2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.178
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Instant Messaging and Microblogging: Situated-Learning Platforms for Educationists and Workplace Mentors

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Darics (2010a) concentrated on the use of ellipsis dots, emoticons, capitalization, laughter, and backchannels for politeness reasons in a virtual workplace; in another study, explored how letter repetition in instant messaging goes beyond phonetic purposes to indicate intimacy and collegiality among colleagues. Other research also touched on the social or pedagogical functions of instant messaging at work, namely joking (Handel & Herbsleb, 2002), performing phatic exchanges (Chung & Nam, 2007), maintaining a minimal sense of group work , sharing work-related memory ( Jacobs, 2006), arranging multitasks, and recording workplace knowledge for newcomers (Mak, Chui et al, 2012). There have been quantitative studies (e.g., Avrahami & Hudson, 2006;Iqbal & Horvitz, 2007) that articulated the communication features (e.g., response time, message length) of Instant Messaging at work as well.…”
Section: Instant Messengers and Instant Messaging In The Workplacementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Darics (2010a) concentrated on the use of ellipsis dots, emoticons, capitalization, laughter, and backchannels for politeness reasons in a virtual workplace; in another study, explored how letter repetition in instant messaging goes beyond phonetic purposes to indicate intimacy and collegiality among colleagues. Other research also touched on the social or pedagogical functions of instant messaging at work, namely joking (Handel & Herbsleb, 2002), performing phatic exchanges (Chung & Nam, 2007), maintaining a minimal sense of group work , sharing work-related memory ( Jacobs, 2006), arranging multitasks, and recording workplace knowledge for newcomers (Mak, Chui et al, 2012). There have been quantitative studies (e.g., Avrahami & Hudson, 2006;Iqbal & Horvitz, 2007) that articulated the communication features (e.g., response time, message length) of Instant Messaging at work as well.…”
Section: Instant Messengers and Instant Messaging In The Workplacementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since workplace socialization involves ongoing interactions between a newcomer and the core members, rather than the cognitive mediation of the newcomer him-or herself only (Korte, 2009), it can be understood through exploring the language use of the newcomer when he or she communicates with the other colleagues (Mak, Liu, & Deneen, 2012), whether face to face, on the phone, or on the Internet (Mak, Chui, et al, 2012). This paper focuses on chitchat in status updates on Facebook.…”
Section: Language Communication and Socialization Into The Workplacementioning
confidence: 99%
“…A few of them (e.g., Mak, Chui, et al, 2012) examine the potential of status updates in newcomers' learning, but their scope is usually small and does not specifically touch on chitchat or other forms of small talk.…”
Section: Social-network Sites and Facebook Status Updatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations