Abstract Show
Credibility is a characteristic of a person who is perceived by others to be a trusted advisor, believable, and confident by exhibiting a high level of expertise in a certain subject. The most important aspect to credibility is that it is an attributed variable. This characteristic can be considered a communication-based
variable since it is the outcome of certain communication behavior, whether analyzed in an interpersonal or organizational setting. There are many aspects to credibility that have been studied in social science research. This study looks at how certain demographic factors and adaptive trait behaviors can positively or negatively manipulate an individual�s credibility when that individual is a newcomer to the organization. This study examines is the interaction between the new
Public Affairs Officer (PAO) serving his first tour and his new command staff. Return to Top Introduction Most military Public Affairs Officers (PAOs) would agree they are in a challenging profession. One of the first challenges they experience is reporting to their first duty assignment and
dealing with the relational uncertainty between themselves and other unit members. PAOs must also establish their credibility within the command structure in order to effectively do their job. Schweiger (2000) defines credibility as an attributed variable given to a communicator from a receiver, based upon that receiver�s internal perception of the communicator. The receiver�s (unit member) perception can be negatively or positively influenced depending on certain trait-like
behaviors the communicator (PAO) exhibits. Likewise, the communicator�s known background (years of experience in service branch or public affairs) can also sway a receiver�s perception which can ultimately influence the level of credibility organizational members will attribute to the newcomer. Return to Top Statement of Problem Whether in peacetime or during conflict, PAOs provide timely and accurate information to their respective service members, military families, and the American public. As the
commander�s spokesperson, the PAO should be considered a knowledgeable, credible, and competent staff officer who understands his unit�s strategic and tactical goals and knows how and when to communicate those goals to internal and external audiences. Unfortunately, PAOs often find themselves having to prove their communication competencies and knowledge before they are seen as credible by their peers and senior leadership. Without this credibility, PAOs are not considered equal
partners in the command�s planning and operation efforts and subsequently cannot perform their mission��telling the command story.� Return to Top Conceptual Orientation Demographically, this analysis looks at how PAOs are accessed into and trained in the public affairs vocation. Understanding the importance of credibility in the public affairs profession, it is intriguing that each service branch acquires their PAOs differently. For example, Marine Corps and Air Force PAOs are predominately accessed at the junior officer grade while all Army and Navy PAOs transfer
into public affairs after working in other fields of their service branch. The differences among the services can be categorized as generalists (Army and Navy) or specialists (Marine Corps and Air Force). Generalists have a broad, basic understanding of the military and usually have at least two years of experience in their service while the specialists do not have the direct service experience. Demographic Factors Army Perspective Public Affairs is considered a �functional area� in the U.S. Army as opposed to a branch. A branch is a grouping of officers that comprises an arm or service of the Army in which officers are commissioned, assigned, developed, and promoted throughout their company grade years (through Captain, or O-3). Officers are
accessed into and will hold a single branch designation until the fifth or sixth year of service (DA PAM 600-3, 1998). At that time, they are augmented with a functional area, such as public affairs. They continue to wear their branch insignia throughout their career. Navy Perspective New navy PAOs must have extensive corporate knowledge before applying to laterally transfer into the community. Based on the fact that Navy PAOs �must be able to understand
complex Navy issues, break them down, and communicate their details to a given audience� (Bupers Web Site), the Navy only takes officers into the PAO community who have successfully proven their corporate abilities in other disciplines. Marine Corps Perspective
The accession of Marine Corps PAOs begins at the company grade level upon completion of Officer Candidate School (OCS) and The Basic School (TBS). During a mandatory, 26-week course of instruction at TBS, newly commissioned second Lieutenant gain a wide variety of knowledge about the Marine Corps (with a focus on Infantry) and are evaluated in areas such as leadership, military skills, academics, and physical fitness. The Basic School instruction ensures young
