language arts and fine arts || speaking

SpeakingAuthor(s): Wallace C. Fotheringham and Goodwin F. Berquist, Jr.Source: Review of Educational Research, Vol. 28, No. 2, Language Arts and Fine Arts (Apr.,1958), pp. 107-116Published by: American Educational Research AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1168865 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 02:50

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

American Educational Research Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Review of Educational Research.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.60 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 02:50:21 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aera

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1168865?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


CHAPTER IV

Speaking WALLACE C. FOTHERINGHAM and GOODWIN F. BERQUIST, JR.

THREE principal bases of selection were employed for materials here reviewed. First, items central to speaking and communication as a social act were included. Other chapters in this issue deal with listening, linguis- tics, communication theory, and speech disorders. Second, items which were speculative, discursive, theoretical, or anecdotal in approach were omitted. Finally, publications relatively accessible to the reader were emphasized. Unpublished dissertations and items in foreign journals were considered generally unaccessible.

The research selected for review was organized into four broad categories: (a) bibliographies and reviews; (b) tests, measurements, and instruments for research; (c) quantitative studies; and (d) historical- critical studies.

Bibliographies and Reviews Auer (3), Knower (67), and Dow (33) continued their indexes and

abstracts of doctoral dissertations. Gray (45) compiled an index of doctoral dissertations in areas contiguous to speech. Bass (5) reviewed research in leaderless group discussion. Karstetter (62) and Kelley and Thibaut (64) reviewed studies in group dynamics. Hovland (59) sum- marized the major studies on mass media of communication. Black (9) reviewed recent research on intelligibility.

Caplan and King (19) compiled an extensive bibliography of studies dealing with pulpit eloquence from 1500 to the present. Haberman and others (51) continued their annotated bibliographies of studies in rhetoric and public address. Gunderson (49) compiled a bibliography of studies in historical journals relevant to public address. Auer (2) pre- pared a bibliography of studies in American public address. Eubanks, Baker, and Golden (36) developed a bibliography stressing studies relevant to the Southern states.

Tests, Measures, Instruments of Research Efforts to develop the instruments of research appeared to be consider-

ably more limited than studies devoted to the testing of hypotheses. In the area of discussion and small-group behavior, two formulas were developed to quantify some outcomes of discussion. Matthews and Bendig (77) developed an Index of Agreement designed to quantify the degree of agreement among discussants. The index is computed simply. Dickens (30) presented and discussed the usefulness of a measure of the "spread of participation" occurring in a discussion.

107



REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Vol. XXVIII, No. 2

Several scales appeared which were designed to measure aspects of behavior in discussion groups. Fine and Zimet (38) described a scale for assessing the emotional quality of the responses of individuals in group discussion. Characteristics of the scale, notably its reliability, were appraised. Haiman (52) developed a measure of attitude toward discussion leadership. Adorno's F-Scale was employed as a validating criterion. Richards and Pence (84) described a discussion rating scale; the scale was empirically derived to create equal appearing intervals. Crutchfield (28) produced a technique, not a scale, to measure individual differences in conformity to group judgment; in regard to his technique, the author discussed the requisite characteristics of measurement in situations of group interaction.

In the area of public speaking, Brooks (18) and Fotheringham (40) described techniques for measuring effectiveness of public speaking. The first was a forced-choice scale designed to reduce bias; it is probably more useful for research than for classroom purposes. The second measure employed a sample of audience rankings combined with instructor rat- ings and was designed for classroom and research use. Krugman (68) discussed an indirect measure of tension as an index of resistance to propaganda. Greenhill (46) described a method for recording audience reactions by means of infrared photography.

Quantitative Studies

In regard to methods, the most extensive collection of studies was those reported by Hovland and others (60). These were an extension of research reported in 1949 and 1953. The focuses of the present studies were the order of presenting (a) a series of communications and (b) the various elements within a single communication. The stimuli employed were predominantly written (audience reads) but occasionally oral (audience listens). Gulley and Berlo (48) and Gilkinson, Paulson, and Sikkink (42) dealt with the second aspect of presentation cited above; these studies employed speech stimuli. Other studies in method included that by Utterback and Harding (98) who reaffirmed that direct presentation is superior to reading from manuscript or presenting a tape-recorded speech. Thistlethwaite, Kamenetzky, and Schmidt (93) found that ex- plicit refutations of audience arguments aroused resistance to persuasion. Thistlethwaite and Kamenetzky (92) reported that refutation or elaboration of audience arguments reduced persuasive effect in audiences op- posed to the speaker's thesis.

