We’ve Selected a Candidate Who More Closely Fits Our Current Needs: A Genre Analysis of Academic Job-Refusal Letters

Journal of Business and Technical Communication Jan 2020 OA PDF

We’ve Selected a Candidate Who More Closely Fits Our Current Needs: A Genre Analysis of Academic Job-Refusal Letters

Luke Thominet Florida International University

Abstract

For many, the academic job-search process involves experiencing rejection, self-doubt, and depression. And a common form of communication during this process—job-refusal letters—can reinforce these negative experiences. This article uses rhetorical genre analysis to study 131 academic job-refusal letters and the applicants’ perceptions of these letters. First it constructs a model of the common genre moves in the sample of letters, giving specific examples of variation in these moves. Then it correlates these moves with the applicants’ perceptions of the letters they received, analyzing the results for statistically significant variations in patterns of applicant perceptions. Based on these analyses, the author argues that the most typified genre moves do not contribute to applicants’ feeling valued. Instead, letters building goodwill through less typified moves and language are often more effective. Ultimately, he argues that we can make the job-search process more humane by attending to the specifics of the full range of interactions between applicants and institutions.

Journal: Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Published: 2020-01-01
DOI: 10.1177/1050651919874099
Open Access: OA PDF Bronze
Topics: quantitative research multimodality

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (4)

Deptula et al. (2025)

Rhetorics of Authenticity: Ethics, Ethos, and Artificial Intelligence

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Omizo (2024)

Automating Research in Business and Technical Communication: Large Language Mod…

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Moeggenberg (2022)

Job Market Mentoring in Rhetoric and Composition and Technical Communication

Rhetoric Review
Shi et al. (2022)

A Cross-Cultural Genre Analysis of Firm-Generated Advertisements on Twitter and…

Journal of Business and Technical Communication

Cites in this index (15)

Turner (2018)

Delivery, Facilitas, and Copia

Pedagogy
Sano-Franchini (2016)

“It’s Like Writing Yourself into a Codependent Relationship with Someone Who Do…

College Composition and Communication
Thominet (2016)

10/10 Would Review Again: Variation in the Player Game Review Genre

Technical Communication Quarterly
Graham et al. (2015)

Statistical Genre Analysis: Toward Big Data Methodologies in Technical Communication

Technical Communication Quarterly
Dadas (2013)

Reaching the Profession: The Locations of the Rhetoric and Composition Job Market

College Composition and Communication

Show all 15 →

Ball (2012)

Assessing Scholarly Multimedia: A Rhetorical Genre Studies Approach

Technical Communication Quarterly
Dannels (2011)

Relational Genre Knowledge and the Online Design Critique: Relational Authentic…

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Jansen et al. (2011)

Explanations First: A Case for Presenting Explanations Before the Decision in D…

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Xu et al. (2010)

Analyzing the Genre Structure of Chinese Call-Center Communication

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Dannels (2009)

Features of Success in Engineering Design Presentations

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Kain et al. (2005)

Building Context: Using Activity Theory to Teach About Genre in Multi-Major Pro…

Technical Communication Quarterly
Limaye (2001)

Some Reflections on Explanation in Negative Messages

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Locker (1999)

Factors in Reader Responses to Negative Letters

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
RUSSELL (1997)

Rethinking Genre in School and Society

Written Communication
JABLIN et al. (1984)

Characteristics of Rejection Letters and their Effects on Job Applicants

Written Communication

Also cites 25 works outside this index ↓

10.4324/9781315690315

↗
10.1075/scl.28

↗
10.2307/378429

↗
10.1177/1080569904268097

↗
10.1177/1080569912442981

↗
10.1177/002194369903600301

↗
10.1177/002194369403100403

↗
10.1016/j.dcm.2013.03.001

↗
10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.09.006

↗
10.1007/BF02521557

↗
10.1007/BF02278256

↗
10.1177/108056998004300413

↗
10.1080/19312450709336664

↗
10.1177/1077800411431561

↗
10.1177/0022022111430256

↗
10.1016/j.pragma.2010.02.013

↗
10.1016/j.esp.2004.08.003

↗
10.1177/0893318988002001006

↗
10.1016/0889-4906(91)90012-L

↗
10.1002/j.2161-1920.2007.tb00030.x

↗
10.1177/002194368802500103

↗
10.1177/108056999605900106

↗
10.1109/47.749363

↗
10.1023/A:1007739127638

↗
10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00250.x

↗

CrossRef global citation count: 6 View in citation network →