Anonymous communication in organizations: Assessing Use and Appropriateness

Management Communication Quarterly

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 157-197

  Rains, Stephen A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

360 degree feedback; anonymity; anonymous communication; appropriateness; communication technology; cybersmearing; identification; John Doe; Sarbanes Oxley; whistle blowing

Indexed keywords

EID: 84990359454     PISSN: 08933189     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0893318905279191     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Anonymous. (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. Armour, S. (2002, December 16). More companies urge workers to blow the whistle. USA Today, Money, p. 01b-01b.
4. Baltes, B. B., Dickson, M. W., Sherman, M., Bauer, C. B., & Laganke, J. (2002). Computer-mediated communication and group decision-making: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87, 156-179.
5. Barker, J. R. (1993). Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 408-437.
6. Barker, J. R., & Tompkins, P. K. (1994). Identification in the self-managing organization: Characteristics of target and tenure. Human Communication Research, 21, 223-240.
7. Bok, S. (1982). Secrets: On the ethics of concealment and revelation. New York: Pantheon.
8. Botan, C. (1996). Communication work and electronic surveillance: A model for predicting panoptic effects. Communication Monographs, 63, 293-313.
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. (in press). Benefits and drawbacks of anonymous on line communication: Legal challenges and communicative recommendations. In S. Drucker (Ed.), Free speech yearbook. Washington DC: National Communication Association.
11. Cheney, G. (1982). Identification as process and product: A field study. Unpublished master’s thesis, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
12. Chiger, S. J. (2002). Cybersmear: Telecommunication’s 200-year-old riddle. Communications and the Law, 24(2), 49-67.
13. DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.
14. Downs, C. W. (1988). Communication audits. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
15. Dutton, W. H. (1992). The social impact of emerging telephone services. Telecommunications Policy, 16, 377-387.
16. Eisenberg, E. M., Farace, R. V., Monge, P. R., Bettinghaus, E. P., Kurchner-Hawkins, R., Miller, K. I., et al. (1985). Communication linkages in interorganizational systems: Review and synthesis. In B. Dervin & M. Voigt (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences(Vol. 6, pp. 231-258). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
17. Ekstrand, V. S. (2003). Unmasking Jane and John Doe: on line anonymity and the First Amendment. Communication Law and Policy, 8, 405-428.
18. Erickson, K. V., & Fleuriet, C. A. (1991). Presidential anonymity: Rhetorical identity management and the mystification of political reality. Communication Quarterly, 39, 272-289.
19. Fairhurst, G. T. (2001). Dualisms in leadership research. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods(pp. 379-439). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20. Flanagin, A. J., Tiyaamornwong, V., O’Conner, J., & Seibold, D. R. (2002). Computer-mediated group work: The interaction of sex and anonymity. Communication Research, 29, 66-94.
21. Frey, L. R., Botan, C. H., & Kreps, G. L. (2000). Investigating communication: An introduction to research methods(2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
22. Froomkin, A. M. (1999). Legal issues in anonymity and pseudonymity. Information, Computers, and Technology, 14, 79-88.
23. Fulk, J., & Collins-Jarvis, L. (2001). Wired meetings: Technological mediation of organizational gatherings. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods(pp. 624-663). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24. Ghorpade, J. (2000). Managing five paradoxes of 360-degree feedback. Academy of Management Executive, 14, 140-150.
25. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
26. Godin, S. (2001, October). In my humble opinion. Fast Company, 51, 86-88.
27. Gopal, A., Miranda, S. M., Robichaux, B. P., & Bostrom, R. P. (1997). Leveraging diversity with information technology: Gender, attitude, and intervening influences in use of group support systems. Small Group Research, 28, 29-71.
28. Guan, Y., Fu, X., Bettani, R., & Zhao, W. (2004). A quantitative analysis of anonymous communications. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 53, 103-115.
29. Hayne, S., Pollard, C., & Rice, R. E. (2003). Identification of comment authorship in anonymous group support systems. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20, 303-331.
30. 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.
31. 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.
32. Jones, D. (2003, May 27). Law rings up growth in worker hotline industry. USA Today, Money, p. 3b-3b.
33. Jones, E., Watson, B., Gardner, J., & Gallois, C. (2004). Organizational communication: Challenges for the new century. Journal of Communication, 54, 722-750.
34. Keppel, G. (1991). Design and analysis: A researcher’s handbook(3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
