On conceptual and empirical treatments of feedback in human communication

Clement, Donald A.; Frandsen, Kenneth D.

doi:10.1080/03637757609375911

Cited by 18 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Impression management is especially critical when providing negative feedback because delivering an unpopular message can easily engender negative perceptions of the supervisor delivering the message. People receiving positive feedback generally have more positive impressions of their supervisors than those receiving negative feedback (Kacmar et al, 1996), yet it is generally believed that negative feedback improves performance in organizations through the association of undesirable behaviors with receiving negative feedback (Clement & Frandsen, 1976;Haeggberg, 2000). Negative feedback is, then, a necessary evil that supervisors must present carefully in order to maintain a positive impression with their employees while still getting the message across.…”

Section: Impression Managementmentioning

confidence: 97%

Supervisor Impression Management: Message Content and Channel Effects on Impressions

Westerman

2010

Communication Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study focuses on the delivery of negative feedback and how supervisors can accomplish that delivery while maintaining their own image and their employees' face. We look at delivery of feedback with and without face-saving messages through two different channels: face-to-face (FtF) and email. Results indicate that the inclusion of face-saving messages had relatively consistent positive effects on a variety of employees' impressions of supervisors. Channel was found to interact with message content to impact perceived face threat of a message and the perception of the supervisor's appropriateness. These findings are discussed in terms of theoretical and practical applications, as are limitations and directions for future research.In organizations, success is predicated in part upon effective communication between supervisors and the employees they supervise. A supervisor's ability to communicate effectively with employees may depend on being able to maintain a certain impression-for example, employees may listen more attentively to a supervisor who is seen as trustworthy and as an expert. However, maintaining a positive impression with employees may be difficult for supervisors when giving messages

show abstract

Section: Impression Managementmentioning

confidence: 97%

Supervisor Impression Management: Message Content and Channel Effects on Impressions

Westerman

2010

Communication Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, however, feedback has typically been defined in communication research as deliberate descriptive and/or evaluative comments given to a speaker following a presentation (Book, 1985;Booth-Butterfield, 1989;Clement & Frandsen, 1976). As a result, feedback research has focused on those post-performance comments typically associated with speech criticism.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Background and Statement of the Problem Clement and Frandsen (1976) argue that feedback is not an independent activity, but a complex set of relationships that influences an entire system. In contrast, however, feedback has typically been defined in communication research as deliberate descriptive and/or evaluative comments given to a speaker following a presentation (Book, 1985;Booth-Butterfield, 1989;Clement & Frandsen, 1976).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Public speaking performance improvement as a function of information processing in immediate and delayed feedback interventions

King

Young

Behnke

2000

Communication Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Treatments of performance feedback in the communication literature have generally focused on the pragmatic advantages of such systems while remaining uncritical of the information processing context in which such instructional interventions are employed. Communication theorists have distinguished between tasks that require conscious deliberation and tasks that are executed automatically. In the present study, the efficacy of using immediate and delayed feedback in generating improvement on a subsequent performance, for tasks which vary in information processing requirements, was examined. Analyses indicate that immediate feedback intervention is more effective when automatic processing occurs while delayedfeedback produces greater change with tasks involving deliberative and effortful processing. Interpretation of the findings, in light of extant theory and research, is provided.

show abstract

“…Inconsistency and confusion exist over what constitutes positive, and, certainly, negative feedback, given differences between "cybernetic" and "psychological/perceptual" orientations (Clement & Frandsen, 1976). Concerns have been voiced regarding overly simplistic and unidimensional treatments of feedback in research (Clement & Frandsen, 1976;Ilgen et al, 1979;Herold & Greller, 1977). These issues have prompted feedback scholars to reexamine and reconceptualize not only performance feedback as a more complex construct, but message valence as well (Ilgen et al, 1979;Taylor et al, 1984;Tracy, Van Dusen, & Robinson, 1987).…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

mentioning

confidence: 98%