User:Natdogmillionaire/Choose an Article

Article Selection

Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Article title: Social Cue
Article Evaluation:

The article describes various types of social cues and gives examples of social cues but doesn't provide a concise definition of the term. This a problem I have with the article as it lacks to provide a clear definition of what social cues are. Thinking deeper the article also does not dive into the biological, evolutionary, or cultural aspects of social cues and how they came to be. I think this could have could have provided a more comprehensive understanding of the topic. Another issue is that the article relies heavily on a single source (ref #3) to support the section on the importance of social cues in social interaction. While the source is reputable, more sources could have been used to provide a broader perspective on the topic. There are even flags for clarification in parenthesis in this section.
Sources:
Dovidio, J. F., & Ellyson, S. L. (1982). Social cognition and nonverbal behavior: An information processing approach. Springer-Verlag.
Paul Ekman, Wallace V. Friesen, Hand Movements, Journal of Communication, Volume 22, Issue 4, December 1972, Pages 353–374, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1972.tb00163.x
Scherer, K. R. (1986). Vocal affect expression: A review and a model for future research. Psychological Bulletin, 99(2), 143–165. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.99.2.143

Article title: Word of mouth
Article Evaluation:

One issue with the article is that it is short, which can be confusing for readers to get enough information. The article could benefit from more focused writing, with more emphasis on key concepts. While the article describes the different types and effects of word of mouth, it doesn't provide a detailed explanation of why word of mouth is so influential in shaping attitudes and behaviors. Overall, the article provides a solid introduction to the phenomenon of word of mouth, but it could be improved by incorporating more focused writing and more emphasis on the psychological aspects involved.
Sources:
Anderson, E. W. (1998). Customer Satisfaction and Word of Mouth. Journal of Service Research, 1(1), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/109467059800100102
Chevalier, J. A., & Mayzlin, D. (2006). The Effect of Word of Mouth on Sales: Online Book Reviews. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(3), 345–354. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.43.3.345
Matthew L. Meuter, Deborah Brown McCabe & James M. Curran (2013) Electronic Word-of-Mouth Versus Interpersonal Word-of-Mouth: Are All Forms of Word-of-Mouth Equally Influential?, Services Marketing Quarterly, 34:3, 240-256, https://doi.org/10.1080/15332969.2013.798201

Article title: Interruption (speech)
Article Evaluation:

This article is similar to the previously evaluated one in the sense that it could benefit from more focused writing as it is a short read. It is a short article that could that could be further improved by providing more clear summaries of key points and concepts. The article describes different types of interruptions, but it doesn't provide a detailed explanation of why interruptions occur and how they affect communication. I think going forward the article could be improved with stronger sources to relate the idea of how interruption affects communication.
Sources:
Carol W. Kennedy & Carl T. Camden (1983) A new look at interruptions, Western Journal of Speech Communication, 47:1, 45-58, DOI: 10.1080/10570318309374104
Marco Gemmiti, Selei Hamed, Johannes Wildhaber, Cosette Pharisa & Petra L. Klumb (2022) Physicians’ Speech Complexity and Interrupting Behavior in Pediatric Consultations, Health Communication, 37:6, 748-759, DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2020.1868063
Wang X, Humes LE. Factors influencing recognition of interrupted speech. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010 Oct;128(4):2100-11. doi: 10.1121/1.3483733. PMID: 20968381; PMCID: PMC2981122.

Article title: Communication in small groups
Article Evaluation:

I think the article could benefit from more examples to help readers better understand the concepts and theories presented. The article could also be improved by providing more recommendations that can improve small group communication. I found it weird that the article does not address the role of technology in small group communication, which is becoming increasingly important nowadays. I think future updates to the article could include a discussion of the impact of technology on small group communication and how to use it effectively in group settings.
Sources:
FUI HOON (FIONA) NAH, JIYE MAO & IZAK BENBASAT (1999) The effectiveness of expert support technology for decision making: individuals versus small groups, Journal of Information Technology, 14:2, 137-147, DOI: 10.1080/026839699344638
Lowry, Paul & Roberts, Tom & Romano, Nicholas & Cheney, Paul & Hightower, Ross. (2006). The Impact of Group Size and Social Presence on Small-Group Communication. Small Group Research. 37. 631-661. 10.1177/1046496406294322.
Melissa A Dobosh, Marshall Scott Poole & Rahul Malik (2019) Small group use of communication technologies: a comparison of modality on group outcomes, Communication Research Reports, 36:4, 298-308, DOI: 10.1080/08824096.2019.1660869

Article title: Frog pond effect
Article Evaluation:

The article could benefit from more concrete examples; as the article provides several anecdotes to illustrate the frog pond effect, but I think more real-world/practical examples would help readers understand the concept better. Another issue is that the article is relatively short like some of the other articles. I think more information could be included to expand discussions of the cause and effects of the frog pond concept, as well as strategize how to overcome the theory. I will say there is not much online on this theory, but it is a valuable resource for anyone interested in understanding how small communities can perpetuate harmful or outdated ideas. It could just use more updating in my opinion and sources if available.
Sources:
Lixin Jiang, Tahira M. Probst & Wendi L. Benson (2014) Why me? The frog-pond effect, relative deprivation and individual outcomes in the face of budget cuts, Work & Stress, 28:4, 387-403, DOI: 10.1080/02678373.2014.965241
Skov, P. R. (2022). Does the Peer Group Matter? Assessing Frog Pond Effects in Transition to Secondary Schooling. Socius, 8. https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231221088652
Zell, E., & Lesick, T. L. (2021). Taking Social Comparison to the Extremes: The Huge-Fish-Tiny-Pond Effect in Self-Evaluations. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(6), 1030–1038. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620956535