See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268184497

Face-to-face Versus Computer-mediated Communication: Exploring

Employees' Preference of Effective Employee Communication Channel

Article · January 2010

CITATIONS READS

46 11,391

1 author:

Cheng Ean Catherine Lee

Sunway University
42 PUBLICATIONS 324 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Cheng Ean Catherine Lee on 06 February 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & ARTS, VOL. 1, NO. 2, 2010 38

Face-to-face Versus Computer-mediated

Communication: Exploring Employees’
Preference of Effective Employee
Communication Channel
Lee Cheng Ean
School of Communication, Taylor’s University Malaysia
No.1, Jalan Taylor’s, 47500 Subang Jaya, Selangor D.E. Malaysia
[email protected]

Abstract

New communication technologies have changed the communication media use in

organisations. It is important to examine the impact of technology in the workplace and how
it affects the communication with the employees whether the technology has replaced the
traditional medium of communication, which is face-to-face. This paper is an examination of
the communication channels use in employee communication of five Malaysian organisations.
The objectives of this study were to explore employee perspectives on the various
communication channels use in the organisations and to compare the use of face-to-face and
computer-mediated communication for employee communication activities. Fifteen in-depth
interviews were carried out with communications staff in five organisations in Malaysia by
using a non-random sampling. The participants claimed that computer-mediated
communication is the most frequently used channel for employee communication in their
organisations; face-to-face communication is perceived to be effective for relationship
building with managers and dissemination of work-related information to colleagues; and
majority of the participants perceived that face-to-face communication is a more effective
employee communication channel compared to computer-mediated communication.

Keywords: Face-to-face communication, Computer-mediated communication, Employee

communication tool

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Employee communication has become one of the most important contributors to

organisational effectiveness (Grunig, 1992) by creating a link between the organisation and
the employees through various communication media such as interpersonal and small group
communication, traditional print communication, electronic communication, and online
communication. Communication is important to keep employees well-informed about an
organisation’s business vision and strategy as well as to help every individual in the
organisation to working together with a common purpose. Holtzhausen (2002) asserted that
employee communication is very crucial for organisations.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & ARTS, VOL. 1, NO. 2, 2010 39

In recent years, technological innovations and Internet has radically emerged and been
introduced in many workplaces. Technological change is one major aspect which has
influenced the communication approaches in the organisations, especially the practice of new
communication technology in employee communication. Many scholarly discourses have
shown that organisations have made a significant shift towards technological adoption in their
communication practices (Sproull and Kiesler, 1991; Steinfield, 1992; Davenport & Prusak,
1997; Jonassen & Kwon, 2001; and Arnesen & Weis, 2007). Nonetheless, computer-
mediated communication is yet to replace face-to-face communication as effective
communication channel (Barkhi, Jacob & Pirkul, 1999; Begley, 2004; van der Meijden &
Veenman, 2005; SCM, 2008).

In this era of information and communication technologies (ICT), computer-mediated

communication is a basic infrastructure that every organisations need to be equipped with.
With the adoption of communication software, it helps the flow of communication among the
organisation and its employees and their clients alike. The usage of computer-mediated
communication has significantly changed the way organisations and their employees
communicate with each other. “The major developments in technology have found
communication being mediated in a number of revolutionary new ways…communication was
transformed in some way by enabling mass publication and far greater speed and distance”
(Thurlow, Lengel & Tomic, 2004, p.26). Miller (2009) claimed that the range of technologies
introduced to the workplace in recent years has impact on communication in organisations.

Prior studies on computer-mediated communication have been conducted by researchers on

the usage of computer-mediated communication, its challenges, problems and effectiveness
(Provenzo, 1986; December, 1996; Nohria & Eccles, 1998; An and Frick, 2006; Heisler &
Crabill, 2006; Adams & Galanes, 2009). Besides, the use of face-to-face communication is
also been studied (Barkhi, Jacob & Pirkul, 1999; Begley, 2004; van der Meijden & Veenman,
2005; SCM, 2008, 2009).

