This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Rice, R. E. Articles by Danowski, J. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Is It Really Just Like a Fancy Answering Machine? Comparing Semantic Networks of Different Types of Voice Mail Users

Rutgers University

James A. Danowski

University of Illinois at Chicago

We propose a conceptual as well as practical distinction, possible in voice mail systems, between the traditional telephone genre of voice answering and a new genre of telephone communication of voice messaging. This distinction should be reflected in comments provided by respondents who report that they use voice mail more for messaging than for answering, and by those who send more voice messages than do others. Semantic network analysis identified different clusters of concepts found in responses to open-ended questions on a survey completed by these kinds of users. For example, all users had common word clusters concerning the ability to overcome temporal constraints and leave messages through voice mail. However, responses of "senders" and "messagers" included word clusters such as "group distribution" and greater concern with issues such as critical mass and problems of traditional telephone usage (such as busy signals), while responses of low senders and answerers included clusters indicating concern about the impersonal nature of voice mail. We discuss implications both for this method of analysis as well as for implementation and management of voice mail systems.

Journal of Business Communication, Vol. 30, No. 4, 369-397 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/002194369303000401


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. Garcia-Alvarez and J. Lopez-Sintas Contingency Table: A Two-Way Bridge between Qualitative and Quantitative Methods Field Methods, August 1, 2002; 14(3): 270 - 287. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Murphy Affiliation Bias and Expert Disagreement in Framing the Nicotine Addiction Debate Science Technology Human Values, July 1, 2001; 26(3): 278 - 299. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. MURPHY and M. MAYNARD Framing the Genetic Testing Issue: Discourse and Cultural Clashes among Policy Communities Science Communication, December 1, 2000; 22(2): 133 - 153. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. M. Rogers and M. M. Allbritton Interactive Communication Technologies in Business Organizations Journal of Business Communication, April 1, 1995; 32(2): 177 - 195. [Abstract] [PDF]