About the case: While several established user-experience research (UXR) methods can reach far-away users (e.g., remote usability testing), the digital divide makes implementation difficult, especially for rural populations facing barriers to transportation and high-speed internet. Situating the case: Web surveys can eliminate these concerns by providing customization for specific use cases, gathering both qualitative and quantitative data, and combining multiple questionnaires and/or UXR methods within them. Our case study demonstrates an instance where our lab—Auburn University's Lab for Usability, Communication, Interaction, and Accessibility—used advocacy-based HCD and design thinking (DT) to develop a nonstandard UXR Qualtrics web survey to solve our client's wicked problem: designing a usability test for rural audiences unable to travel to our lab while also considering time constraints and technological literacy. Methods: Our survey design followed the Nielsen Norman Group's adaptation of DT, and our process was informed by academic research on: 1. Survey design, question formats, and response bias, 2. Existing user-experience (UX)/usability methods, and 3. Mixed-methods approaches to UXR. Discussion: Our work suggests this tool can potentially serve as the UX testing situation itself, implementing multiple in-person research methods (i.e., heatmapping, user interviews, card sorting) virtually. Conclusion: We conclude with six survey design suggestions and a discussion of how this nonstandard UXR tool can reach underrepresented or vulnerable populations, serving to empower and advocate for users. We suggest that using DT to ideate new UXR methods is a means for UXR practitioners conducting future studies to better address the wicked problems they will face.

Mike Diana was the first artist in the United States convicted for artistic obscenity. His crime, for which he was convicted in 1994, was creating and distributing a zine titled Boiled Angel. Diana's work and subsequent conviction opens potential avenues of exploration into radical rhetorics, ethics, and perceptions of aberrance. This paper considers how endeavors labelled as aberrant or radical ask us to expand ethical boundaries, even leading us to question what we might consider "technical," "professional," or "valuable." This reconsideration of appropriateness and acceptability through extremism, which leads us through the often-fuzzy distinction between "morals" and "ethics," has the potential to open or amplify opportunities for underrepresented or marginalized authors, groups, and genres by forcing us to question why we draw the lines we draw with what we deem as socially, professionally, or morally acceptable.

On June 12, 2020, the SIGDOC Executive Committee issued the following Response to Injustice on the SIGDOC website. We reprint the statement here in its entirety.

On behalf of SIGDOC and CDQ, we wanted to reach out to all of you and thank you for all you do in this difficult time. Our organization's greatest strength is in its members, and we hope you are all staying as safe and sane as possible while COVID-19 changes the way we work and play. SIGDOC has yet to reach an official decision on the viability or nature of our 2020 Conference in Denton, TX, but the Executive Committee along with this year's Conference Committee, lead by Stacey Pigg, are in consistent contact and weighing options. Above all else, our decision will be informed by the values that we have articulated as an organization, which are: valuing human well-being; engaging in financial stewardship; respecting labor; foregrounding accessibility; supporting early-career scholars; establishing continuity; managing community and networkbuilding; supporting innovation; valuing industry practices; and maintaining and facilitating interorganizational and international relationships. The option for SIGDOC 2020 that best addresses these core values will be the option we select. For now, we have confirmation that the proceedings publications will be moving forward and supported by ACM and included in the Digital Library regardless of the decision we make on the conference. This is great news, and fulfills our values in supporting scholarship and valuing the labor done by our authors, reviewers, and our program cochairs, Josephine Walwema and Daniel Hocutt, who have worked diligently in the midst of the pandemic. CDQ will continue to publish as often as we are able. We understand that our workflows have changed, dramatically for some of us. So while it may be that extra time is occasionally needed for a review, we remain committed to providing you as rapid turnaround as we can, and publishing cutting-edge research on communication design through our original articles, experience reports, and book reviews. In this issue, for example, we are pleased to share with you Sonia Stephens and Dan Richards' "Story mapping and sea level rise: Listening to global risks at street level," and Jennifer Roth Miller, Brandy Dieterle, Jennifer deWinter, and Stephanie Vie's "Social media in professional, technical, and scientific communication programs: A heuristic to guide future use." These two excellent articles are accompanied by reviews of Jonanna Boehnert's Design, ecology politics: Towards the ecocene, reviewed by Ryan Cheek, and Christa Teston's Bodies in flux: Scientific methods for negotiating medical uncertainty, reviewed by Ella Browning.

It is my sincere pleasure to author my first Editorial since joining Communication Design Quarterly as Editor in Chief in 2018. It is a real pleasure to work with the dedicated, inspiring group of people that form the Special Interest Group for Design of Communication, and a true honor to be trusted with the work of all who submit to CDQ 's pages.

