A significant problem in technical communication is persuading the user that the information is accurate, valid, and useful. All too often, technical communicators treat users as members of their own culture. When authors do consider cultural issues, they often focus on matters such as vocabulary, visuals, and organization. Other strategies, however, can be useful in gaining acceptance of technical information in cross-cultural situations. For example, the communication theory of compliance-gaining offers suggestions for how the technical communicators can adapt the text to enhance user acceptance when communicating to members of their own culture as well as when communicating across cultures. Communicators can use promises, threats, demonstrate positive and negative outcomes, extend friendliness, etc., to develop the text. In this article, I will explain several compliance-gaining strategies authors can use, identify rhetorical strategies they can combine with compliance-gaining strategies, show how these strategies can be effective in a cross-cultural environment by comparing the strategies in two sample cultures, and analyze a brief sample.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
See, for example: ShannonC. and WeaverW., The Mathematical Theory of Communication, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, 1949; WienerN., Cybernetics or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1961; also his The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1954; and von BertalanffyL., General Systems Theory: A Critical Review, General Systems, 7, pp. 1–20, 1962; and his General Systems Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications, Braziller, New York, 1968.
2.
See, for example: PeirceC. S., Charles S. Peirce: Selected Writings, WienerP. O. (ed.). Dover, New York, 1958; LangerS., Mind: An Essay on Human Feeling (3 Vols.), Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1967, 1972; her Philosophy in a New Key, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1942; ChomskyN., Three Models for the Description of Language, Transactions on Information Theory, IT-2, pp. 113–124, 1956; and his Studies on Semantics in Generative Grammar, Mouton, The Hague, 1972.
3.
See, for example: DeliaJ. G.O'KeefeB. J., and O'KeefeD. J., The Constructivist Approach to Communication, in Human Communication Theory: Comparative Essays, DanceF. E. X. (ed.), Harper & Row, New York, pp. 147–191, 1982; and O'KeefeB., Variation, Adaptation, and Functional Explanation in the Study of Message Design, in Developing Communication Theories, PhilipsenG. (ed.), SUNY Press, Albany, pp. 85–118, 1997.
4.
OsgoodC., Cross Cultural Universals of Affective Meaning, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, 1975; his The Nature and Measurement of Meaning, in The Semantic Ditfferential Technique, SniderJ. and OsgoodC. (eds.), Aldine, Chicago, pp. 9–10, 1969; HeiderF., The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, Wiley, New York, 1958; FishbeinM. and AjzenI., Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1975; FestingerL., A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1957; FestingerL. and CarlsmithJ. M., Cognitive Consequences of Forced Compliance, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, pp. 203–210, 1959; SherifM.SherifC., and NebergallR., Attitude and Attitude Change: The Social Judgment Involvement Approach, Saunders, Philadelphia, 1965; and PettyR. E. and CacioppoJ. T., Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1986.
5.
DeliaJ. C.O'KeefeB. J., and O'KeefeD. J., The Constructivist Approach to Communication, in Human Communication Theory: Comparative Essays, DanceF. E. X. (ed.), Harper & Row, New York, pp. 147–191, 1982.
MarwellG. and SchmittD. R., Dimensions of Compliance-Gaining Strategies: A Dimensional Analysis, Sociometry, 30, pp. 350–364, 1967. For an analysis of the theory, see WheelessL. R.BarracloughR., and StewartR., Compliance-Gaining and Power in Persuasion, in Communication Yearbook 7, BostromR. N. (ed.), Sage, Beverly Hills, California, pp. 105–145, 1983; WisemanR. L. and Schenck-HamlinW. J., A Multidimensional Scaling Validation of an Inductively-Derived Set of Compliance-Gaining Strategies, Communication Monographs, 48: 4, pp. 251–270, 1981; Schenck-HamlinW. J., A Model of Properties of Compliance-Gaining Strategies, Communication Quarterly, 30: 2, pp. 92–100, 1982; GarkoM. G., Perspectives on and Conceptualizations of Compliance, and Compliance-Gaining, Communication Quarterly, 38, pp. 138–157, 1990; HellwegS. A., An Analysis of Compliance-Gaining Instrumentation in the Organizational Communication Literature, Management Communication Quarterly, 4, pp. 244–271, 1990; SullivanJ. J., A Cross-Cultural Test of Compliance-Gaining Theory, Management Communication Quarterly, 5, pp. 220–239, 1991.
8.
MarwellG. and SchmittD. R., Dimensions of Compliance-Gaining Strategies: A Dimensional Analysis, Sociometry, 30, pp. 360–361, 1967.
9.
See, for example, the rhetorical strategies described in NadellJ., The Macmillian Writer: Rhetoric, Reader, Handbook (2nd Edition), Macmillan, New York, 1994.
10.
BurkeK., A Grammar of Motives and A Rhetoric of Motives, Meridian Books, The World Publishing Company, Cleveland, 1945, 1952. For one key text in speech-act theory, see SearleJ., Speech Acts: An Essayin the Philosophy of Language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1969.
11.
WarrenT. L., Cultural Influences on Technical Manuals, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 32, pp. 111–123, 2002.
12.
WarrenT. L., Three Approaches to Reader Analysis, Technical Communication, 40, pp. 81–88, 1993.
13.
WarrenT. L., Cultural Influences on Technical Manuals, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 32, pp. 111–123, 2002.
14.
SullivanJ. and TaylorS., A Cross-Cultural Test of Compliance-Gaining Theory, Management Communication Quarterly, 5, pp. 220–239, 1991.
15.
Microsoft Corporation, Discovering Microsoft Office 2000: Premium and Professional, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, p. 2, 1999.
16.
WarrenThomas L., Cultural Influences on Technical Manuals, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 32: 2, 2002.
17.
WarrenThomas L., Communicating Style Rules to Editors of International Standards: An Analysis of ISO TC 184/SC4 Style Documents, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 31: 2, 2001.
18.
WarrenThomas L., Prolegomena for Table Design, in Public Graphics: Visual Information for Everyday Use, SwagaJ. G. (eds.), Taylor & Francis, Utrecht, 1999.
19.
WarrenThomas L., Informal Survey of Technical Writing Textbooks: 1950–1970. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 26: 2. 1996.
20.
WarrenThomas L., Issues in Internationalization of Documentation: Quality Control, in Quality in Documentation Studies in Language and Communication, SteehouderM. (eds.), Utrecht, 1994.