Yet, most of the researches on the use of computer-mediated and face-to-face communication
in the workplace focus in the West countries such as United States of America, little is known
about the communication channels use in Malaysian organisations. In addition, the literature
of comparing the use of face-to-face and computer-mediated communication is largely
centres on students’ perception and in education context. Thus, this present study could shed
insight as how computer-mediated and face-to-face communication is used in workplace
communication.

Looking at the availability of various communication media choices in the workplace, it

raises the question on how Malaysian employees perceive the effective employee
communication channel by comparing face-to-face and computer-mediated communication.
The participants in this study are employees from the communications or public relations
department. Communicationw employees play an extremely significant role in directing
organisation’s internal and employee communications (Wright, 1995) and they spend most of
their time performing communication activities in the organisation. With this in mind, the
participants are able to provide a better insight on the best employee communication medium.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & ARTS, VOL. 1, NO. 2, 2010 40

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Employee Communication

“Organisations are increasingly recognising the value of building with employees long-term
relationships based on mutual satisfaction” (Shockley-Zalabak, 2009, p. 346). Grunig, Grunig
and Dozier (2002, p. 487) stated that “employees are most satisfied with information that
helps them make sense of their situation by explaining how their jobs fit into the
organisational mission, the organisation’s policies and plans, and the relationships with key
constituencies in the organisation’s environment”. Smidts, Pruyn and van Riel (2001) in their
research found that effective employee communication strengthen employees’ identification
with their organisations and contribute to organisation’s financial performance and sustained
success. Other outcomes of effective employee communication includes facilitate
engagement and building trust among the employees (Grates, 2006), enhance business
performance to influence customer behaviour and directly affects revenue growth and
profitability (Towers, 2003).

Thus, it is essential for organisations to recognise the importance of employee

communication and the appropriate use of communication channels in employee
communication. The choice of communication media use in employee communication is
important. Organisations can choose to communicate either face-to-face or through various
forms of mediated communications. The selection of communication tools are based on how
effective they are in achieving the bottom-line of the business goal and how they fit in a
strategic internal communication process (Kalla, 2005).

Computer, interactive video and other information technologies are very useful in informing
the employees about important internal messages as well as gathering their new ideas (Wright,
1995). With the adoption of new communication technologies in employee communication, it
has increased the overall level of the organisational communication (Miller, 2009). The
electronic communication technologies media use in workplace includes telephone, fax,
video-conferencing and internet facilities such as email, intranet and social media. Besides
electronic technologies, face-to-face communication is also used in employee communication.
Face-to-face communication can be started with formal and informal one-to-one meeting
which include eye contact, facial expression, body movement and the tone of message that
show the importance of the message. The way to interpret the message will also change based
on the differences of the expressions.

2.2 Face-to-face communication

Face-to-face communication is a conversation that one has while being face to face with the
other party. This type of communication enables a person to hear and see the non-verbal
communication conveyed by the sender and respond with feedback straightaway. Face-to-
face discussion also facilitates immediate feedback, contains visual and audio cues, act as a
personal source and uses natural body languages. Begley (2004) claimed that face-to-face
remains the most powerful human interaction, never replace intimacy and immediacy of
people conversing in the same room.

An and Frick’s (2006) research reported that face-to-face communication is faster, easier and
more convenient than computer-mediated communication in the educational context. Face-to-
face communication represents a high social presence i.e. a quality of a medium to convey
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & ARTS, VOL. 1, NO. 2, 2010 41

the presence of a sender (Kaushik, David, Kline & Oaks, 2000). Besides, Barkhi, Jacob and
Pirkul (1999) claimed that face-to-face communication is an efficient method of
communicating in organisations as face-to-face manner resulted in better overall performance.
It uses verbal communication, enriched by facial cues to convey information and relay quick
feedback to other parties (Barkhi, Jacob & Pirkul, 1999). An and Frick (2006) further claimed
that face-to-face communication is best use for communicating ambiguous tasks, making
decision and completing complex tasks. Lastly, Van der Meijden and Veenman (2005) in
their study reveals that students were more satisfied with using face-to-face communication
as compare to computer-mediated communication in a primary school setting.

