The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Review: A Cognitive-Affective Model of Organizational Communication for Designing IT1,2
Abstract
There are several theories available to describe how managers choose a medium for communication. However, current technology can affect not only how we communicate but also what we communicate. As a result, the issue for designers of communication support systems has become broader: how should technology be designed to make communication more effective by changing the medium and the attributes of the message itself? The answer to this question requires a shift from current preoccupations with the medium of communication to a view that assesses the balance between medium and message form. There is also a need to look more closely at the process of communication in order to identify more precisely any potential areas of computer support. This paper provides the spadework for a new model of organizational communication, and uses it to review existing research, as well as to suggest directions for future research and development. Beginning with the crucial aspects of action, relationship, and choice, an integrated model of how people communicate is developed. This model incorporates three basic factors: (1) inputs to the communication process (task, sender-receiver distance, and values and norms of communication with a particular emphasis on inter-cultural communication); (2) a cognitive-affective process of communication; and (3) the communication impact on action and relationship. The glue that bonds these factors together is a set of communication strategies aimed at reducing the complexity of communication. The model provides a balance between relationship and action, between cognition and affect, and between message and medium. Such a balance has been lacking in previous work, and we believe it reflects a more realistic picture of communication behavior in organizations. A set of propositions generated from the model sets an agenda for studying the communication process as well as its inputs and outputs. Furthermore, this knowledge of the mechanisms that guide behavior is used to demonstrate the potential for developing design principles for future communication support systems.
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
Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.98.2.224 · Cited by 21,995
Searle, J. R. (1969) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173438 · Cited by 11,718
Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554 · Cited by 9,868
Gumperz, J. J. (1982) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511611834 · Cited by 5,861
The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.398 · Cited by 4,957
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173933 · Cited by 3,487
Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality
Mischel, W. (1973) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0035002 · Cited by 3,181
BERGER, C. R., & CALABRESE, R. J. (1975) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x · Cited by 3,006
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
Determinants of Coordination Modes within Organizations
Ven, A. H. V. D., Delbecq, A. L., & Koenig, R. (1976) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2094477 · Cited by 1,979
Cited by
Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews
Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008 · Cited by 1,987
A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of Information Systems Research
Okoli, C., & Schabram, K. (2011) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1954824 · Cited by 1,849
Media, Tasks, and Communication Processes: A Theory of Media Synchronicity1
Dennis, A. R., Fuller, R. M., & Valacich, J. S. (2008) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148857 · Cited by 1,511
A Guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Literature Review
Okoli, C. (2015) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.03743 · Cited by 1,413
An extension of the technology acceptance model in an ERP implementation environment
Amoako-Gyampah, K., & Salam, A. F. (2004) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2003.08.010 · Cited by 922
Metadata
- Authors
- Dov, T.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2001-06-01
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 251-312
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1496596930
- Cited by
- 512
- References
- 17
- FWCI
- 78.75
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Review: A Cognitive-Affective Model of Organizational Communication for Designing IT1,2. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/3250931
- The paper
- Dov, T. (2001). Review: A Cognitive-Affective Model of Organizational Communication for Designing IT1,2. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250931
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.