35. Keyton, J. (1999). Relational communication in groups. In L. R. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research(pp. 192-222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36. 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.
37. Levine, N. (1996). Establishing legal accountability for anonymous communication in cyberspace. Columbia Law Review, 96, 1526-1572.
38. Levmore, S. (1996). The anonymity tool. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 144, 2191-2236.
39. Lewis, D. (2002). Whistleblowing procedures at work: What are the implications for human resource practitioners? Business Ethics: A European Review, 11, 202-209.
40. Lipinski, T. A. (2002). To speak or not to speak: Developing legal standards for anonymous speech on the Internet. Informing Science, 5, 95-111.
41. Marx, G. T. (1999). What’s in a name? Some reflections on the sociology of anonymity. Information Society, 15, 99-112.
42. McDowell, S. R. (2004). Legal: Understanding Sarbanes-Oxley’s whistle-blower provisions. Association Management, 56(4), 23.
43. 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.
44. Mostyn, M. M. (2000). The need for regulating anonymous remailers. International Review of Law, Computers, and Technology, 14, 79-88.
45. Nunamaker, J. F., Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Vogel, D. R., & George, J. F. (1991). Electronic meeting systems to support group work. Communications of the ACM, 34, 40-61.
46. 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 on line defamation cases. Fordham Law Review, 70, 2745-2776.
47. O'Connor, J. D. (2005, May 31). I'm the guy they called Deep Throat. Retrieved June 1, 2005, from www.vanityfair.com/commentary/content/articles/050530roco02?page=1
48. O'Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991). People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 487-516.
49. O'Sullivan, P. B., & Flanagin, A. J. (2003). Reconceptualizing “flaming” and other problematic messages. New Media and Society, 5, 69-94.
50. Patterson, J. R., & Wilson, G. R. (1969). Anonymity, occupation, and conservatism. Journal of Social Psychology, 78, 263-266.
51. Perrow, C. (1986). Complex organizations: A critical essay. New York: Random House.
52. Pinsonneault, A., & Heppel, N. (1998). Anonymity in group support systems research: A new conceptualization, measure, and contingency framework. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14, 89-108.
53. Postmes, T., & Lea, M. (2000). Social processes and group decision making: Anonymity in group decision support systems. Ergonomics, 43, 1252-1274.
54. Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1998). Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 25, 689-715.
55. Price, A. R. (1998). Anonymity and pseudonymity in whistleblowing to the U.S. Office of Research Integrity. Academic Medicine, 73, 467-472.
56. Rodriquez, A., & Clair, R. P. (1999). Graffiti as communication: Exploring the dis-cursive tensions of anonymous texts. Southern Communication Journal, 65, 1-15.
57. Savicki, V., Kelley, M., & Lingenfelter, D. (1996). Gender and group composition in small task groups using computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 12, 209-224.
58. Scott, C. R. (1999a). Communication technology and group communication. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), D. S. Gouran & M. S. Poole (Assoc. Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research(pp. 432-472). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
59. Scott, C. R. (1999b). The impact of physical and discursive anonymity on group members’ multiple identifications during computer-supported decision making. Western Journal of Communication, 63, 456-487.
60. Scott, C. R., Connaughton, S. L., Diaz-Saenz, H., Maguire, K., Ramirez, R., Richardson, B., et al. (1999). The impacts of communication and multiple identifications on intent to leave: A multi-methodological exploration. Management Communication Quarterly, 12, 400-435.
61. 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.
62. Sias, P. M. (1996). Constructing perceptions of differential treatment: An analysis of coworker discourse. Communication Monographs, 63, 171-187.
63. Sias, P. M., & Jablin, F. M. (1995). Differential superior-subordinate relations, perceptions of fairness, and coworker communication. Human Communication Research, 22, 5-38.
64. Smith, P., Kendall, L., & Hulin, C. (1969). The measurement of satisfaction in work and retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally.
65. 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.
66. Westerman, J. W., & Rosse, J. G. (1997). Reducing the threat of rater nonparticipation in 360-degree feedback systems: An exploratory examination of antecedents to participation in upward ratings. Group & Organization Management, 22, 288-309.
67. Wieland, J. B. (2001). Death of publius: Toward a world without anonymous speech. Journal of Law and Politics, 17, 589-629.
68. Williams, R. (1988). Reflections on anonymity. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 67, 763-766.
69. Wulfemeyer, K. T., & McFadden, L. L. (1986). Anonymous attribution in network news. Journalism Quarterly, 63, 468-473.