The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Knowledge Worker Communications and Recipient Availability: Toward a Task Closure Explanation of Media Choice
Abstract
Recent innovations in organizational forms, such as delayered management, empowered workers, telework, and ad hoc work groups, have created a need to ensure that communication between dispersed knowledge workers can be supported. The movement toward a less cohesive workplace suggests a need to deploy computer-based media, but it is not clear which media should be deployed and under what circumstances. Addressing such significant issues must begin with insights into why knowledge workers choose particular media for particular tasks in the first place. Prior research theorizing about media choice has focused on: (1) task, (2) medium, (3) the fit between task and medium, and (4) social environment. It has not sufficiently considered the role of the availability of the intended recipient or the interaction between recipient availability and task social presence variables which could have a significant impact on media choice. To examine the effects of these two factors, the authors conducted an initial exploratory study and a subsequent controlled factor study. In the initial study, an analysis of 1,669 hypothetical scenarios from 100 knowledge workers at a worldwide transportation company indicated that social presence (SP) theory proves to be a good predictor of media choice, as does the recipient availability construct. The analysis also suggested that the interaction between recipient availability and task social presence might be a good predictor. With a partial replication, randomized treatment design, including 1,883 scenarios from 257 workers, the controlled factor study at a large financial institution generally confirmed the study hypotheses. The authors examine rival explanations simultaneously along the dimensions of task, medium, fit between task and medium, and social environment. They propose and test a new model of media choice and suggest directions for future testing of a new “task closure” model of media choice. They conclude by offering guidelines for managers deploying electronic communications in the workplace.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance
Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249689 · Cited by 6,006
Information richness. A new approach to managerial behavior and organization design
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1983) · doi:10.21236/ada128980 · Cited by 2,263
Cited by
Internet Users' Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC): The Construct, the Scale, and a Causal Model
Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1040.0032 · Cited by 3,173
Validation Guidelines for IS Positivist Research
Straub, D., & Gefen, D. (2004) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.01324 · Cited by 2,797
Self-citationGefen, D., & Straub, D. W. (2004) · Omega · doi:10.1016/j.omega.2004.01.006 · Cited by 2,025
Self-citationOnline social networks: Why do students use facebook?
Cheung, C. M. K., Chiu, P.-Y., & Lee, M. K. O. (2011) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.028 · Cited by 1,501
Managing User Trust in B2C e-Services
Gefen, & Straub (2003) · e-Service Journal · doi:10.2979/esj.2003.2.2.7 · Cited by 1,074
Hassanein, K., & Head, M. (2007) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.11.018 · Cited by 986
Predicting collaboration technology use: integrating technology adoption and collaboration research
Brown, S. A., Dennis, A. R., & Venkatesh, V. (2010) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.2753/mis0742-1222270201 · Cited by 592
Toward a Theory-Based Measurement of Culture
Straub, D., Loch, K., Evaristo, R., Karahanna, E., & Srite, M. (2002) · Journal of Global Information Management · doi:10.4018/jgim.2002010102 · Cited by 572
Self-citationIntroduction to the Special Issue: Communication Processes for Virtual Organizations
DeSanctis, G., & Monge, P. (1999) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.10.6.693 · Cited by 495
Washington State University, Hess, T., Fuller, M., University of Massachusetts, A., Campbell, D., & Millsaps College (2009) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00216 · Cited by 233
Measuring Online Communication Attitude: Instrument Development and Validation
Ledbetter, A. M. (2009) · Communication Monographs · doi:10.1080/03637750903300262 · Cited by 133
The effect of voice and humour on users’ perceptions of personal intelligent agents
Moussawi, S., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2021) · Behaviour & Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2020.1772368 · Cited by 83
Chuang, H.-H. (2016) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-016-9438-5 · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Straub, D., & Karahanna, E.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 1998-04
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 160-175
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W1976848519
- Cited by
- 358
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 9.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.