Several studies dealt with some aspect of ethos in persuasion. An addi- tional finding in the Gilkinson, Paulson, and Sikkink study (42) was that quoting authorities had no significant effect. Pastore and Horowitz (78) reaffirmed that persuasion associated with positive motives was significantly more accepted. Cooper (26) found audiences able to identify 108




April 1958 SPEAKING

a persuader's bias when his manifest intent was only "to give the facts." Berlo and Gulley (7) and Winthrop (105) found change in attitude related to attitude toward the speaker.

Numerous studies considered other factors of persuasive effect on audiences. Some dealt with the condition or personality of the listener as a force in persuasion. Weiss and Fine (103, 104) reported that aggres- sive persons were more influenced by a punitively oriented communication. Janis (61) reported that persons with a high degree of neurotic anxiety were not more resistant to persuasion, and that persons with feelings of inadequacy were more influenced. Katz, Sarnoff, and Mc- Clintock (63) concluded that giving the recipient of persuasion insight into the self is more influential than giving insight into the problem presented in the communication.

Other studies dealt with factors such as majority influence and desire to seek agreement with one's own viewpoint. Sawyer (88) found audiences most influenced by persuasion perceived to be similar to the attitude of the majority. Brodbeck (17) found that listeners, after exposure to opposing persuasion, seek reinforcement from those agreeing with them.

Closely related to research on factors of persuasion were a series of studies on the interaction of persons in a persuasive situation. This concept, in some respects, suggests the older concept of "social facili- tation." Research interest in this area increased; it can be grouped in two broad categories: (a) the interaction of speaker and audience and (b) the interaction between audience members. In the first group, studies by Cervin (20, 21), Field (37), Peters (79), Verplanck (100), and Zimmerman and Bauer (109) supported and defined interaction between speaker and audience. In the second group, studies by Kelley and Woodruff (65), Rosenbaum and Blake (86), and Luchins and Luchins (73, 74) supported the claim of auditor-auditor interaction.

In contrast to the shortage of published research in debate, considerable research interest continued in discussion. One group of studies, involving discussion and small-group activity, is related to those cited above in regard to interaction. These pertain to the differentiation of communicative roles within a group, the interaction of group members, and the emergence of group leaders. Lawlor (69), Slater (90), Shaw and Gilchrist (89), Asch (1), Deutsch and Gerard (29), and Kidd and Campbell (66) examined hypotheses relevant to the student of the discussion process. A second group of studies focused on differing conditions under which discussion might take place. Yuker (107) found a co-operative atmosphere superior to a competitive one in terms of group recall of information, while Harnack (54) did not find any significant distinction between these two conditions. Wischmeier (106) studied group-centered vs. leader-centered leadership, reporting that groups considered the former better discussion, but that the latter type of leadership contributed more to the discussion,

109

April 1958 SPEAKING



A third group of studies appears to focus on the outcomes of discussion and group activity. Comrey and Staats (25) questioned the assumption of "group" product and reported a finding that most of group performance was predictable from individual performances. Lawrence and Smith (70) reported that individually determined goals were superior to group- established goals in terms of group productivity. Grissinger (47) reported discussion significantly superior to debate in influencing opinion. Ziller (108) found group judgment superior to individual judgment in a situation where a valid criterion was available. Ruja (87) studied discussion vs. lecture in college teaching; discussion was not superior in regard to subject-matter mastery and emotional adjustment of students. Utterback (97) reported intelligence and sex as nonsignificant factors in effecting shift of opinion in discussion.

Research interest in speaking to inform was not as vigorous as that concerned with persuasion and discussion. Ward (101) found lecture- demonstration superior to group study for the less capable student. Brandon (14) found no differences among lecture, interview, and discussion in regard to presenting information. Thistlethwaite, de Haan, and Kamenetzky (91) reported conclusion drawing and well-defined organization important to greater audience comprehension. Harwood (56) found reading produced insignificantly greater comprehension than speaking throughout a series of graded communications. McPherson (76) was successful in predicting those listeners likely to distort information in making oral reports to others.

