Social interaction and the Internet in Asia Essay Example for Free

Social interaction and the Internet in Asia Essay The abstract is excellently presented, and sheds the light onto the study purpose. The author used the abstract to briefly justify the choice of the research country (Singapore). Introduction In the introduction, the author justified the need for such research by the fact that â€Å"little empirical research had been done outside of Europe and the USA†. The author has clearly identified the aim of the research in the form of a question: â€Å"what is the Internet usage pattern of young Singaporeans and what is the extent of its impact on their social lives? † Literature review The author did not perform a detailed literature review due to the absence of sufficient relevant literary sources related to the topic of research. The author summarised the results of the previous studies to create the relevant theoretical basis for her research. Research question The author was not very specific in determining the research question. She limited her study by investigating the social interactions between young Singaporeans and the impact of Internet upon their socialisation. Trying to be very specific, the author suggested that it would be interesting to research, whether young Singaporeans preferred Internet socialisation to traditional means of social interaction. Methodology The author did not create any clear hypotheses, and did not predict any possible research outcomes. The choice of respondents was mainly based on their age (between 15 and 30), without any specific attention to their gender or social position. However, it was important that all of them studied in Universities and were provided with individual Internet accounts. The author used questionnaires which are traditional methods of qualitative analysis. Findings Research findings were presented in qualitative and quantitative form. The author did not mention any significant problems encountered in analysing and evaluating the research findings. The author did not perform profound statistical analysis, but used simple mathematical interpretations of her results as the basis for qualitative research. By quoting interviews with several research participants, the author of the article significantly increased the relevance of the research results. References All in-text citations were referenced in bibliography. The reference list mainly included primary sources, among which previous researches in the area of Internet and communication prevailed. Summary The analysed study is the excellent basis for the further research in the area of communication and social sciences. The article determines the future directions in investigating the socialisation processes under the impact of Internet technologies. New for old? Converging media and e-mail practices in the workplace Abstract The aim of the discussed research was to investigate the impact of e-mail applications on the workplace practices through the three different perspectives: â€Å"e-mail as a medium, e-mail as a set of practices, and e-mail as speech versus writing† (Yell, 2003). The author used the abstract to create the system of questions, which had to be answered during the research process. Introduction The topic of the research was excellently specified in the introduction, and was not too broad. The author also delineated specific theories, on which the research had to be based (Bourdieu’s concepts of dispositions and the habitus, and Schirato and Yell’s concept of cultural literacy). Literature review The author did not use any formal framework for literature review. Moreover, the article lacked any theoretical justification of the study. A separate â€Å"background† chapter provided the reader only with a surface understanding of the research topic, and was not referred to any significant theoretical perspectives. Research question The researcher sought to identify, what means research participants would choose to fulfill a range of tasks and to communicate at workplace. The author has clearly determined the research question and narrowed her research as determined in the article’s abstract. Methodology The methods of the research were clearly identified in the background section of the article: the use of interviews had to ensure validity of research findings, but could potentially decrease the generalisability of research results. The age of participants was between 30 and 65, and they were asked to describe their communication and work preferences in terms of emails or other communication strategies. The author did not conceal statistical insignificance of the research sample, and has concentrated upon determining qualitative tendencies and validity of the communication choices made by participants. Findings Yell (2003) presented research findings in the form of qualitative assessment. The use of tables was called for increasing the generalisability of interviews, but the author did not specify whether she had encountered any significant problems in evaluating the research results. The discussion section of the research was presented in the form of several small chapters, with each devoted to a separate research perspective. There is no reason to doubt the validity and reliability of research findings due to the fact that interviews are relatively unbiased tools of qualitative research. The author constantly linked research findings to the theoretical perspectives identified in the introduction, which made the discussion relevant and theoretically justified. References All in-text citations were included into the list of references at the end of the article. Summary Despite the lack of theoretical basis, the author performed profound research of the communication preferences among workers. The results of the study can be further refined by linking them to certain theoretical perspective. The researcher has generalised the research findings and pointed out the most important aspects of the study, without shedding the light onto potential applications of the research results. The author has identified important contradictions in describing e-mail as homogeneous medium, and has suggested that e-mail had to be analysed from multiple perspectives. Organisational communication satisfaction in the virtual workplace Abstract The abstract was excellently structured. It served a brief summary of the research, research findings, implications, and controversies. Introduction The authors did not elaborate on theoretical or practical research implications in the introduction; the introduction served a brief summary of the similar research works. The potential challenges of the virtual workplace were identified