Tom Crawford, the head of employee engagement at Deloitte, stated that face-to-face
communication is still the most effective and compelling provided it’s delivered with honesty,
clarity and in a time-relevant fashion (SCM, 2008). Angela Sinickas, the president of
Sinickas Communications, Inc., further advised not to let face-to-face be eclipsed by
technology (SCM, 2009). She claimed that “all the online communication has not made
employees any better informed than they used to be in the days before we started speeding
along the information superhighway, though they’re getting that information faster and more
accurately… not letting two way face-to-face communication get left behind in the dust”
(SCM, 2009, p. 11).

2.3 Computer-mediated communication

The history of computer-mediated communication (CMC) is more than fifty years old and
since the mid-1990s, the fast-growing popularity and ubiquity of personal computers has
caused CMC to become very attractive to scholarly attention (Thurlow, Lengel & Tomic,
2004). CMC is a form of human communication using computer and internet network and
this Internet-based communication takes place on global collection of networks that uses the
Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) suite for data exchange (December,
1996). It is a type of communication which allows people to combine numerous media in a
single message when conversing. CMC is an interactive channel which allows users to be
active and engage in a two-way communication, herein, it is an inexpensive way of
information seeking for increasing efficiency and productivity (Miller, 2009).

The mediated nature of computer-mediated communication allows greater manipulation and

more careful construction of personal information; the delayed nature gives participants the
opportunity to review, revise or cancel their communications before the information are sent
(Heisler & Crabill, 2006). Steinfield’s (1992) study revealed that employees use computer-
mediated communication to organise social activities with their peers, play games and engage
in entertaining conversation with other internal employees. Jonanssen and Kwon (2001)
found that computer-mediated communication appears to support problem solving by
eliciting more focused, on-task and purposive communication.

Besides, computer-mediated communication is a form of asynchronous communication

which has the advantages of eliminating problems created by barriers of time and space; cost-
effective; fairly easy to use; as well as the potential of being more personal and customizable
(Provenzo, 1986). According to Sproull and Kiesler (1991), computer-mediated
communication has democratized the workplace as it reduces information gaps by providing
a tool for peripheral employee to be connected to all people within the organisation. The
computer-mediated communication technologies include computer conferencing, e-mail,
online chat, database utilities, multimedia and Web-based environments. These technologies
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & ARTS, VOL. 1, NO. 2, 2010 42

are used for strategic planning, assessment, product evaluation and project coordination
(Adams & Galanes, 2009) as well as for people to easily communicate directly with one
another across time and space (Nohria & Eccles, 1998).

2.4 Research Questions

The two research questions guiding this study are:

RQ1: What are the media use to communicate with the employees in the workplace?

RQ2: Comparing face-to-face and computer-mediated communication, which medium

preferred by employees as effective employee communication channel in Malaysian
organisations?

3.0 METHODOLOGY

Qualitative interviewing was the methodology used in this study with the attempt of
comparing face-to-face and computer-mediated communication as an effective employee
communication channel in five Malaysian organisations. Though qualitative interview uses a
smaller non-random sample, it provides a wealth of detail which increases a researcher’s
depth of understanding of the phenomenon under investigation (Wimmer & Dominick, 2006).

3.1 Data Collection and Data Analysis

This study used non-random sample, namely an available sample. An available sample “is a
collection of readily accessible subjects for study” (Wimmer & Dominick, 2006, p.90). Even
though a non-random sample would not provide an accurate cross-section sample of likely
target audiences, the available sample “can be helpful in collecting exploratory information
and may produce useful data…in pretesting questionnaires or other preliminary or pilot study
work” (Wimmer & Dominick, 2006, p.90-91) which was effective to provide insights on how
Malaysian communications employees perceived an effective employee communication
channel.

The selected organisations are from the services industry with medium and small in size. Two
organisations were public relations and advertising agencies, a local bank, a food and
beverage Company and a property agency. In total, fifteen in-depth interviews were carried
out with the communications staff of five Malaysian organisations. The interviews were
conducted at the participants’ offices with an average duration of 30 to 45 minutes per
session. All conversations during the interview were recorded using a radio cassette recorder
and later transcribed for analysis.

