Lynne M. Sallot

From Aardvark to Zebra: A New Millennium Analysis of Theory Development in Public Relations Academic Journals

In a replication and extension of a 1984 study by Ferguson to investigate the status of theory building by public relations scholars, 748 abstracts or articles published in Public Relations Review, Journal of Public Relations Research and its predecessor, Public Relations Research Annual, since their inceptions through the year 2000, were subjected to content analysis. Nearly 20% of articles analyzed were found to have contributed to theory development in public relations, compared to only 4% in Fergusons study. Theory was most prevalent in articles about excellence/symmetry, public relationships, ethics and social responsibility, crisis response, critical-cultural, feminism/diversity, and international topics. These and interdisciplinary influences are expected to continue to contribute to ever more theory building in public relations. Proportionally, Public Relations Research Annual made the greatest contributions to theory development, followed by Journal of Public Relations Research, although Public Relations Review published the greatest number of articles contributing to theory development. Public Relations Review and Journal of Public Relations Research published comparable numbers of articles regarding excellence theory, public relationships, and crisis response theory. However, Public Relations Review published far more articles on theories about academic versus applied research, ethics/social responsibility, international and role theory than Journal of Public Relations Research. Conversely, Journal of Public Relations Research published more content about situational theory and gender/diversity theories than Public Relations Review. The most prolific authors contributing to theory development were James E. Grunig, Robert L. Heath, Larissa Schneider Grunig, W. Timothy Coombs, and John A. Ledingham.

Public Relations and the Production of News: A Critical Review and Theoretical Framework

Because the source-reporter relationship forms the focal point of news gathering, it is a significant topic in the media sociology literature. Most of the source-reporter literature, however, focus...

What the Public Thinks about Public Relations: An Impression Management Experiment

Impression management theories suggest that perceived motives of self-interest may explain the poor reputation sometimes attributed to public relations. A 4×2×2 factorial design experiment with 585 nonstudent adults and undergraduate students tested effects of motives, communication style, and licensing on the reputation of public relations. Perceived motives to impression manage in public relations, seen as advocacy behavior, had a main effect. Public relations was found to be less well-regarded when its practitioners were seen as acting with overt, intentional behaviors for self-gain compared with practitioners not appearing to be intentionally managing impressions. Mixed support was found for licensing as a means of enhancing reputation. Results of experimental tests suggest licensing may create a halo effect around selfishly motivated practitioners. The effect of one-way or two-way communication was in combination with the other factorial variables.

Developing standards of professional performance in public relations

Abstract A survey instrument derived from sixty in-depth interviews was administered to 598 public relations professionals across the nation with a 42 percent response rate. Based on a review of literature and the interview phase of the current study, twenty-four elements of professional performance were operationalized in the survey. Survey respondents assessed the extent to which a standard of professionalism currently exists for each of the twenty-four items. Respondents tended to view ethical guidelines, accreditation and writing/editing skills as enjoying well established standards. Licensing, location of public relations on the organizational chart and inclusion of public relations in the dominant coalition were viewed as most lacking in a standard of professional performance. The twenty-four items factored into eight dimensions. Assessments of professionalism along these eight factors differed significantly as a function of age, education, race and both length and geographic region of practice of public relations.

New Technologies and Public Relations: Exploring Practitioners' Use of Online Resources to Earn a Seat at the Management Table:

A survey of corporate public relations practitioners classified as managers or technicians revealed that although online databases are having positive effects on the practice of public relations, most practitioners are not yet taking advantage of these empowering opportunities. Practitioners need to be aware that online databases provide a new avenue for participation in management decision making. As greater numbers of practitioners begin cruising the information superhighway and put the new technologies available to full use, public relations can experience even greater opportunities to pull up a chair at the management table.

Pluralistic Ignorance and Professional Standards: Underestimating Professionalism of Our Peers in Public Relations.

Abstract Two-hundred-fifty-one responses to a battery of 45 professional standard items indicate that public relations professionals randomly surveyed from across the nation tend to underestimate the current state of professional standards in the field. This state of affairs, described in coorientation theory as pluralistic ignorance, suggests that our field may actually hold higher standards and greater confidence in standards than we commonly attribute to our peers. Following the third-person effect, respondents tended to view themselves as better able to withstand pressures and outdated thinking than their peers. In fact, practitioners held their peers in comparatively low esteem, viewing others collectively as somewhat naive, unprofessional and unenlightened in comparison to their own personal self-images. While female practitioners are generally less sanguine about gender and racial equity in public relations, women tend to be more optimistic about standards for ethics and professional functions such as planning and research. Women also tended to be less harsh in their ratings of peer professionalism, while also attributing lower values to others. This study, conducted under the auspices of the Yarbrough Public Relations Laboratory, is a followup to preliminary results of the survey of practitioners reported in the article titled “Developing Standards of Professional Performance in Public Relations” published in Public Relations Review in 1996. Preliminary results of a followup survey of educators was reported in the article “Professional Standards in Public Relations: A Survey of Educators” published in Public Relations Review in 1997. All three authors are with the Department of Advertising/Public Relations, Henry W. Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Georgia, Athens. Lynne M. Sallot, APR, Fellow PRSA, is Assistant Professor. Glen T. Cameron is Associate Professor and Director of Research, James M. Cox, Jr. Institute for Newspaper Management Studies. Ruth Ann Weaver Lariscy is Associate Professor.

Public relations practice in Japan: an exploratory study

Abstract Ninety-four (62%) survey responses in the Japanese language from 151 corporate public relations professionals in Japan were analyzed to investigate how Japanese management styles have changed since the recent economic recession, and how present management styles have impacted public relations practice in Japan. Findings suggest today’s Japanese management styles are not a static system unaffected by the economic pressures, and that current public relations practices in Japan align more closely with mixed models of public relations practiced in Western societies.