Unintended consequences of emerging communication technologies: Instant Messaging in the workplace

By Ann Frances Cameron, J. Webster. Computers in Human Behavior, 2005

321 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems and Management, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3f7085b40845da4cf7f8a3cfcfa610fc26465876

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems and Management

1. Gregory D. Saxton
2. Christine A. Henle

In Social Psychology

1. N. Reinsch
2. Christine A. Henle
3. Jeanine Warisse Turner

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Anita L. Blanchard
2. Gregory D. Saxton
3. Christine A. Henle

Citations in the corpus

• Using mobile instant messaging to leverage learner participation and transform pedagogy at a South African University of Technology (2013, background): “Cameron and Webster’s (2005) study on IM usage by 19 employees from four organisations suggests that critical mass is among the core explanations for the widespread adoption of IM. IM was considered appropriate when senders wanted to emphasise the intentionality of messages, elicit quick responses a”
• Correlates of different forms of cyberloafing: The role of norms and external locus of control (2008, background): “For example, instant messaging and blogs were once considered completely inappropriate at work, but some organizations are now using these technologies as ways to connect and inform their employees (see Cameron & Webster, 2004; Stross, 2006).”
• Technology acceptance model (TAM) and social media usage: an empirical study on Facebook (2014, unknown): “Extending the economic theory of positive externalities, the theory of critical mass states that once a certain number of users (critical mass) have been attracted (or achieved), use and usage should spread rapidly throughout the community (Cameron and Webster, 2005).”
• Information, Community, and Action: How Nonprofit Organizations Use Social Media (2012, background): “…technologies, which could be considered “precursors” to social media, found they engendered substantially greater capabilities for collaboration, interactivity, and “polychronic” communication (Cameron & Webster, 2005; Macias, Hilyard, & Freimuth, 2009; Quan-Haase, Cothrel, & Wellman, 2005).”
• The Business Communicator as Presence Allocator: Multicommunicating, Equivocality, and Status at Work (2007, background): “A new technology can influence the way in which workers understand and use time (Orlikowski & Yates, 2002) and, in the case of chat, seems to be changing the ways in which people communicate (Cameron & Webster, 2005; Turner & Tinsley, 2002).”