The participants were asked for their use of face-to-face and computer-mediated
communication in the workplace and which medium best use as effective employee
communication tool in their organisation. Six open-ended questions were asked which
include the types of communication channel use in the workplace, purposes of usage and the
frequently use channel, comparing the use of face-to-face with computer-mediated
communication by discussing its advantages and disadvantages, the employees’ preferred
channel of communication in the workplace and finally which medium is best use as effective
employee communication tool.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & ARTS, VOL. 1, NO. 2, 2010 43

The data from the interviews were analysed following Miles and Huberman’s (1994) data
analysis approach (cited in Creswell, 2007) in which the researcher manually summarise the
raw data into coding and themes; make comparisons among the interviewees’ responses and
finally interpret the displayed data as according to the research questions set in this study.

4.0 RESULTS

4.1 Participants’ Demographic Profiles

The participants are currently working in the public relations or communications department
of services industry in the Klang Valley. There were seven males and eight females aged 24
to 35 years old. All participants have a bachelor degree in communications or mass
communication with two to ten years of working experience.

4.2 The Communication Channels Use in the Workplace

The first research question addressed the media use for employee communication in the
workplace for transmission of work-related information, communication between managers
and subordinates and among colleagues. From the interviews, the frequently used channels
for communication in the workplace are summarized as follow (in descending order):
computer-mediated communication, face-to-face communication, electronic media and print
media.

The interviewees claimed that their organisations mostly use computer-mediated

communication for disseminating work-related information to employees who are working in
different area and time zone; receiving updated information from the management; and as
reminders or black and white proof of communication. The frequently used computer-
mediated communications are e-mail, instant messaging, intranet, and corporate website. One
of the participants stated that “my manager normally sends us information and instruction
through email because it is more convenient and easy”, while other participants said: “I used
to email my fellow colleagues as well as my manager as a reminder for any up-coming
activities and as proof of communication”; and “due to locality and different working time
zone, CMC is more frequently use”.

Face-to-face communication, on the other hand, is used for communicating sensitive issues;
building interpersonal relationships between employees and managers; and for project
collaboration. The participants said: “If it is a crisis or something sensitive which requires
urgent attention, face-to-face communication will be preferred”; “face-to-face is a necessity
to avoid any misunderstanding”; and “for project co-ordination, face-to-face will be more
effective because it is rich in content and it save time when I need to receive feedback from
the participants”.

Other employee communication channels used in the organisations include electronic media
such as telephone and mobile phone as well as print media such as newsletter, memorandum
and notice, and written letter. Electronic media is used for giving verbal instructions to
employees off-site; and for employees to communicate urgent matters with their managers.
Some of the comments by the interviewees include: “I will use the mobile phone when there
is an emergency”; “telephone is used for communication with colleagues who are not
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & ARTS, VOL. 1, NO. 2, 2010 44

available physically”; and “but if we are far apart, telephone is the best way to
communicate”.

The traditional print media on the other hand, is used for announcing human resources-related
matters such as warnings and promotions, awards and activities; and as reminder and proof of
communication after face-to-face interactions. The interviewees claimed that “my head of
department will use memo to disseminate work-related information and letter is used for
human resources matter such as promotion”; “the traditional media such as memo is used as
a reminder for us to complete our task on time”; and “we use letter when issuing warning
letter or to demote a staff”.

4.3 Employees’ Preferred Medium of Effective Employee Communication Channel

The second research question addressed the issue of the effective employee communication
channel as preferred by communications staff of five Malaysian organisations. During the
interviews, the employees discussed the advantages and disadvantages of using face-to-face
and computer-mediated communication in the workplace.

In summary, nine out of fifteen interviewees claimed that face-to-face communication is the
best medium for effective employee communication. Three interviewees however, agreed
that computer-mediated communication is an effective employee communication channel,
and the remaining three interviewees recommended a combination of both face-to-face and
computer-mediated communications should be used for better effect.

