Search results
Through the creation of a semantic differential scale—called the Message Invectives Scale—the study took eight different concepts found in more than 20 research articles on flaming and examined email users’ responses to a set of messages in relation to those eight characteristics.
- Anna K. Turnage
- 2007
- Introduction
- The Flaming Phenomenon
- The Flaming Phenomenon Revisited
In this chapter we explore in some depth the phenomenon of flaming with the intention of challenging the widely accepted claim that CMC somehow promotes such behaviour. We shall be arguing that, far from being uninhibited and deregulated behaviour that is universally observed, flaming is in fact both radically context-dependent and relatively uncom...
The evidence
We surveyed several hundred articles on computer-mediated communication and computer supported cooperative work (Lea, O’Shea & Fung, 1991). Despite many references to flaming in these texts, we found only a handful of data sources. The most complete findings are contained in the influential series of experimental studies carried out by the Social Committee on Computing at Carnegie–Mellon University. A very limited quantity of field data is also reported in the literature, but for the most par...
Reduced social cues
The first and most widely accepted explanation is really a constellation of suggested behavioural implications arising from the central observation that nonverbal cues, such as facial expressions, gestures, and tone of voice are not communicated in CMC as they are in FTF communication and some other media. This important socio-technical feature of CMC is argued to have a variety of social psychological effects that make uninhibited behaviour more likely to occur (Kiesler et al., 1984). 1. Fir...
Computing subculture
The second explanation that has been advanced is based on social influence processes and therefore stands in marked contrast to the essentially antinormative reduced social cues explanation. According to this account, uninhibited behaviour originates from the specific influence of the computing subculture in CMC networks (Kiesler et al., 1984). The subculture itself has been studied in some detail (Dubrovsky, Kiesler, Sproull & Zubrow, 1986; Sproull, Kiesler & Zubrow, 1987; Steele, Woods, Fin...
Definitions of flaming;
Up until this point we have chosen only to loosely define uninhibited behaviour and flaming and to assume that the reader understands what is intended by the terms; in fact more precise definitions turn out to be problematic.
This article focuses on the study of organizational communication, which is a dominant subarea of communication scholarship as recognized by the National Communication Association (NCA) and the...
Oct 1, 2007 · A study on flaming shows that email messages containing slang and bad language, using excessively exclamation or question marks, or using capital letters created conflicts in workplace ...
Researchers examining ‘flaming’ - defined as hostile and aggressive interactions via text-based computer mediated-communication - have proposed theoretical frameworks to explain possible causes.
This study explores whether the attributes listed in the literature on flaming in email are considered characteristic of flaming by actual email users.
People also ask
Does Flaming cause conflict in email?
What makes a message Flaming?
What causes flaming in organizations?
What is flaming in email?
Is flaming a media characteristic of CMC?
What are the characteristics of flaming?
This document provides an overview of the 4th edition of the book "Effective Business Communication in Organisations" by Michael Fielding and Franzél du Plooy-Cilliers.
