Abstract

This paper builds on the calls and responses of the last two decades to methodological interdisciplinarity. It proposes that as we set goals for the next decade's research, we ask ourselves who benefits from our work. Scholars motivated by their desire to contribute to the study of rhetoric and to its pedagogy are certainly beneficiaries. And researchers interested in building bridges between their schools and neighborhoods are as well. But in addition to those who belong to professional organizations, attend academic conferences, and read journals, who benefits? I hope here to suggest that those members of our communities who participate in our research projects are some of the most important beneficiaries, or users, of the information our projects offer. I propose ways to work toward a more reciprocal research methodology by including project participants in discussions about the purpose and design of our research before we launch it and as we navigate it. To demonstrate how reciprocity like this might work, I describe human factors, usability, and participatory design theory and explain how they have been useful in my own work. Combining these principles from professional communication offers a new approach to research, which I call "user-centered" and which can be valuable to rhetorical studies for a variety of practical and philosophical reasons.

Journal
Rhetoric Review
Published
2004-01-01
DOI
10.1207/s15327981rr2301_4
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (6)

  1. Computers and Composition
  2. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  3. Communication Design Quarterly
  4. Technical Communication Quarterly
  5. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Show all 6 →
  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication

References (29) · 5 in this index

  1. 10.1016/0277-5395(83)90035-3
  2. Adams, Jack A. Human Factors Engineering. New York: MacMillan P, 1965.
  3. Aristotle. The Nicomachean Ethics. Trans. David Ross. New York: Oxford UP, 1925.
  4. Bakhtin, Mikhail. The Dialogic Imagination. Ed. Michael Holquist. Austin: U of Texas P, 1981.
  5. Rhetoric Review
Show all 29 →
  1. Callahan, Carol. "Nontraditional Students in First-Year Composition Classes: Group Activities as Tools of Int…
  2. Cushman, Ellen. The Struggle and the Tools. Albany: SUNY P, 1998.
  3. Dautermann, Jennie. Writing at Good Hope: A Study of Negotiated Composition in a Community of Nurses. Greenwi…
  4. Rhetoric Review
  5. Doheny-Farina, Stephen. Rhetoric, Innovation, Technology: Case Studies in Technical Communication Transfers. …
  6. Dubinsky, Jim. "The Mobius Loop of Theory and Practice." Diss. Oxford, OH: Miami U of Ohio.1998.
  7. Ehn, Pelle. Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts. Stockholm: Arbetslivscentrum, 1988.
  8. 10.2307/356630
    College Composition and Communication  
  9. Feminism and Methodology. Ed. Sandra Harding. Milton Keynes, UK: Open UP
  10. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  11. Jarratt, Susan. "Toward a Sophistic Historiography." PRE/TEXT8 (Spring/Summer 1987): 10-26.
  12. Johnson, Robert R. User-Centered Technology: A Rhetorical Theory of Computers and Other Mundane Artifacts. Al…
  13. 10.2307/469155
    New Literary History  
  14. College English
  15. Lather, Patti, and Chris Smithies. Troubling the Angels: Women Living with HIV/AIDS. Boulder, CO: Westview P, 1997.
  16. Lyons, Scott. "Crying for Revision: Postmodern Indians and Rhetorics of Tradition." Making and Unmaking the P…
  17. Rhetoric Review
  18. Rhetoric Review
  19. Powell, Malea. "I Write These Words with Bone and Blood: Two 19th-Century American-Indian Intellectuals and a…
  20. Technical Communication Quarterly
  21. Sullivan, Patricia A. "Feminism and Methodology." Methods and Methodology in Composition Research. Ed. Gesa K…
  22. Rhetoric Review
  23. Visible Language
  24. Wolf, Margery. A Thrice Told Tale: Feminism, Postmodernism and Ethnographic Responsibility. Stanford: Stanfor…