Engagement as a Reflection of Communicative Potential
https://doi.org/10.21453/2311-3065-2020-8-1-27-33
Abstract
The paper represents the analysis of the concept of communicative. The choice of topic is determined by the search for criteria and tools for assessing the results of strategic communication, taking into account the development of its interactive forms. The author leads the existing approaches to the definition of the concept of engagement and identifies the areas for further interdisciplinary research of the specified subject, and raises the issue of the appropriateness of using the engagement indicators in the assessment the social potential of communication. The work is based on the phenomenological tradition in the interpretation of communicative processes and the metamodel of communication of R. Craig. The author uses the methods of comparative analysis, analogy, generalization, and combined methodology of interdisciplinary analysis
References
1. Гофман И. (2003). Анализ фреймов: эссе об организации повседневного опыта. М.: Институт социологии РАН.
2. Гуляева М.А. (2016). Теоретические основы изучения вовлеченности в коммуникацию // Известия Волгоградского государственного педагогического университета. № 9-10 (113). С. 65-69.
3. Гуляева М.А. (2017). Вовлеченность в коммуникацию. Постановка проблемы // Язык и культура: сборник статей XXVII Международной научной конференции. Томск, 26-28 октября 2016. Национальный исследовательский Томский государственный университет.
4. Кириллина Н.В. (2017). Символический обмен как системная характеристика коммуникативных практик // Поведенческая экономика современности и формирование рынков будущего. Материалы VII международной социологической Грушинской конференции 15-16 марта 2017 г. С. 1701-1703.
5. Anderson B., Swenson R., Gilkerson N. (2016). Understanding Dialogue and Engagement Through Communication Experts’ Use of Interactive Writing to Build Relationships // International Journal of Communication. No. 10. P. 4095-4118.
6. Craig R.T. (1999). Communication theory as a field // Communication Theory, Vol. 9, Issue 2. P. 119-161. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00355.
7. Johnston K. (2018). Engagement. In: The International Encyclopedia of Strategic Communication / Eds.: Robert L. Heath, Winni Johansen. Wiley-Blackwell.
8. Johnston K., Taylor M. (2018). Engagement as Communication: Pathways, Possibilities, and Future Directions. In: Taylor M., Johnston K. (Eds.) The handbook of communication engagement (Handbooks in Communication and Media). John Wiley and Sons. P. 1-15.
9. McGee M.C. (1980). The “ideograph”: A link between rhetoric and ideology // Quarterly Journal of Speech. No. 66. P. Issue 1. P. 1-16.
10. Pearson R. (1989). Business Ethics As Communication Ethics: Public Relations Practice and the Idea of Dialogue. In: Carl H. Botan, Vincent Hazleton Jr. (Eds.), Public Relations Theory. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale. P. 111-131.
11. Sommerfeldt E. (2013). Online Power Resource Management: Activist Resource Mobilization, Communication Strategy, and Organizational Structure // Journal of Public Relations Research. Vol. 25. Issue 4. P. 347-367.
12. Taylor M., Kent L. (2014). Dialogic Engagement: Clarifying Foundational Concepts. Journal of Public Relations Research. Vol.25, Issue 5. P. 384-398
Review
For citations:
Kirillina N.V. Engagement as a Reflection of Communicative Potential. Communicology. 2020;8(1):27-33. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21453/2311-3065-2020-8-1-27-33
Views:
171
Email this article 