Heckman, Knower, and Wagner (57) studied by interviews the personal characteristics of professional communicators vs. a control group of professional engineers not considered professional communicators. The groups did not differ significantly. Lull, Fun, and Piersol (75) surveyed presidents of large corporations affirming management's belief in the im- portance of communications and the development of communication skills in managers.

Military, clinical, and collegiate researchers studied aspects of voice and delivery. Tolhurst (94, 95, 96) concluded that (a) listeners prefer a normal or prolonged delivery to a staccato; (b) instructions to talk loudly, to articulate precisely, and to talk fast were effective in im- proving speaker intelligibility; and (c) instructions to be more intelligible improved intelligibility scores. Harwood (55) found that listenability decreased with increase in rate of presentation. Diehl and McDonald (31) found that only simulated breathy and nasal voice qualities appeared to interfere with communication. Black (8) tentatively concluded that intelligibility in speaking and listening were not independent skills.

Historical Studies Public speaking was the subject of a considerable number of historical-

critical studies.

110




April 1958 SPEAKING

The most frequently used approach was that of the limited or non- comprehensive study of one or more speakers. A key work in this area was the History and Criticism of American Public Address, Volume 3 (58), a collection of 11 essays on American speakers. Because of its variety of method, excellence of content, and breadth of coverage, this volume constitutes a worthy introduction to public address studies. Re- cent biographies are another fruitful source of research in this area. For instance, Chambers (22), Clark (24), Doughty (32), and Forbush (39) spent considerable time assessing the influence of speech upon the careers of their subjects. A sizeable number of journal articles also dealt with limited studies of speakers. Briggs (15) and Lewis (71), for example, focused their attention upon specific characteristics of nineteenth-century British speakers, while Ellingsworth (35), Gunderson (50), Peterson (80), and Ridge (85) concerned themselves with selected aspects of speaking before and after the American Civil War. Valuable collateral reading for those interested in the speaking of Woodrow Wilson was presented in Garraty's "personality study" of the late President (41).

A second approach used by the historical critic was that of the case study of a specific speech situation. Ching (23) presented a detailed analysis of Stanley Baldwin's speech on the abdication of Edward VIII. Ellingsworth (34), Golden (43), Hamilton (53), and Reid (83) studied speech situations having a bearing on the Civil War; and Vasilew (99) sought to find out what could be learned from a speech that failed- Norman Thomas' address to the Townsend Convention in 1936. These writers attempted to recreate the historical speech situation in order to assess better a speaker's degree of success or failure.

A third kind of historical-critical study dealt with speech theory. Be- cause of the great influence of British rhetorical theory on America, it is not surprising to find that studies in this area often involve English and Scottish rhetoricians. Thus, Baylen and Hogan (6), investigated the speech theories of W. T. Stead; Brockriede (16) explored the speech criticisms of Jeremy Bentham; Golden and Ehninger (44) looked at the bases of Hugh Blair's remarkable influence as a speech theorist; and Watkins (102) set out to determine Henry Brougham's authorship of a series of rhetorical articles in the Edinburgh Review.

The special speech type comprised yet another form of historical- critical research. Bode (10) contributed much to our understanding of the public lecture. In a detailed analysis of 28 speeches, Braden and Brandenburg (13) examined the "Fireside Chats" of Franklin D. Roose- velt. Lomas (72), Baskerville (4), and Borman (12) investigated the

demagoguery of Dennis Kearney, Joseph McCarthy, and Huey Long. Reid (82) studied the nationalism of Edward Everett's ceremonial speaking.

A final approach used was that of studying a specific phase of the

speech-making process. Quimby (81) examined Dwight Moody's tech-

111

April 1958 SPEAKING



REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Vol. XX VIII, No. 2

niques of holding audience attention. Borg (11) chose to analyze in detail the impact of ideas of Franklin Roosevelt's "quarantine" speech of 1937. Crowell (27) made a detailed study of the structuring process of Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" address delivered four years later. Each of these studies should find a place in any comprehensive analysis of these important public figures.