Majority of the interviewees perceived that face-to-face interactions are best used for
employees to build interpersonal relationships with their managers and also for managers to
transmit work instructions and daily operations to their employees. One of the interviewees
described: “I think face-to-face communication can bridge the gap between the managers and
the employees”. Another interviewee claimed that “face-to-face communication is quicker,
more accurate and able to give immediate response when transmitting information to
employees besides for employees to better understand the manager’s instructions”.
Other comments include: “face-to-face is best use for understanding supervisor’s
instructions compared to email”; “face-to-face is quick and more accurate in transmitting
information”; and “traditional face-to-face meeting provides me clearer picture of my task
and strengthening my relationship with my boss”.

Based on the findings of the interviews, the advantages of using face-to-face communication
were instant feedback; rich of non-verbal cues such as gestures, eye contact and tone of
voice; personal focus; easier to solve problems; bridging the gap between the managers and
the employees; and able to reduce misunderstanding or misinterpretation during
communication. However, the disadvantages of face-to-face communication, as according to
the interviewees were increasing decision time for solving problems; the unavailability of
subjects; and lack of time for consideration when making decision or communicating with the
employees.

Finally, three interviewees claimed that computer-mediated communication had a number of

advantages over face-to-face communication such as speed of interaction; communicating in
remote area or in different time zone; provides black and white reference or as reminders
after face-to-face interactions; and to deliver routine information to vast employees such as
work instructions and job function. On the other hand, the disadvantages of computer-
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & ARTS, VOL. 1, NO. 2, 2010 45

mediated communication were insufficient infrastructure of the new media in the

organisation; difficulty of access in some organisations; and lack of non-verbal cues
especially facial expression and tone of voice.

5.0 CONCLUSION

The results of this study provide an interesting insight that the most frequently used channel
may not be the participants’ preference of effective employee communication channel. The
participants claimed that computer-mediated communication is the most frequently used
channel for employee communication in their organisations while face-to-face
communication is perceived to be effective for relationship building with managers and
dissemination of work-related information to employees. Finally, the interviewees perceived
that face-to-face communication is a more effective employee communication channel
compared with computer-mediated communication.

Despite the proliferation use of technology in organisations, communications employees still

preferred face-to-face communication and perceived it as an effective employee
communication channel. When the interviewees were asked on the preferred channel for
employee communication, majority of them quoted face-to-face communication because of
its advantages of direct feedback, two-way communication, multiple information cues and
good for relationship building and project collaboration. This study has shown that even
though CMC has been pervasively used in the workplace as a communication channel, yet
traditional media such as face-to-face interaction still plays an important role in workplace
communication.

This highlights the need for a better understanding of the role communication technology
plays in employee communication. The management needs to use appropriate communication
media when communicating with the employees or to communicate work-related information
throughout the organisation.

5.1 Limitations and Recommendations

This is a study on five service-oriented organisations in the Klang Valley, thus, it is limited in
its generalizability to other types of organisations in Malaysia. Nevertheless, the findings
from this study could help shed insights into the employees’ preference of the use of new
communication technologies in the workplace as compare to the traditional communication
media. Therefore, similar studies could be conducted with the rank-and-file employees of
various types of organisations in Malaysia.

Another limitation relates to the methodology use in this study. The use of only one method
with a non-random sample may significantly bias the results of the study which may lead to
inaccurate estimates of the populations from which the sample was drawn. However, this
study served as a pilot study for future research. Consequently a mix approach of
methodology with a random sample can be recommended for better validity of the results.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & ARTS, VOL. 1, NO. 2, 2010 46

6.0 REFERENCES

[1] Adam, K. & Galanes, G. (2009). Communicating in groups: Application and skills
(6th Ed.). McGraw Hill: New York

[2] An, Y-J. & Frick, T. (2006). Student perceptions of asynchronous computer-mediated
communication in face-to-face courses. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication. Vol. 11 (2)

[3] Arnesen, W. & Weiss, L. (2007). Developing an effective company policy for
employee Internet and email use. Journal of Organisational Culture, Communications
and Conflict, Vol. 11 (2), p. 59

[4] Barkhi, R., Jacob, V. & Pirkul, H. (1999). An experimental analysis of face to face
versus computer mediated communication channels. Group Decision and Negotiation,
Vol. 8 (4), p. 325 – 347

