural-material model of truth and objective reality. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 69, 351-363.
159. Rittel, Horst W.J., & Melvin M. Webber. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155-169.
160. Roberts-Miller, Patricia (2005). Democracy, demagoguery, and critical rhetoric. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 8(3), 459-476.
161. Ryfe, D. M. (2006). Narrative and deliberation in small group forums. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 34, 72-93.
162. Sanders, Lynn M. (1997). Against deliberation. Political Theory, 25, 347-376.
163. Scott, Robert L. (1967). On viewing rhetoric as epistemic. Central States Speech Journal, 18:9-16
164. -(1976). On viewing rhetoric as epistemic: Ten years later. Communication Studies, 27, 258-266.
165. Shumate, M., & Pike, J. (2006). Trouble in a geographically distributed virtual network organization: Organizing tensions in continental direct action network. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue3/shumate.html
166. Simons, Herbert W. (2002). The Temple Issues Forums: Innovations in pedagogy for civic engagement. In G. A. Hauser & A. Grim (Eds.), Rhetorical democracy: Discursive practices of civic engagement. Selected papers from the 2002 Conference of Rhetoric Society of America. (pp. 53-70). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
167. Sink, E. (2006). Better educating citizens through the basic public speaking course. Unpublished thesis. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University.
168. Sloane, Thomas. (1997). On the contrary: The protocol of traditional rhetoric. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press
169. Spano, S. (2001), Public Dialogue and Participatory Democracy: The Cupertino Project. Cresskill, N. J.: Hampton Press.
170. Spears, R. & Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or panopticon? The hidden power in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 21, 427-459.
171. Sproule, J. M. (2002). Oratory, democracy, and the culture of participation. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 5, 301-310.
172. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492-1511.
173. Steffensmeier, T., & Schenck-Hamlin, W. (2008). Argument quality in public deliberations. Argumentation and Advocacy, 45, 21-36.
174. Stewart, J., Zediker, K.E., & Witteborn, S. (2007). Together: Communicating interpersonally. 5th ed. New York: Oxford UP.
175. Stromer-Galley, J. (2007). Measuring deliberation's content: A coding scheme. Journal of Public Deliberation, 3, article 12. Toulmin, Stephen. 1958. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
176. Tracy, K. (2007). The discourse of crisis in public meetings: Case study of a school board's multimillion dollar error. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 35, 418-441.
177. Tracy, K., & Mirivel, J.C. (2009). Discourse analysis: The practice and practical value of taping, transcribing, and analyzing talk. In L.R. Frey and K. Cissna (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Applied Communication Research (pp. 153-178). New York: Routledge.
178. Tracy, K., & Durfy, M. (2007). Speaking out in public: Citizen participation in contentious school board meetings. Discourse and Communication, 1, 223-249.
179. Tracy, K., McDaniel, J. P., & Gronbeck, B. E. (Eds.). (2007). The prettier doll: Rhetoric, discourse, and ordinary democracy. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama.
180. van Eemeren, Frans H., & Peter Houtlosser. (2001). Managing disagreement: Rhetorical analysis within dialectical framework. Argumentation and Advocacy, 37, 150-157.
181. van Eemeren, Frans H., Rob Grootendorst, & Fransica Snoeck Henkemans. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory: A handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary developments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
182. Waddell, C. (1996). Saving the great lakes: Public participation in environmental policy. In C. G. Herndl & S. C. Brown (Eds.), Green culture: Environmental rhetoric in contemporary America (pp. 141-165). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
183. Walker, G. B. (2004). The roadless area initiative as national policy: Is public participation and oxymoron? In S. P. Depoe, J. W. Delicath, & M-F. A. Elsenbeer (Eds.), Communication and public participation in environmental decision making (pp. 113-135). Albany: State University of New York Press.
184. Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-43.
185. -(2008). Social information processing theory. In L. A. Baxter & D. O Braithwaite (Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 391-404). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
186. Wenzel, Joseph W. (1990). Three perspectives on argument: Rhetoric, dialectic, logic. In R. Trapp, J. Schuetz, and Brockriede (Eds.) Perspectives on argumentation: Essays in honor of Wayne Brockriede (Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press).
187. Willard, Charles. (1996). Liberalism and the problem on knowledge: A new rhetoric for modern democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
188. Williams, David E., & Brian R. McGee. (2000). Negotiating a change in the argumentation course: Teaching cooperative argument. Argumentation and advocacy, 36, 105-119.
189. Young, I. M. (1996). Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political (pp. 120-135). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
190. Zarefsky, David. (1986). President Johnson's War on Poverty: Rhetoric and history. University: University of Alabama Press.
191. -(2008a) History of public discourse studies. In Andrea A. Lunsford (Ed.) The SAGE Handbook of Rhetorical Studies (pp. 433-460). Los Angeles: Sage.
192. -(2008b). Two faces of democratic rhetoric. In T.F. McDorman and D. M. Timmerman (Eds.). Rhetoric and Democracy: Pedagogical and Political Practices (pp. 113-137). East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
193. -(2010). Plenary address: Reclaiming rhetoric's responsibilities. In Michelle Smith and Barbara Warnick (Eds.), The responsibilities of rhetoric (pp. 13-24). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
194. Zoller, Heather M. (2000). "A place you haven't visited before": Creating the conditions for community dialogue. Southern Communication Journal, 65, 91-207.