Summary and Critique A review of research in speaking over the last three years suggests

the following: (a) Of the studies examined, a substantial number, quantitative and historical, represent the research efforts of nonspeech scholars. A wide variety of periodicals not under the sponsorship of speech organi- zations accepted studies in speech for publication. Both of these trends

appear to be on the increase. This evidence of vigor and interest, it is

hoped, will continue on as broad a basis. (b) Certain areas, such as tests and measurements, debate, informative speaking, the teaching of

speaking, and business and professional speaking, are not commanding the attention of those publishing research. (c) On the other hand, persuasion, discussion, and interaction phenomena in speech situations appear to attract increasing research interest. (d) Quantitative studies, on the whole, seem to be appearing at an increasing rate. Furthermore, these studies generally reflect a greater sophistication in regard to quantitative methodology.

Bibliography 1. ASCH, SOLOMON E. Studies of Independence and Conformity: 1. A Minority of

One Against a Unanimous Majority. Psychological Monographs, No. 416. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1956. 70 p.

2. AUER, J. JEFFERY. "American Public Address and American Studies: A Bibliog- raphy-Work in Progress, 1955, 1956, 1957." American Quarterly 9: 217-22; Summer 1957.

3. AUER, J. JEFFERY. "Doctoral Dissertations in Speech: Work in Progress." Speech Monographs 22: 136-41; June 1955. 23: 79-83; June 1956. 24: 77-83; June 1957.

4. BASKERVILLE, BARNET. "Joe McCarthy, Brief Case Demagogue." Today's Speech 2: 8-16; September 1954.

5. BASS, BERNARD. "The Leaderless Group Discussion." Psychological Bulletin 51: 465-92; September 1954.

6. BAYLEN, JOSEPH 0., and HOGAN, PATRICK G. "W. T. Stead on the Art of Public Speaking." Quarterly Journal of Speech 43: 128-36; April 1957.

7. BERLO, DAVID K., and GULLEY, HALBERT F. "Some Determinants of the Effect of Oral Communication in Producing Attitude Change and Learning." Speech Monographs 24: 10-20; March 1957.

8. BLACK, JOHN W. A Relationship Between Speaking and Listening. U.S.N. School of Aviation Medical Research Report. Project Number NM 001 104 500.54, iii, 1955. 7 p.

9. BLACK, JOHN W. "Systematic Research in Experimental Phonetics; 2. Signal Reception: Intelligibility and Side-Tone." Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 19: 140-46; June 1954.

10. BODE, CARL. The American Lyceum: Town Meeting of the Mind. New York: Oxford University Press, 1956. 275 p.

11. BORG, DOROTHY. "Notes on Roosevelt's 'Quarantine' Speech." Political Science Quarterly 72: 405-33; September 1957.

112

Vol. XXVIII, No. 2 REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH



April 1958 SPEAKING

12. BORMAN, ERNEST G. "Huey Long: Analysis of a Demagogue." Today's Speech 2: 16-20; September 1954.

13. BRADEN, WALDO W., and BRANDENBURG, EARNEST. "Roosevelt's Fireside Chats." Speech Monographs 22: 291-302; November 1955.

14. BRANDON, JAMES R. "An Experimental Television Study: The Relative Effec- tiveness of Presenting Factual Information by the Lecture, Interview, and Discussion Methods." Speech Monographs 23: 272-83; November 1956.

15. BRIGGS, ASA. "Cobden and Bright." History Today 7: 495-503; August 1957. 16. BROCKRIEDE, WAYNE E. "Bentham's Criticism of Rhetoric and Rhetoricians."

Quarterly Journal of Speech 41: 377-82; December 1955. 17. BRODBECK, MAY. "The Role of Small Groups in Mediating the Effects of

Propaganda." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 52: 166-70; March 1956.

18. BROOKS, KEITH. "The Construction and Testing of a Forced Choice Scale for Measuring Speaking Achievement." Speech Monographs 24: 65-73; March 1957.