and analysed in a separate section of the paper. Literature review The author did not perform any formal literature review. The authors did not make any predictions or suggestions towards the future research outcomes, but identified the set of variables drawn from the previous surveys. That set of variables was later used to analyse and interpret the research findings. Research question The authors determined the research question in the article’s abstract: â€Å"to compare the levels of communication satisfaction between virtual workplace and traditional employers in a single firm. † This research question was later analysed through the pre-determined set of variables. Methodology Akkirman and Harris used the set of hypotheses based on the previous studies and the research survey conducted â€Å"in the Turkish subsidiary of an international company based in Germany†. The distinguishing feature of the research article was in that the authors had identified the exact set of variables closely tied to their hypotheses: communication climate, organisational integration, etc. (Akkirman Harris, 2005). Findings The research findings were presented in quantitative form, in the form of tables, and statistical analysis. The results were assessed in a concise and organised manner, with each variable discussed and evaluated separately. In this manner, the researchers have explained each variable identified in the research methodology section. References The reference list included all in-text citations, as well as the Appendix with the research survey questionnaire. This questionnaire helped objectively evaluate the relevance and validity of survey results. Summary The advantageous feature of the article is in the fact that the researchers discussed and evaluated the research results in the structured form: implications and limitations of the research were also analysed. As the results of the research were contrary to the majority of previous studies, the authors emphasised the most important variables to be researched in the future studies (the role of transition and support in the level of satisfaction among virtual office workers). The authors of the article summarised their findings in conclusion, but did not identify any problems or biases they faced during the research and evaluation process. Intercultural communication competence and managerial functions within the Australian hospitality industry Abstract The abstract was brief and written in concise manner. The authors briefly delineated major theoretical foundations of the future research. Introduction The aim of the research was very clearly identified in the introductory section of the article. The authors defined the major terms to be used in the study, making the research clear and understandable to the reader. Literature review The theoretical perspectives constituted the significant portion of the article, and initially made it difficult to identify the major theoretical directions which were used in the research. It seems that the authors have gathered all information available on the topic, without specifying the most important data, and the exact theoretical basis of research. Theoretical background of intercultural communication was presented from different perspectives (cultural, psychological, anthropological, etc. ), which have created a confused theoretical image of the study. Ultimately, the researchers neither made theoretical predictions, nor drew hypotheses from previous studies. Research question The authors of the research sought to consider the nature of intercultural communication competence in the Australian hospitality industry. Methodology The authors have limited their research methodology to in-depth analysis of interviews and organisational documentation, ethnomethodology, and historical analysis. In addition, the authors did not inform the readers about the number and characteristics of the research sample. A number of important research variables were identified only in the section devoted to the discussion of interpretive findings. Findings The research findings were interpreted through the prism of qualitative analysis, but as no data on the research sample was available, it was difficult to evaluate the validity and reliability of the research results. It should be pointed out that the authors have discussed implications of their research for management training. Those implications could make their research results applicable, if their validity could be objectively assessed. The conclusion of the article was aimed at summarising the major research findings, and emphasising the limitations of the study: â€Å"the Australian hospitality managers in this study were found to have shortcomings in their ability to apply intercultural communication competence to key managerial functions† (Saunders Sauee, 2000). References All in-text citations were referenced in bibliography. The authors listed all literature sources in alphabetical order. Summary The research could create solid basis for future practical investigations if the theoretical perspectives were clearer. Research findings suggested that intercultural communication in the hospitality industry should be linked to a single theoretical perspective, that could make future researches more transparent and theoretically justified. Organisational websites. How and how well do they communicate? Abstract The author of the research used the abstract to determine the aim of the study, and to briefly justify the need for such research. The author also suggested the need to perform further sophisticated analysis of Websites and communication challenges they face. Introduction The particularity of the discussed research is in the fact that it has appeared too personalised from the very beginning: The author initially turned it into a form of narration, which could be understandable even to a non-professional reader. Literature review The author did not perform any literature review; consequentially, the research findings could hardly be tied to any theoretical perspectives. Research question The author has expressed the research purpose in the form of a question: â€Å"how are websites currently being described and analysed, particularly by researchers? † The author has clearly underlined the criteria for choosing the research information, which ultimately served the research sample. That search was limited to formal business and general websites (Durham, 2000). Methodology The article did not have any separate section devoted to the discussion of the research methodology. As a result, the reader (either professional or non-professional) could not clearly understand how the research was conducted. It is