Background: As all sorts of communications have substantially moved to the internet, volumes of literature on internet-mediated communication have emerged in professional and technical communication in different research paradigms, including studies on internet-mediated genres, which often have generic features beyond traditional conception and thus require updated understanding. This study systematically explores the emerging body of internet-mediated genre studies and identifies the specific genres that researchers have studied, the analytical components and research methods used, and conclusions reached to characterize the current state of the research. Research questions: 1. Which internet-mediated genres have been studied in existing literature (2005-2019)? 2. What affordances have been considered in existing studies on internet-mediated genres? 3. Which research methods have been used to study internet-mediated genres? Literature review: Major issues affecting prior studies of internet-mediated genres include inconsistent terminology used by researchers, the ways that affordances are considered, and the inadequacies of current genre analysis methods to explain features arising from those affordances. Methodology: Employing an integrative literature review, we conducted a systematic search resulting in 35 qualified studies published in journals indexed in the Social Sciences Citation Index between 2005 and 2019. Each was systematically analyzed to identify the genre addressed, communicative goal, medium, affordances addressed, and research methods used. Results/discussion: Three main types of internet-mediated genres-including email, website, and social media, and several subtypes-were identified, each distinguished by their medium and communicative goal. The affordances were either treated monomodally, mentioned as contextual information, or integrated into the analytical framework. Researchers relied on a variety of methods to study internet-mediated genres, with mixed methods most commonly used. Conclusions and further research: The data show that both the genres of interest and methods used to study them vary with time, suggesting that this area of research continues to evolve. Future studies could probe into a larger variety of internet-mediated genres with more diverse analytical components and methods.

Problem: Perhaps it is presumptuous of technical communicators to assume that, because some of their skills that might be employed in developing and delivering training materials, that those skills alone are qualifications to work in training, much less the source by which the processes of Training might be examined. Using data from one survey and one interview-based study of the work of Technical communication and Training groups, as well as participation on committees responsible for certification examinations for technical communicators and trainers, this tutorial analyzes differences in the occupational cultures of the two fields. Key concepts: The work differs: technical communicators produce content that explains how to perform tasks; trainers produce programs that develop skills that a third party can verify. To do so, technical communicators follow a process that emphasizes writing and production; trainers follow a process that emphasizes the analysis of intended goals and evaluation of whether those goals have been achieved. The guiding philosophy of Technical communication is usability; the guiding philosophy of Training is performance. Although both disciplines are rooted in cognitive psychology, the primary intellectual roots of Technical communication are in rhetoric and composition, while the primary intellectual roots are in education. The preferred research methods of Technical communication are critical; the preferred research methods of trainers are empirical qualitative and quantitative methods. Key lessons: As a result, Technical communication professionals and researchers who want to work in training should approach the field in a culturally appropriate way by (1) recognizing distinctions between a communication product and a training program, (2) recognizing distinctions in work processes, (3) recognizing distinctions in language, (4) recognizing differences in values, and (5) acknowledging that an academic discipline of training exists.

Research Problem: Investigate the match between content published by the Transactions and content sought by its readers. Research Questions: What content does the IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication publish? How does that compare to the content published by other journals in the field? And what content do readers of the Transactions want to read? Literature Review: Researchers in most fields occasionally analyze the entire body of literature within a discipline to assess the current state of the literature, identify leading works, assess the state of the literature, provide a basis for changing the direction of a journal, and assess alignment among parts of the literature. Methodology: To identify what journals published, researchers used the STC Body of Knowledge schema and a list of categories of research methods that classify all peer-reviewed articles published between January 2006 and December 2010 in the Transactions, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, Technical Communication, and Technical Communication Quarterly. To identify reader preferences of the Transactions, researchers surveyed members of the IEEE Professional Communication Society about their preferences for content and types of research. Results and Discussion: In terms of the topics covered, the three most widely covered topics in the Transactions were: (1) Deliverables, (2) Information Design and Development, and (3) Academic Programs. Readers prefer (1) About Technical and Professional Communication, (2) Information Design and Development, and (3) Research Theory, and Practice. The three least-covered topics were (1) Business Knowledge, (2) About Technical Communication, and (3) Technical Communication Standards. Of least interest to participants were: (1) Deliverables, (2) Quality Assurance, (3) Management, and (4) Technical Communication Standards. The Transactions primarily publishes experiments, surveys, and tutorials while readers prefer case studies, literature reviews, and tutorials.

Technical communicators have developed different methodologies for evaluating the effectiveness of their work (whether the information can be used by the intended audience), such as editing, usability testing, and determining the value-added. But, as vastly differing assessments of the same professionally produced technical communication products suggest, at least three broad value systems underlie the assessment practices: characteristic-based (assessing against a set of criteria), task-based (assessing users' observed ability to perform tasks), and results-based (assessing the contribution to the publisher, usually in financial terms). The systems do not overlap with one another; rather, they embody different values about what makes technical communication effective. The most complete form of assessment may involve multiple assessment approaches and triangulated results.

This article explores the design choices for Network Earth, a museum exhibit that introduced the general public to computer networks and related issues. The exhibit was one of three studied in a larger research project to develop a grounded model of design for learn-ing in museums. Network Earth was developed by a team that had neither formal train-ing nor academic credentials usually associated with museum exhibits. Although the design process and some of the general goals were similar to those at other sites studied and in the literature, certain practices differed. The team excluded historical objects, let donors influence content, and used different terminology. These differences appear to be cultural. With a limited affiliation with the occupational culture of museum exhibit design, the Network Earth team made choices that were more consistent with the culture of high technology—the subject of the museum and the industry that provided most of its financial support.

The use of lists in engineering writing as organizational tools is recommended. Well-designed lists can help readers see what is important and how those items relate to one another, and to remember what they see. Guidelines for the use and construction of lists in technical material are presented.

The author argues that technical writers need to pay close attention to writing good headings because headings not only provide information to users but also motivate users to examine a document. Writing a good heading is a rhetorical action; that is, the writer first determined how the writer wants users to perceive the document and then uses language and structure to project that image.