Slip-Sliding-Away: A Review of the Literature on the Constraining Qualities of PowerPoint

Sebastian Kernbach Università della Svizzera italiana ; Sabrina Bresciani University of St. Gallen ; Martin J. Eppler University of St. Gallen

Abstract

PowerPoint is a dominant communication tool in business and education. It allows for creating professional-looking presentations easily, but without understanding its constraining qualities it can be used inappropriately. Therefore we conducted a systematic literature review structuring the literature on PowerPoint in three chronological phases ( Early Criticism, Heated Debate, and Scientific Take-Off) and identifying 18 constraining qualities classified into three categories: cognitive, emotional, and social. This article provides implications for educators’ and practitioners’ use (and nonuse) of PowerPoint through synthesis and description of such constraining qualities. Directions for future research are developed by identifying theoretical gaps in literature on PowerPoint.

Journal
Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
Published
2015-09-01
DOI
10.1177/2329490615595499
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (5)

  1. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  2. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  3. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  5. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication

References (68)

  1. 10.1080/00220270600579141
  2. Technical Communication
  3. Atkinson C. (2004). Five experts dispute Edward Tufte on PowerPoint [Online forum article]. Retrieved from ht…
  4. 10.1177/1080569903262046
  5. Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method
Show all 68 →
  1. Successful Meetings
  2. Bresciani S., Blackwell A. F., Eppler M. (2008, January). A collaborative dimensions framework: Understanding…
  3. Brown D. (2002, September 29). Understanding PowerPoint: Special deliverables No. 5 [Blog post]. Retrieved fr…
  4. Bumiller E. (2010, April 26). We have met the enemy and he is PowerPoint. The New York Times. Retrieved from …
  5. 10.1177/1080569908317151
  6. PowerPoint—Macht und Einfluss eines Präsentationsprogramms
  7. 10.1007/s10755-006-9017-5
  8. 10.1177/1080569904671008
  9. 10.1287/orsc.5.2.121
  10. 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.09.012
  11. 10.1515/sem-2013-0078
  12. Slide:ology: The art and science of creating great presentations
  13. Resonate: Present visual stories that transform audiences
  14. 10.1177/1080569904671009
  15. Multidisciplinary Newsletter for Activity Theory
  16. Farkas D. K. (2005, May). Understanding and using PowerPoint. Proceedings of the Society of Technical Communi…
  17. 10.1075/idj.14.2.08far
  18. Technical Communication
  19. 10.1177/0170840607079536
  20. 10.1145/1323688.1323710
  21. Across the Board
  22. The theory of affordances
  23. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration
  24. 10.1177/0092055X12444071
  25. Visual language: Global communication for the 21st century
  26. Educational Leadership
  27. 10.1177/1080569906294634
  28. 10.1287/orsc.1100.0531
  29. Paper presented at the 20th EGOS Colloquium
  30. International Journal of Media, Technology and Lifelong Learning
  31. 10.1177/1749975507086275
  32. 10.1177/1080569904672010
  33. 10.1016/S0079-7421(02)80005-6
  34. Empowering organizations: Enabling platforms and artefacts
  35. The basic works of Aristotle
  36. Understanding media: The extension of man
  37. Laws of media: The new science
  38. Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction
  39. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (2003). Report of Columbia accident investigation board. Retri…
  40. Norvig P. (1999). Gettysburg PowerPoint presentation. Retrieved from http://norvig.com/Gettysburg/
  41. Fortune
  42. 10.1037/h0027272
  43. The New Yorker
  44. 10.1080/00220489909595980
  45. 10.1177/002194369102800303
  46. 10.1111/1467-8330.00317
  47. Schwartz J. (2003, September 28). The level of discourse continues to slide. New York Times. Retrieved from h…
  48. Searls D. (1998). It’s the story stupid: Don’t let presentation software keep you from getting your message a…
  49. Harvard Business Review
  50. Communication Insight
  51. Simons T. (2005). Does PowerPoint make you stupid? Retrieved from http://academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/at…
  52. 10.1177/0263276408095215
  53. Fortune
  54. The cognitive style of PowerPoint
  55. Tufte E. (2003b, September). PowerPoint is evil: Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely. Retrieved fr…
  56. The cognitive style of PowerPoint: Pitching out corrupts within
  57. Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet
  58. Globalization culture and education in the new millennium
  59. Change: Principles of problem formation and problem resolution
  60. 10.1177/1080569903262027
  61. 10.1177/1080569904265536
  62. 10.1016/j.infoandorg.2013.07.003
  63. 10.2190/CPIC4