Background: This paper offers a hybrid, place-based ethic drawn from multiple perspectives as a way to reinvigorate ethical thought for technical communicators. Literature review: Aldo Leopold's land ethic asks us to consider actions beyond our immediate surroundings. Martin Buber's dialogic ethics complement a land ethic and interrogate interpersonal communication. Anticipatory technology ethics recommends the integration of ethical discussions and decisions during the design phase of new technologies. Together, these three approaches inform a place-based ethic for technical communicators. Research questions: 1. How might we meaningfully merge the many ways that technical communicators from varying backgrounds approach ethics into a useful ethical model that considers human interaction, technological innovation, and physical place? 2. How might such a merged model, what we call a place-based ethic, affect technical communication design? Methods: We analyze cases including documents from radical environmental defense groups, a restyling of certain federal court rules from legalese into plainer language, the creation of mortgage documents suitable for consumers and industry professionals, and the action-research design phase of a locative mobile application about public art. Results and conclusion: The cases provide concrete examples of the components of a place-based ethic, and we conclude that designing with a place-based ethic includes actively acknowledging the value of the environment, seeking areas for dialogue among involved parties and celebrating dialogue where it occurs, seeking shared spaces, clearly stating anticipated outcomes, and usability testing for potential ethical issues.

This article is a case-based theoretical exercise designed to investigate the role that ethics, culture, and artistry play in scientific illustration. In this article, the author theorizes a visual model of cultural interplay and scientific illustration in the creation of scientific knowledge and argues that scientific illustrations work as epistemological devices because they are culturally mediated constructions imbued with personal, organizational, and disciplinary trust, and shaped by the embedded cultural worldviews.

Research problem: Subversive environmental texts, those that strive against hegemonic discourse, such as the book Ecodefense, have a long history of use by radical environmentalists as a means for recruitment and distribution of best practices. This study aims to investigate the role of plain language in the subversive text Ecodefense, and consider some ethical implications of plain language by conducting a close textual analysis. Research questions: (1) Is the subversive text Ecodefense an artifact of plain language? (2) If Ecodefense is written in plain language, what does that suggest about the inherent ethicality of plain language? Literature review: Plain language refers to clear expression designed to help users achieve desired goals. In the sense that it is a communication practice, it is guided by standards put forth by various agencies and bureaucratic bodies. In the sense that it is a movement, plain language is characterized by the proliferation of organizations advocating for plain language practices in society. This study is rooted in the investigation of the ethical practices of social movements. It considers the ethics of plain language practices when they are put toward subversive ends and explores the ethical value of plain language itself. Methodology: Ecodefense is analyzed using the Center for Plain Language's (CPL) Plain Language checklist and Writemark's criteria for documents, which includes consideration of the audience, structure, language content, and design of a text, as well as usability testing. Results and conclusion: Analysis shows that Ecodefense is partially representative of plain language use and practice under the CPL's standards, and appears somewhat more fully representative under Writemark's standards, which are designed for use by a trained assessor. Analysis further suggests that adherence to checklist-driven language practices may unwittingly enable an ethic of exigence; thus, research is needed into the ethical implications for list-driven, or standards-based, rhetoric in order to ensure that plain language practices consider long-term implications for users and for organizations that employ these practices.

This article presents data from a two-part study of student perceptions of research. Fifty-one research proposals are analyzed in order to understand perceptions of research, and results from a survey are analyzed to better understand how students both perceive and articulate their understanding of research. The data show that students assign multiple definitions to the concept of research, and suggest that increased attention to clarifying terminology and identifying student perceptions would facilitate better work.

Common topics are words or phrases used to develop argument, and commonplaces aid memory or catalyze frames of understanding. When used in argumentation, each may help interested parties more effectively communicate valuable scientific and environment-related information. This article describes 12 modern topics of environmental rhetoric, identified from 125 interviews, and discusses them in relation to their topical fluidity and managerial, generative, and encapsulated utility: “Al Gore,” “balance,” “common sense,” “environment as setting,” “experience,” “extremism,” “man’s achievements,” “pragmatism,” “proof,” “religion,” “recycling,” and “seeing is believing.” Findings suggest that “environment” is a complex topic with many potential implications—using topics common to environmental rhetoric to shape argumentation may facilitate more productive environment-related communication.

The discoveries of science and technology are accelerating. The choice of how to regulate and react to scientific and technological innovations relies heavily on the notion of risk. The emergence nature contemporary science and technology (i.e., complex systems that are not reducible to the simple physical and chemical processes from which they arose) confounds risk studies Indeed, whether to embark on a particular path of scientific inquiry or proceed with a technological development depends on the ability to calculate the amount of risk associated with the endeavor. We are, however, ill-equipped to resolve the demands of risk analysis with certainty.

Phishing e-mails deceive individuals into giving out personal information which may then be utilized for identity theft. One particular type, the Personal Solicitation E-mail (PSE) mimics personal letters—modern perversions of ars dictaminis (the classical art of letter writing). In this article, I determine and discuss 19 appeals common to the PSE. These appeals were established first by conducting generative rhetorical analysis, then by volunteer coding, on 170 e-mails collected over a 12-month period. After defining these categories, I show how these letters are excellent twenty-first century teaching tools for pathos-based argumentation, logical appeals, the creation of ethos, and kairos in the development of perceived exigency.

Arguments manifest in scientific visuals through graphic representation, content placement, and overall document structure. These arguments, designed to influence public perception, change over time in relation to sociopolitical climate. Analysis of a series of documents constructed deliberately to influence perception can help to determine patterns of argumentation and perceived exigencies. In this article, four self-guided tour brochures produced for distribution to visitors to the Glen Canyon Dam in 1977, 1984, 1990, and 1993 are analyzed in order to identify rhetorical strategies designed to influence public perceptions of the dam site, and examine how public perception of the dam, and related argumentation, is structured by sociopolitical climate.