19. CAPLAN, HARRY, and KING, HENRY H. "Pulpit Eloquence: A List of Doctrinal and Historical Studies in English." Speech Monographs 22: 5-159; Special Issue 1955.

20. CERVIN, VLADIMIR. "Experimental Investigation of Behavior in Social Situations: I. Behavior Under Opposition." Canadian Journal of Psychology 9: 107-16; June 1955.

21. CERVIN, VLADIMIR. "Experimental Investigation of Behavior in Social Situa- tions: II. Individual Behavioral Effects of Change in Group Attitude from Opposition to Cooperation." Canadian Journal of Psychology 9: 155-60; Sep- tember 1955.

22. CHAMBERS, WILLIAM N. Old Bullion Benton: Senator from the New West. Bos- ton: Little, Brown and Co., 1956. 517 p.

23. CHING, JAMES C. "Stanley Baldwin's Speech on the Abdication of Edward VIII." Quarterly Journal of Speech 42: 163-69; April 1956.

24. CLARK, ROBERT D. The Life of Matthew Simpson. New York: Macmillan Co., 1956. 344 p.

25. COMREY, ANDREW L., and STAATS, CAROLYN K. "Group Performance in a Cog- nitive Task." Journal of Applied Psychology 39: 354-56; October 1955.

26. COOPER, JOSEPH B. "Perceptual Organization as a Function of Politically Oriented Communication." Journal of Social Psychology 41: 319-24; May 1955.

27. CROWELL, LAURA. "The Building of the 'Four Freedoms' Speech." Speech Mono- graphs 22: 266-83; November 1955.

28. CRUTCHFIELD, RICHARD. "A New Technique for Measuring Individual Differ- ences in Conformity to Group Judgment." Proceedings, 1954 Conference on Test Problems. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service, 1955. p. 69-74.

29. DEUTSCH, MORTON, and GERARD, HAROLD B. "A Study of Normative and Infor- mational Social Influences upon Individual Judgment." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51: 629-36; November 1955.

30. DICKENS, MILTON. "A Statistical Formula To Quantify the 'Spread of Participa- tion' in Group Discussion." Speech Monographs 22: 28-30; March 1955.

31. DIEHL, CHARLES F., and McDONALD, EUGENE T. "Effect of Voice Quality on Communication." Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 21: 233-37; June 1956.

32. DOUGHTY, WILLIAM L. John Wesley, Preacher. London: Epworth Press, 1955. 214 p.

33. Dow, CLYDE W., editor. "Abstracts of Theses in the Field of Speech." Speech Monographs 22: 142-56, June; 157-216, August 1955. 23: 84-156; June 1956. 24: 84-154; June 1957.

34. ELLINGSWORTH, HUBER. "Ben Hill Speaks Out." Southern Speech Journal 22: 233-41; Summer 1957.

35. ELLINGSWORTH, HUBER, "John Quincy Adams II and the Regenerate Rebels." Quarterly Journal of Speech 41: 391-96; December 1955.

36. EUBANKS, RALPH; BAKER, V. L.; and GOLDEN, JAMES. "A Bibliography of Speech and Theatre in the South for the Year 1956." Southern Speech Journal 22: 248-56; Summer 1957.

37. FIELD, JOAN B. "The Effects of Praise in a Public Opinion Poll." Public Opinion Quarterly 19: 85-91; Spring 1955.

113

April 1958 SPEAKING



REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Vol. XX VIII, No. 2

38. FINE, HAROLD J., and ZIMET, CARL N. "A Quantitative Method of Scaling Com- munication and Interaction Process." Journal of Clinical Psychology 12: 268- 71; July 1956.

39. FORBUSH, BLISS. Elias Hicks: Quaker Liberal. New York: Columbia University Press, 1956. 355 p.

40. FOTHERINGHAM, WALLACE C. "A Technique for Measuring Speech Effectiveness in Public Speaking Classes." Speech Monographs 23: 31-37; March 1956.

41. GARRATY, JOHN A. "Woodrow Wilson: A Study in Personality." South Atlantic Quarterly 56: 176-85; April 1957.

42. GILKINSON, HOWARD; PAULSON, STANLEY F.; and SIKKINK, DONALD F. "Ef- fects of Order and Authority in an Argumentative Speech." Quarterly Journal of Speech 40: 183-92; April 1954.