Marine Corps officers have the cognitive ability to perform as basic infantry platoon commanders in the Fleet Marine Force, no matter what other occupational specialty the Marine focuses on during his career. A TBS student�s overall grade-point standing at the end of the course helps determine the Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) they receive. After graduating TBS, students move on to their MOS schools and then out to the fleet, taking with them the valuable lessons learned at
TBS. The Basic School is an experience common to all Marine Corps officers. Air Force PerspectiveThe Air Force accesses from 25 to 35 PAOs per year. Approximately 10 to 20 percent of accessions are U.S. Air Force Academy graduates. About 70 to 80 percent come from Reserve Officer Training Corps with the remaining 10 percent from Officer Training School. All officers start as a deputy chief of public affairs at the wing level and after three to four years progress to chief positions. While serving as a deputy chief of public affairs, the officers spends their time under the guidance of the PAO. The officer learns the technical part of being a PAO. The officer receives DINFOS training during this tenure if he or she hasn�t already received it prior to this first assignment. The officer also receives on-the-job training and mentorship during this period as well. "Across the range of military operations, public affairs enhances a commander's ability to accomplish the mission successfully" (PA Doctrine, 1999, p.7). During every phase of contingency operations, public affairs should be represented on the information operation team. The synergistic relationship between the PAO and the commander is an integral attribute to a unit's strategic planning and daily operations and success.| There are no specific degree requirements for officers to enter the public affairs career. It is desirable for a candidate to possess a public communications, communicative arts, journalism, public relations, advertising, sociology, or social psychology degree. Public affairs officers are assigned to nearly every location and every level of command.Coast Guard Perspective For the purposes of this study, we did not look at the Coast Guard PAO accession program. Due to the low numbers of designated Coast Guard PAOs, we feel the data collected would be infinitesimal for our study. Training While previous education is considered before placing a candidate into public affairs, the services do not require a degree in communication, journalism, or a related field. Placement into public affairs is based on candidate request, the needs of the service at that time and the recommendation of instructors and supervisors
either in early military training or work experience. The only public affairs training officers receive is available at DINFOS. Personality Traits The personality aspect of this study focuses on three behavioral; communication competency, assertiveness, and interaction involvement. Of the many communication traits necessary to be an adept communicator, we feel that these three were the most vital to a young PAO in regards to credibility. Communication Competency Competence is an adaptation trait which has received much attention by communication researchers (Infante et al., 1997). Wiemann
(1977) defines the competent communicator as: Communication Assertiveness Assertiveness can be described as a �person�s general tendency to be interpersonally dominant, ascendant and forceful� (Infante et al., 1997, p. 127). In their research, Lorr and More (1980) found four distinct aspects of assertiveness; directiveness, social assertiveness, defense of rights and interests and independence (Infante et al., 1997). Interaction Involvement Interaction involvement can be defined as the �tendency to participate with another in conversation composed
of three dimensions: responsiveness, perceptiveness, and attentiveness� (Infante et al., 1997, p. 126). �People who are higher in interaction involvement are generally viewed as more competent communicators. Persons who are low in interaction involvement tend to be �removed� from the situation� (Infante et al., 1997, p. 126). Return to Top Rationale (Research Question) Researchers have studied the complex intricacies of credibility for decades. Studies have focused on how
the perceived credibility of an individual influences their effectiveness when using persuasive communication. Studies have also looked at communicative, nonverbal behaviors, such as facial expressiveness, speaker�s posture and voice inflection to see how they influence credibility (Heath & Bryant, 2000). Another complicated factor associated with credibility is that it constantly fluctuates with time. It is not static during any communicative process or in any situational