[5] Begley, K. A. (2004). Face-to-face communication: Making human connections in

technology-driven world. Thompson Place: Boston

[6] Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches (2nd Ed.). Sage Publications Inc.: United States of America

[7] Davenport, T. & Prusak, L. (1997). Working knowledge: How organisations manage
what they know. Harvard Business School Press: Boston

[8] December, J. (1996). Units of analysis for Internet communication. Journal of

Communication, Vol. 46 (1), p. 1 – 22

[9] Grates, G. (2006). Are your employees working with the volume off? Edelman Memo
to Management, Vol. 1 (4) [available at
http://www.edelman.com/expertise/practices/employee_change/documents/Edelman_
memotoManagement_vol1issue4.pdf., accessed 18 September 2010]

[10] Grunig, J. (1992). Excellence in public relations and communication management.

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Publishers: London

[11] Grunig, J., Grunig, L. & Dozier, D. (2002). Excellent public relations and effective
organisations: A study of communication management in three countries. Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Publishers: London

[12] Heisler, J. & Crabill, S. (2006). Who are “Stinkybug” and “packerfan4”? email
pseudonyms and participants’ perceptions of demography, productivity, and
personality. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 12 (1)

[13] Holtzhausen, D. (2002). The effects of a divisionalised and decentralised

organisational structure on a formal internal communication function in a South
African organisation. Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 6 (4), p. 323 –
339
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & ARTS, VOL. 1, NO. 2, 2010 47

[14] Jonassen, D. & Kwon, H. (2001). Communication patterns in computer-mediated

versus face-to-face group problem solving. Educational Technology Research and
Development, Vol. 49 (10), p. 35 – 52

[15] Kalla, H. (2005). Integrated internal communications: A multidisciplinary

perspectives. Corporate Communication, Vol. 10 (4), p. 302 – 314

[16] Kaushik, R., David, P., Kline, S. & Oaks, D. (2000). Social presence effects: A study
of CMC vs. FtF in a collaborative fiction project. Fifth Annual International
Workshop Presence 2000, Universidade Fernando Pessoa, Porto, Portugal, p. 1 – 28

[17] Miller, K. (2009). Organisational Communication: Approaches and process (5th Ed.).
Wadsworth: United States of America

[18] Nohria, N. & Eccles, R. (1998). Network and organisations: Structure, form and
action. Harvard Business School Press: United States of America

[19] Provenzo, E. F. (1986). Beyond the Gutenberg galaxy. Teachers College Press: New
York

[20] SCM (Feb/Mar 2008). Building a two-way dialogue at Deloitte. Strategic

Communication Management, Vol. 12 (2), p. 6

[21] SCM (Feb/Mar 2009). Don’t let face to face be eclipsed by technology. Strategic
Communication Management, Vol. 13 (2), p. 11

[22] Shockley-Zalabak, P. (2009). Fundamentals of organisational communication:

knowledge, sensitivity, skills, values (7th Ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.: United States
of America

[23] Smidts, A., Pruyn, A. & van Riel, C. (2001). The impact of employee
communication and perceived external prestige on organisational identification. The
Academy of Management Journal, p. 1 – 29

[24] Sproull, L. & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New ways of working in the
networked organisation. MIT Press: U.S.A.

[25] Steinfield, C. (1992). Computer-mediated communications in organisational settings:

Emerging conceptual frameworks and directions for research. Management
Communication Quarterly, Vol. 5 (3), p. 348 – 365

[26] Thurlow, C., Lengel, L. & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer-mediated communication:

Social interaction and the Internet. Sage Publication: London

[27] Towers, P. (2003). Working today: Understanding what drives employee

engagement. Towers Perrin: Stamford CT.

[28] Van der Meijden, H. & Veenman, S. (2005). Face-to-face versus computer-mediated
communication in a primary school setting. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 21,
p. 831 – 859
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & ARTS, VOL. 1, NO. 2, 2010 48

[29] Wimmer, R. & Dominick, J. (2006). Mass media research: An introduction (8th Ed.).
Thompson Wadsworth: United States of America

[30] Wright, D. K. (1995). The role of corporate public relations executives in the future
of employee communications. Public Relations Review, Vol. 21 (3), p. 181 – 198

View publication stats