43. GOLDEN, JAMES L. "Hilliard vs. Yancey: Prelude to the Civil War." Quarterly Journal of Speech 42: 35-44; February 1956.

44. GOLDEN, JAMES, and EHNINGER, DOUGLAS. "The Extrinsic Sources of Blair's Popularity." Southern Speech Journal 22: 16-32; Fall 1956.

45. GRAY, GILES W. "Doctoral Dissertations in Areas Contiguous to Speech." Speech Monographs 24: 299-308; November 1957.

46. GREENHILL, L. P. The Recording of Audience Reactions by Infra-Red Photog- raphy. U.S.N. Special Devices Center Technical Report, SDC 296-7-56, 1955. 11 p.

47. GRISSINGER, JAMES A. "The Comparative Influence on Audience Opinion of Panel Discussion and Formal Debate." Speech Monographs 22: 60-67; March 1955.

48. GULLEY, HALBERT E., and BERLO, DAVID K. "Effect of Intercellular and Intra- cellular Speech Structure on Attitude Change and Learning." Speech Mono- graphs 23: 288-97; November 1956.

49. GUNDERSON, ROBERT G. The CHAPA Letter, December 12, 1957. Oberlin, Ohio: Oberlin College, Department of Speech. 5 p.

50. GUNDERSON, ROBERT G. "William C. Rives and the 'Old Gentleman's Conven- tion.'" Journal of Southern History 22: 459-76; November 1956.

51. HABERMAN, FREDERICK W., and OTHERS, editors. "A Bibliography of Rhetoric and Public Address." Speech Monographs 22: 79-110; June 1955. 23: 157-88; August 1956. 24: 180-211; August 1957.

52. HAIMAN, FRANKLYN S. "A Measurement of Authoritarian Attitudes Toward Discussion Leadership." Quarterly Journal of Speech 41: 140-44; April 1955.

53. HAMILTON, HOLMAN. "'The Cave of Winds' and the Compromise of 1850." Journal of Southern History 23: 331-53; August 1957.

54. HARNACK, R. VICTOR. "An Experimental Study of the Effects of Training in the Recognition and Formulation of Goals upon Intra-Group Cooperation." Speech Monographs 22: 31-38; March 1955.

55. HARWOOD, KENNETH A. "Listenability and Rate of Presentation." Speech Mono- graphs 22: 57-59; March 1955.

56. HARWOOD, KENNETH A. "Listenability and Readability." Speech Monographs 22: 49-53; March 1955.

57. HECKMAN, DAYTON; KNOWER, FRANKLIN; and WAGNER, PAUL. The Man Be- hind the Message: A Study of Some Personal Characteristics of Professional Communicators. Columbus: Ohio State University, 1956. 132 p.

58. HOCHMUTH, MARIE K., editor. A History and Criticism of American Public Address. Vol. 3. New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1955. 554 p.

59. HOVLAND, CARL I. "Effects of Mass Media of Communication." Handbook of Social Psychology. (Edited by Gardner Lindzey.) Cambridge, Mass.: Addi- son-Wesley Press, 1954. Vol. 2, Chapter 28, p. 1062-1103.

60. HOVLAND, CARL I., and OTHERS. The Order of Presentation in Persuasion. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1957. 192 p.

61. JANIS, IRVING L. "Anxiety Indices Related to Susceptibility to Persuasion." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51: 663-67; November 1955.

62. KARSTETTER, ALAN. "Group Dynamics as a Factor in Speech Communication." Today's Speech 3: 21-28; September 1955.

63. KATZ, DANIEL; SARNOFF, IRVING; and MCCLINTOCK, CHARLES. "Ego-Defense and Attitude Change." Human Relations 9: 27-45; February 1956.

114




April 1958 SPEAKING

64. KELLEY, HAROLD H., and THIBAUT, JOHN W. "Experimental Studies of Group Problem Solving and Process." Handbook of Social Psychology. (Edited by Gardner Lindzey.) Cambridge, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Press, 1954. Vol. 2, Chapter 21, p. 735-85.