context. For example, many news organizations may have been perceived as highly credible before the 2000 U.S. Presidential election. After the election, the public�s perception of the media�s credibility may have drastically changed. Moreover, this credibility issue seems to have even more relevance for the organizational or corporate spokesperson. RQ1: What are the effects of the adaptive behavior traits�communication competence, assertiveness, and interaction involvement on a PAO�s credibility? RQ2: Is the number of years of military service correlated to credibility? Return to Top Methodology Participants and Procedures Participants in the study will include newly accessed PAOs in all four services and their commanders. Participants will be instructed to self-report their levels of communication competence, assertiveness, and interaction involvement at the six month mark of their first public affairs assignment. Since this study involves officers reporting to their first duty station as PAOs, and only a limited number access the community each year, we propose a three-year study in order to accumulate valid and reliable results. The surveys should be distributed to all new PAOs and their supervisors to obtain a large enough sample. Surveys will be distributed through service branch public affairs career managers to ensure all new PAOs have the opportunity to participate in the study. Along with the PAO surveys, supervisor surveys will be enclosed with instructions for completion. This procedure should be employed while the PAO is in the early stages of relational uncertainty within the organization in order to capture the PAOs� initial perceptions as they enter the new environment. Participation in this study will be voluntary and anonymous. Return to Top Instruments To measure credibility, we use the McCroskey�s (1966) source credibility scale because it has been proven by many researchers to have face and criterion-related validity. The article that first introduced this scale has been referenced at least
100 times in previous research. This scale has been used to confirm presumed credible speakers will actually be perceived as credible (Rubin, 1981). The format of the scale has emerged as the �predominant method of scaling� (Rubin, 1981, p. 335) credibility. Statistical Analysis
Once the three year survey is complete, the data collected could be analyzed using one of two quantitative methods. The first possible method is to perform an analysis of variance (ANOVA) on the results. The other approach is multiple regression. Table 1. First Second
Third Fourth Demographics: Communication Assertiveness: Interaction Multiple regression could also be used to analyze the results. Each subject will have an average score for each predictor variable (personality trait). The three independent variables will be utilized to predict individual�s credibility levels. Credibility results will be collected from the supervisor�s source-credibility survey. Return to Top Projected Results Results from the credibility tests (competency, assertiveness, and interaction involvement) will probably reveal that military PAOs exhibit varying degrees of all three variables. Since the characteristics tested are internal traits and not something necessarily taught and there is no measure of these traits prior to entrance into the public affairs field, we project there will be no conclusive evidence of high levels in any service. It is possible that the Army and Navy may find higher levels of assertiveness because of those PAOs� organizational experience which may have helped developed increased confidence and assertiveness. Commanders may perceive their PAOs as credible based on the services� view of the public affairs career field � Army and Navy PAOs will be higher ranking which in and of itself increases credibility while the Marine Corps and Air Force have public affairs as its own career field stressing the importance of the public affairs mission. We project that high credibility perceived from commanders will correlate to high self-reported levels of the personality traits. Return to Top Discussion We feel the adaptive personality traits of communication competency, assertiveness, and interaction involvement are directly linked to credibility. As the spokesperson for their command,
establishing and maintaining credibility is vital to the success of a PAO. We feel possessing these traits will help enhance the credibility of PAOs and ultimately the success of the mission of telling the service story. Return to Top References Argyle, M. (1972). Review Essay, Review Author, Erving Goffman, Rules and Rituals of Everyday Life Relations in Public. Microstudies of the Public Order and Science, New Series, Vol. 176, No. 4035, pp. 627-628. Brass, D., & Burkhardt, M. E. (1993). Potential power and power use: An investigation of structure and behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 441-470. Cegala, D. J. (1981). Interaction involvement: A cognitive dimension of communicative competence, Communication Education, 30, 109-121. Cegala, D. J. (1984). Affective and cognitive manifestations of interaction involvement during unstructured and competitive interactions. Communications Monagram, 51, 320-335. Cupach, W. R., & Spitzberg, B. H. (1983). Trait versus state: A comparison of dispositional and situational measures of interpersonal communication competence. The Western Journal of Speech Communication, 47, 364-379. Cutlip, S. M., & Center, A. H. (1971). Effective Public Relations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Defense Information School, (2001), 2002 Course Offerings, http://www.dinfos.osd.mil/course_info/fy2.asp Department of the Air Force (1999). Public Affairs Operations: Air Force Doctrine Document 2-5.4. Joint Doctrine for Information Operations and JP 3-61, Doctrine for Public Affairs in Joint Operations. Department of the Army (1998). DA PAM 600-3. Introduction to the officer career fields. Department of the Navy Personnel Network Web Site, 2001. http://www.persnet.navy.mil/pers448/p448home.htm. Heath, R. L., & Bryant, J. (2000). Human communication theory and research: Concepts, contexts, and challenges. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hurley, A., & Fagenson-Eland, E. (1997). Does cream always rise to the top? An investigation of career attainment determinants. Organizational Dynamics, 26(2), 65. Infante, D., Rancer, A., & Womack, D., (1990). Building Communicatioin Theory. (3rd Ed.).Prospect Heights, Il.: Waveland Press Inc. Lorr, M., & More, W. (1980). Four dimensions of assertiveness. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 2, 127-138. McCroskey, J. C. (1966). Scales for the measurement of ethos. Speech Monographs, 33, 65-72. Monge, P. R., Bachman, S. G., Dillard, J. P., & Eisenberg, E. M. (1982). Communicator competence in the workplace: Model testing and scale development. Communication Yearbook, 5, 505-528. Rathus, S. (1973). A 30-Item Schedule for Assessing Assertive Behavior, Behavior Therapy, 4, 398-406. Rubin, R. B., Palmgreen, P., & Sypher, H. E. (Eds.). (1981). Communication research measures: A sourcebook. New York: Guildford Press. Scheiger, W. (2000). Media credibility � experience or image? A survey on the credibility of the world wide web in germany in comparison to other media. European Journal of Communication, 15, 37-59. Wiemann, J. M. (1977). Explication and test of a model of communicative competence. Human Communication Research, 3, 195-213. Return to Top Appendix A Source Credibility Scale�McCroskey: Instructions: On the scales below, please indicate your feelings about _____________________. Circle the number between the adjectives which best represents your feeling about_______________________. Numbers �1� and �7� indicate a very strong feeling. Numbers �2� and �5� indicate a fairly weak feeling. Number �4� indicates you are undecided or do not understand the adjectives themselves. Please work quickly. There are no right or wrong answers. Authoritativeness
Reliable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Unreliable* Character Honest 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 Dishonest* Note. Items presented here grouped by dimension. Users should randomly order the bipolar adjectives to avoid response set error variance. Reverse scoring should be performed for items with asterisks. __________________________________________________________________ 15-Item Semantic Differential** Instructions: On the scales below, pleas indicate your feelings about _____________________. Circle the number between the adjectives which best represents your feeling about_______________________. Numbers �1� and �7� indicate a very strong feeling. Numbers �2� and �5� indicate a fairly weak feeling. Number �4� indicates you are undecided or do not understand the adjectives themselves. Please work quickly. There are no right or wrong answers. Sociability Good-natured 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 Irritable* Extroversion
Timid 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Bold Competence
Expert 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Inexpert* Composure Poised 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 Nervous* Character Dishonest 1 2 3
4 5 6 7 Honest Note. Items presented here grouped by dimension. Users should randomly order the bipolar adjectives to avoid response set error variance. Reverse scoring should be performed for items with asterisks. * Copyright 1966 by the Speech Communication Association. Reprinted by permission. **Copyright 1974 by Sage Publications, Inc. Reprinted by permission. Return to Top Appendix B Self-Rated Communicative Competence Scale Instructions: Complete the following questionnaire/scale with yourself in mind. Circle one of the sets of letters before each numbered questions based upon whether you strongly agree (SA), agree (A), are undecided or neutral (?), disagree (D), or strongly disagree (SD). Always keep yourself in mind as you answer. Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree
Strongly SA A ? D SD Note: Items 4, 8, 11, 12, and 28 are reverse-coded before summing the 36 items. This has been modified for self-report. Return to Top Appendix C Rathus Assertiveness Schedule Directions: Indicate how characteristic or descriptive each of the following statements is of you by using the code given below. +3 very characteristic of me, extremely descriptivea 1. Most people seem to be more aggressive and assertive than I am.* a Total score obtained by adding numerical responses to each item, after changing the signs of reversed items. * Reversed item. Return to Top Appendix D Interaction Involvement Scale Number of Questions: 18 Aprox .Time Required to Complete:6 minutes Instructions: This questionnaire is designed to provide information about how people communicate. There are no right or wrong answers to any of the items. You only need to indicate the extent to which you feel each item describes your own behavior. In responding to some of the items, you might say, "sometimes I do that and sometimes I don't." You should respond to each item in a way that best describes your typical manner of communication -- how you behave in most situations. If you cannot decide how a particular item applies to you circle the "not sure" alternative. however, please be sure to respond to all of the items. Choose one alternative for each item that best characterizes your communication in general by circling your response. 1. I am keenly aware of how others perceive me during my conversations. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat Like Me Very Much 2. My mind wanders during conversations and I often miss parts of what is going on. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat Like Me Very
Much 3. Often in conversations I'm not sure what to say, I can't seam to find the appropriate lines. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat Like Me
Very Much 4. I am very observant of others' reactions while I'm speaking. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat Like Me
Very Much 5. During conversations I listen carefully to others and obtain as much information as I can. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat Like Me
Very Much 6. Often in conversations I'm not sure what my role is, I'm not sure how I'm expected to relate to others. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat Like Me
Very Much 7. Often in conversations I will pretend to be listening, when in fact I was thinking of something else. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat Like Me
Very Much 8. Often during conversations I feel like I know what should be said (like accepting a compliment, or asking a question), but I hesitate to do so. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat
Like Me Very Much 9. Sometimes during conversations I'm not sure what the other really means or intends by certain comments. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat
Like Me Very Much 10. I carefully observe how the other is responding to me during a conversation. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat
Like Me Very Much 11. Often I feel withdrawn or distant during conversations. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat Like
Me Very Much 12. Often in conversations I'm not sure what others' needs are (e.g. a compliment, reassurance, etc.) until it is too late to respond appropriately. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure
Somewhat Like Me Very Much 13. I feel confident during my conversations, I am sure of what to say and do. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat
Like Me Very Much 14. Often I'm preoccupied in my conversations and do not pay complete attention to others. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat
Like Me Very Much 15. Often I feel sort of "unplugged" during conversations, I am uncertain of my role, others' motives, and what is happening. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat
Like Me Very Much 16. In my conversations I often do not accurately perceive others' intentions or motivations. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat
Like Me Very Much 17. In conversations I am very perceptive to the meaning of my partner's behavior in relation to myself and the situation. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat
Like Me Very Much 18. Often during my conversation I can't think of what to say, I just don't react quickly enough. Not at all Somewhat Not Sure Somewhat
Like Me Very Much Return to Top Which of the following statements is true of the credibility of a study finding?Which of the following statement is true of the credibility of a study finding? The credibility of a finding mainly rests on the funding source and the credentials of the researchers.
Which of the following characteristic of a recommendation is the most important determinant of its credibility?Which of the following characteristics of a recommendation is the most important determinant of its credibility? D. The linkage between the recommendation and the evidence supporting it.
Which statement best describes the appraisal of research evidence?Which statement best describes appraisal of research evidence? Appraisal is a set of judgments using an objective set of criteria regarding the credibility, clinical significance, and applicability of the recommendations of clinical practice guidelines, conclusions of systematic reviews, or study findings.
Which statement is true of the findings of a single original study group of answer choices?Which statement is true of the findings of a single, original study? The findings of a single, original study should be brought together and integrated with the findings of other studies of the same issue.
|