Written Communication (journal)
journal
Written Communication is a quarterly peer-reviewed academic journal that publishes papers in the field of written communication. The editors-in-chief are Dylan Dryer (University of Maine) and Mya Poe (Northeastern University). It was established in 1984 and is published by SAGE Publishing.
Abstracting and indexing
The journal is abstracted and indexed in Scopus and the Social Sciences Citation Index. According to the Journal Citation Reports, the journal has a 2025 impact factor of 2.5.
History
Written Communication was established in October 1984 with Stephen P. Witte and John Daly as its founding editors. While Daly ceased working with the publication in 1989, Witte remained chief editor until his death in 2004. Following Daly's departure, Witte worked alongside others at different periods of the journal's history, including Roger D. Cherry and Keith Walters of Ohio State University and Deborah Brandt and Martin Nystrand of the University of Wisconsin–Madison.
Following Witte's death from glioblastoma multiforme, his surviving wife, Christina Haas of the University of Minnesota, took over the editorship of the journal. Chad Wickman of Auburn University served as the editor-in-chief from 2017 to the end of 2022; the last issue he oversaw was published in March 2023.
The public source identifies “Written Communication (journal)” as journal. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Written, Communication and journal.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Written Communication (journal)”, the useful work is to connect “journal” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 6, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q15710116. The first chronological checks are 1984, 2025, 1989 and 2004.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Written Communication (journal)”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Written Communication (journal) primary sources, Written Communication (journal) archive and Written research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Written Communication (journal)”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Written Communication (journal)” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.