65. KELLEY, HAROLD H., and WOODRUFF, CHRISTINE L. "Members' Reactions to Apparent Group Approval of a Counternorm Communication." Journal of Ab- normal and Social Psychology 52: 67-74; January 1956.

66. KIDD, J. S., and CAMPBELL, DONALD T. "Conformity to Groups as a Function of Group Success." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51: 390-93; November 1955.

67. KNOWER, FRANKLIN H. "Graduate Theses-An Index of Graduate Work in Speech." Speech Monographs 22: 111-35; June 1955. 23: 189-215; August 1956. 24: 155-80; August 1957.

68. KRUGMAN, HERBERT. "The Measurement of Resistance to Propaganda." Human Relations 8: 175-84; May 1955.

69. LAWLOR, MONICA. "An Investigation Concerned with Changes of Preference Which Are Observed After Group Discussion." Journal of Social Psychology 42: 323-32; November 1955.

70. LAWRENCE, LOIS C., and SMITH, PATRICIA C. "Group Decision and Employee Participation." Journal of Applied Psychology 39: 334-37; October 1955.

71. LEWIS, W. DAVID. "Three Religious Orators and the Chartist Movement." Quar- terly Journal of Speech 43: 62-68; February 1957.

72. LOMAS, CHARLES W. "Dennis Kearney: Case Study in Demagoguery." Quarterly Journal of Speech 41: 234-42; October 1955.

73. LUCHINS, ABRAHAM S., and LUCHINS, EDITH H. "On Conformity with True and False Communication." Journal of Social Psychology 42: 283-303; November 1955.

74. LUCHINS, ABRAHAM S., and LUCHINS, EDITH H. "Previous Experience with Am- biguous and Non-Ambiguous Perceptual Stimuli Under Various Social In- fluences." Journal of Social Psychology 42: 249-70; November 1955.

75. LULL, PAUL; FUN, FRANK; and PIERSOL, DARREL. "What Communications Means to the Corporation President." Advanced Management 20: 17-20; January 1955.

76. MCPHERSON, JOSEPH. Predicting the Accuracy of Oral Reporting in Group Situations. U.S.A.F. Personnel Training Research Center Research Bulletin No. AFPTRC-TR54-130, v. 1954. 84 p.

77. MATTHEWS, JACK, and BENDIG, A. W. "The Index of Agreement: A Possible Criterion for Measuring the Outcome of Group Discussion." Speech Mono- graphs 22: 39-42; March 1955.

78. PASTORE, NICHOLAS, and HOROWITZ, MILTON W. "The Influence of Attributed Motive on the Acceptance of Statements." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51: 331-32; September 1955.

79. PETERS, ROBERT W. Changes in Voice Intelligibility, Sound Pressure Level of Response, and Duration of Response as a Function of the Speaker's Being Re- peatedly Informed That He Is Not Being Understood by His Listeners. U.S.N. School of Aviation Medicine Research Report No. NM 001 104 500.50, iii. 7 p.

80. PETERSON, OWEN. "Judah P. Benjamin's Senate Speeches on Slavery and Se- cession." Southern Speech Journal 23: 10-20; Fall 1957.

81. QUIMBY, ROLLIN W. "How D. L. Moody Held Attention." Quarterly Journal of Speech 43: 278-83; October 1957.

82. REID, RONALD F. "Edward Everett: Rhetorician of Nationalism, 1824-1855." Quarterly Journal of Speech 42: 273-82; October 1956.

83. REID, RONALD F. "Edward Everett's 'The Character of Washington.'" Southern Speech Journal 22: 144-56; Spring 1957.

84. RICHARDS, GALE, and PENCE, ORVILLE. "An Empirically-Derived Rating Scale for Inter-Collegiate Discussion Sequences." Journal of Communication 6: 69-76; 1956.

85. RIDGE, MARTIN. "Ignatius Donnelly and the Granger Movement in Minnesota." Mississippi Valley Historical Review 42: 693-709; March 1956.

86. ROSENBAUM, MILTON, and BLAKE, ROBERT R. "Volunteering as a Function of Field Structure." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 50: 193-96; March 1955,

April 1958 SPEAKING




87. RUJA, HARRY. "Outcomes of Lecture and Discussion Procedures in Three College Courses." Journal of Experimental Education 22: 386-94; June 1954.