implied that the author of the article used qualitative analysis. However, as the exact methodology of the research was not explained, it was impossible to draw any conclusions as for the validity and reliability of the research findings. Findings The research findings lacked relevant theoretical basis and could hardly be systematised. Later in the article, the author recognised the lack of theoretical frameworks, but the research could significantly benefit of a separate section devoted to literature review. References The author has included the long list of literary sources, used in the research. The author utilised both primary and secondary sources of scientific information related to the research topic. Summary The research conclusion was brief, and was also written in the simple (and rather vague) form, which is not characteristic of the majority of scientific works in the area of communication strategies. â€Å"The overview of current work suggests rich areas for future research: site macrostructure, navigation and issues of intertextuality via the linkages made, etc† – the list of those suggestions was useful for the future studies. Due to the evident lack of theoretical basis, the discussed research looked as a system of practical suggestions, which might become the starting point in the creation of the valid theoretical structure in the area of communicational strategies. References Akkirman, AD Harris, DL 2005, Organisational communication satisfaction in the virtual workplace, Journal of Management Development, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 397-409. Durham, M 2000, Organisational websites. How and how well do they communicate? Australian Journal of Communication, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 1-14. Frey, LR, Bolan, Carl H, Fredman, PG Krep, GL 1992, Interpreting communication research: a case study approach, Prentice Hall, pp. 15-19. Goby, VP 2000, Social interaction and the Internet in Asia, A study of young Singaporeans, Australian Journal of Communication, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 79-90. Saunders, S Saee, J 2000, Intercultural communication competence and managerial functions within the Australian hospitality industry, Australian Journal of Communication, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 111-128. Yell, S 2003, New for old? Converging media and e-mail practices in the workplace, Australian Journal of Communication, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 93-107.

Barriers to Effective Communication :: Functions of Communication

There are a wide number of sources of noise or interference that can enter into the communication process. This can occur when people now each other very well and should understand the sources of error. In a work setting, it is even more common since interactions involve people who not only don't have years of experience with each other, but communication is complicated by the complex and often conflictual relationships that exist at work. In a work setting, the following suggests a number of sources of noise: Language: The choice of words or language in which a sender encodes a message will influence the quality of communication. Because language is a symbolic representation of a phenomenon, room for interpreation and distortion of the meaning exists. In the above example, the Boss uses language (this is the third day you've missed) that is likely to convey far more than objective information. To Terry it conveys indifference to her medical problems. Note that the same words will be interpreted different by each different person. Meaning has to be given to words and many factors affect how an individual will attribute meaning to particular words. It is important to note that no two people will attribute the exact same meaning to the same words. defensiveness, distorted perceptions, guilt, project, transference, distortions from the past misreading of body language, tone and other non-verbal forms of communication (see section below) noisy transmission (unreliable messages, inconsistency) receiver distortion: selective hearing, ignoring non-verbal cues power struggles self-fulfilling assupmtions language-different levels of meaning managers hesitation to be candid assumptions-eg. assuming others see situation same as you, has same feelings as you distrusted source, erroneous translation, value judgment, state of mind of two people Perceptual Biases: People attend to stimuli in the environment in very different ways. We each have shortcuts that we use to organize data. Invariably, these shortcuts introduce some biases into communication. Some of these shortcuts include stereotyping, projection, and self-fulfilling prophecies. Stereotyping is one of the most common. This is when we assume that the other person has certain characteristics based on the group to which they belong without validating that they in fact have these characteristics.

Google Globalization Essay

Globalization has completely altered the way in which the world operates. The barriers that once hindered our ability to communicate and interact with people across the world have diminished. Globalization has become ingrained in all fields: business, government, economic, social. Google began in 1996 as a project by Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Larry and Sergey were both studying at Stanford University California. In their research project they came up with a plan to make a search engine that ranked websites according to the number of other websites that linked to that site (and ultimately came up with the Google we have today). Before Google, search engines had ranked sites simply by the number of times the search term searched for appeared on the webpage, and the duo set out to make a more â€Å"aware† search engine.†¨ The domain google.com was registered on September 14th 1997 and Google Corporation was formed a year later in September 1998.†¨ Google started selling advertisements with its keyword searches in 2000, and so Google Adwords/Adsense was born. These advertisements used a system based on the pretence that you only paid for your advertising if some clicked on your ad link – hence the term Pay Per Click (PPC) was born. The term PageRank was patented in September 2001 – this term is actually named after co-founder Larry Page and not, as some think, named because it is the rank of a page (webpage).†¨ Also in 2001 co-founder Larry Page stood down as the CEO of Google and former CEO of Novel. Eric Schmidt. was appointed as the new CEO of Google.†¨ Google moved its offices to its large Google estate (nicknamed GooglePlex) in Mountainview California in 2003, and is still based there today.