88. SAWYER, THOMAS M., JR. "Shift of Attitude Following Persuasion as Related to Estimate of Majority Attitude." Speech Monographs 22: 68-78; March 1955.

89. SHAW, MARVIN E., and GILCHRIST, J. C. "Intra-Group Communication and Leader Choice." Journal of Social Psychology 43: 133-38; February 1956.

90. SLATER, PHILIP E. "Role Differentiation in Small Groups." American Sociological Review 20: 300-10; June 1955.

91. THISTLETHWAITE, DONALD L.; DE HAAN, HENRY; and KAMENETZKY, JOSEPH. "The Effects of 'Directive' and 'Non-Directive' Communication Procedures on Attitudes." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51: 107-13; July 1955.

92. THISTLETHWAITE, DONALD L., and KAMENETZKY, JOSEPH. "Attitude Change Through Refutation and Elaboration of Audience Counterarguments." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51: 3-12; July 1955.

93. THISTLETHWAITE, DONALD L.; KAMENETZKY, JOSEPH; and SCHMIDT, HANS. "Factors Influencing Attitude Change Through Refutative Communications." Speech Monographs 23: 14-25; March 1956.

94. TOLHURST, GILBERT. The Effect on Intelligibility Scores of Specific Instructions Regarding Talking. U.S.N. School of Aviation Medicine Research Report No. NM 001 064.01.35, 1954. 6 p.

95. TOLHURST, GILBERT. The Effects of an Instruction To Be Intelligible upon a Speaker's Intelligibility, Sound Pressure Level, and Message Duration. U.S.N. School of Aviation Medicine Research Report No. NM 001 104 500.58, iii, 1955. 15 p.

96. TOLHURST, GILBERT. Some Effects of Changing Time Patterns and Articulation upon Intelligibility and Word Reception. U.S.N. School of Aviation Medicine Research Report No. NM 001 500.40, iii, 1955. 15 p.

97. UTTERBACK, WILLIAM W. "Independent Variables in the Conference Situation." Quarterly Journal of Speech 40: 381-87; December 1954.

98. UTTERBACK, WILLIAM E., and HARDING, HAROLD. "Some Factors Conditioning Response to Argument." Speech Monographs 22: 303-308; December 1955.

99. VASILEW, EUGENE. "Norman Thomas at the Townsend Convention of 1936." Speech Monographs 24: 233-43; November 1957.

100. VERPLANCK, WILLIAM S. "The Control of the Content of Conversation: Reinforce- ment of Statements of Opinion." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51: 668-76; November 1955.

101. WARD, JOHN N. "Group-Study Versus Lecture-Demonstration Method in Physical Science Instruction for General Education College Students." Journal of Ex- perimental Education 24: 197-210; March 1956.

102. WATKINS, LLOYD H. "Lord Brougham's Authorship of Rhetorical Articles in the Edinburgh Review." Quarterly Journal of Speech 42: 55-63; February 1956.

103. WEISS, WALTER, and FINE, BERNARD J. "The Effect of Induced Aggressiveness on Opinion Change." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 52: 109-14; January 1956.

104. WEISS, WALTER, and FINE, BERNARD J. "Opinion Change as a Function of Some Intrapersonal Attributes of the Communicatees." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51: 246-53; September 1955.

105. WINTHROP, HENRY. "Effect of Personal Qualities on One-Way Communication." Psychological Reports 2: 323-24; September 1956.

106. WISCHMEIER, R. R. "Group-Centered and Leader-Centered Leadership: An Ex- perimental Study." Speech Monographs 22: 43-48; March 1955.

107. YUKER, HAROLD E. "Group Atmosphere and Memory." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51: 17-23; July 1955.

108. ZILLER, ROBERT. "Scales of Judgment: A Determinant of the Accuracy of Group Decisions." Human Relations 8: 153-64; May 1955.

109. ZIMMERMAN, CLAIRE, and BAUER, RAYMOND A. "The Effect of an Audience upon What Is Remembered." Public Opinion Quarterly 20: 238-48; Spring 1956.

116



language arts and fine arts || speaking

Documents