Writing a First-Class Book Report

Compared with many other academic assignments, writing a book report doesn’t look like much. How difficult it may be – just read the book, then write about what it was like. Right? Wrong. This approach may be more or less appropriate in primary school, but it would certainly look utterly ridiculous in college. If you are going to be serious about it, you have to follow a pattern – and this guide is here to provide you with it. Book Report and Book Review: What Is the Difference and What Am I Writing? First of all, you should make sure you understand correctly what is expected of you. The terms â€Å"book review† and â€Å"book report† are often used interchangeable despite having different meanings; in addition to that, both of them can be understood differently depending on your academic level. Basically, the difference is as follows: Book report is a relatively short and simple description of the book. You give its title and the year of publication, name the author and provide some background information about him/her (year and place of birth, schools he/she attended, what family he/she had, marital status, occupation, significant life events, other notable works, etc.). Then you go on summarizing the plot of the book in a few paragraphs. Sometimes you may be asked to outline the themes and symbols relevant for the story, but not always. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CGNAujYHcw Book review is a much more serious affair. It is a critical and/or analytical evaluation of the text in question. It may contain the story’s summary (although sometimes it is assumed that readers are already familiar with it), but it is far from being the most important part of it. Review is first and foremost a commentary or argument – you are expected to express your own opinion, agreement or disagreement with the author, your evaluation of the work: where it hits the mark and where it is deficient. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UW5NL6Tb7PY However, this division is often vague, and some people, even teachers and professors, don’t differentiate between them at all. Book reports either acquire traits of reviews or these two terms are used synonymously. Alternatively, it is sometimes said that a book report should be an objective presentation of the book and analysis of its structure, while a book review should present a critical analysis and evaluation. The point we are trying to drive home is this: consult your teacher or professor before writing and make sure both of you understand the assignment in the same way. For the sake of completeness, this guide will cover all potential parts of this assignment. Before Writing In order to write a book review or report, first you have to read the book in question. It may sound self-evident, but if a book is given to you as a part of a course, and you don’t particularly feel like reading it, skimming through the text or reading an online summary becomes increasingly tempting as the deadline grows nearer. However, if you want to save yourself an embarrassment of writing something hilariously out of place, better read the book. And not just read it, but prepare to write a review as you go along. So, in the course of reading, ask yourself the following questions to focus your thinking: Does the author make his primary idea, point of view, theme evident? Do I agree with it? How can I characterize the author’s style? Is it formal or informal, does it suit the intended audience; if it is a work of fiction, does it change to express the peculiarities of different characters? What is the main focus of the story; who are the main characters? Do I like the way the story is handled? Do I find it realistic or relevant? As you read, you may encounter some paragraphs and entire passages that may be useful later on to prove your point. Don’t rely on your ability to locate them and remember that they exist – mark the corresponding places and make sure to return to them afterwards. Structure of a Book Report In its simplest form book report can be boiled down to a classic five-paragraph essay (introduction, 3 body paragraphs, conclusion). Depending on the academic level and complexity of the task, it may be larger, but the basic parts remain the same: 1. Introduction (supplementary information) Here you put all secondary information about the text in question that may be useful for understanding and evaluating it. Depending on your school’s guidelines, it may be more or less detailed – usually it is enough to mention the writer’s name and the book’s title and genre, but sometimes you may be asked to include publication information: publisher, year and number of pages. In larger assignments it may be necessary to provide some background information: writer and his personality, circumstances of his life, especially those that surrounded the writing and publication of this particular text, society he lived in (if it is relevant to the story), evaluations of the book by other well-known people and so on. Conclude it with your thesis about the book – it should be particularly clear-cut if you are going to make some kind of argument in the analytical part of the essay. 2. Body (summary and, possibly, analysis and evaluation) This section may be different depending on whether your assignment is closer to being a review or a report. In the first case, it will be divided into two parts: summary and analysis/evaluation. In the second case, there will be only summary. We will return to it later. 3. Conclusion (sums up your thoughts and formulates the main idea you’ve got from reading the book) Several sentences summing up and organizing your thoughts. You may emphasize the impression the book left you with, or point out what the writer was especially successful (or unsuccessful) in conveying, or point out what you consider to be the most important thing about it. Summary Irrespectively of whether you are going to go into deep analysis of the text, first you have to summarize it for the sake of the reader. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zgKOguRrRs There is no clear-cut standard according to which a summary should be written. You should take into account a number of factors: Will it be followed by in-depth analysis and evaluation? Who are your audience? Will you try to argue a point that will require backing up with concrete evidence from the book? If your book report is a true book report and you don’t have to express your own opinion and evaluation in addition to basic â€Å"What I liked most about the book†, go on and use most of your available word count to cover the summary. The amount of detail should be evident from the amount of space you are allowed – if you have to cram it into three-four hundred words, you should omit everything except what you consider to be vital. If you are given some elbow space, feel free to add the details. If, however, you are expected to analyze the text, then the summary should be as brief as possible, because analysis takes precedence. Feel free to omit some facts that you will have to bring up in other parts of the review as evidence – in a sense, your summary will be scattered throughout the paper, with facts and details appearing whenever you need to support your argument with the book’s contents. Also, take into account who you are writing the review for. If the book is a part of the course and you may be reasonably sure that both your professor and other students have read it, you may omit most of the summary altogether, only mentioning the facts that are relevant for the point you want to make with your review. If, however, you have chosen the book yourself, then you should make sure even those who encounter it for the first time know what you are talking about. Analysis and Evaluation If this part is at all present, it immediately steals the limelight for itself, which means that you should pay special attention to it. Analysis may be mainly concerned with the literary side of the text – that is, how well it is written and what exactly the author is trying to tell. In this case, you are basically limited to answering the following questions: Source: https://www.thewordfactory.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/5BQ.png As an alternative, your teacher or professor may pose a particular question you should answer and provide support for your opinion based on the book. Finally, sometimes you are not given any direct instructions – your task is to simply analyze the text. In this case, you may consider a number of questions to concentrate your attention on: What was the writer’s purpose in writing this text? Did he achieve it? Is the writing effective, beautiful, difficult to read? How can you characterize it in general? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the book in your opinion? Prove it. What is your general impression of the book? How did it influence you? Did you find it boring, fascinating, moving, thought-provoking or contrived? Why? Would you recommend it to others? Who, in your opinion, can benefit from reading it? Why? If you are dealing with multiple points, make sure to organize the review accordingly: divide it into paragraphs dealing with separate aspects of the book and your argument. If you are dealing with a large and complex text, it may be challenging; however, at the same time it will help you organize your thoughts, systematize your argumentation and present a fuller and more detailed point of view. However, make sure to avoid two practices that are often found tempting by beginners: Excessive use of quotation. You may be attracted by the idea of showing off your knowledge of the book and presenting what you consider to be irrefutable evidence. However, direct quotations are to be avoided unless they are no longer than a couple of words. You may express most of what the author had said in your own words. Comparisons and parallels with other books, either by the same author or other people. They may be useful in some cases, but try to keep them brief – it is a book review you are writing, not a comparative study of the author’s creative work or an entire genre. Conclusion In conclusion you have to restate your initial thesis about the book, this time taking into account all the evidence you’ve presented throughout the review. Or, alternatively, you may make a final evaluation of the book – it depends on the task you were given. However, you should take into account the following points: No new evidence at this point. Conclusion is for summing up, not for continuing your argument – if you have anything else to say that doesn’t fit into the existing body paragraphs, either omit it entirely or devote a separate body paragraph to it. Your conclusion shouldn’t come out of the blue. That is, if your final evaluation of the book is a positive one, you should found it upon positive points covered in the review’s body, and vice versa. If the essay body didn’t lead up to a straightforwardly positive or negative conclusion, you should state whether pros outweigh the cons and why. Some General Considerations These tips may come in handy throughout the process of writing: Try to define the objective of your review early on, while you still read the book, and start finding evidence that proves your point of view as you go along; Keep an eye out for symbolism. Even if the author didn’t intend something to be a symbol, it won’t prevent you from seeing it as such – and symbols are a very useful part of analytical arsenal; Be balanced in your judgment. Try to provide an objective argument and don’t engage in nitpicking. You may have a strongly positive or negative impression about the book, but if you either extol it or find fault with every sentence, the audience may suspect that you are being led by emotions. In general, a book report or review leaves you enough freedom to express your own personality despite putting someone else’s work in the center of attention. Make use of these tips, and there won’t be any problems!