oa The invisible supporters

References

1. Alvarez, I., Espasa, A., & Guasch, T.
   (2011) The value of feedback in improving collaborative writing assignments in an online learning environment. Studies in Higher Education, 37(4), 387–400. 10.1080/03075079.2010.510182
   https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.510182 [Google Scholar]
2. Ballantyne, D., & Varey, R. J.
   (2006) Creating value-in-use through marketing interaction: The exchange logic of relating, communicating and knowing. Marketing Theory, 6(3), 335–348. 10.1177/1470593106066795
   https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593106066795 [Google Scholar]
3. Beyer, K.
   (2018) InliAnTe: Instrument für die linguistische Analyse von Textkommentierungen. Linguistik online, 91(4), 15–40.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Brand, D.
   (2005) Writing for a living: Literacy and the knowledge economy. Written Communication, 22(2), 166–197. 10.1177/0741088305275218
   https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088305275218 [Google Scholar]
5. Cho, K., Schunn, C., & Charney, D.
   (2006) Commenting on writing. Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewer and subject matter experts. Written Communication, 23(3), 260–294. 10.1177/0741088306289261
   https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088306289261 [Google Scholar]
6. Guasch, T., Espasa, A., & Martinez-Melo, M.
   (2019) The art of questioning in online learning environments: The potentialities of feedback in writing. Higher Education, 44(1), 111–123.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Haapanen, L., & Perrin, D.
   (2018) Media and quoting: Understanding the roles, purposes and processes of quoting in mass and social media. InC. Cotter & D. Perrin (Eds.), Handbook of language and media (pp.424–442). London: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Jakobs, E.-M.
   (1999) Textvernetzung in den Wissenschaften. Zitat und Verweis als Ergebnis rezeptiver, reproduktiver und produktiver Prozesse. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783110945928
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110945928 [Google Scholar]
9. Jakobs, E.-M.
   (2018) Textproduktion und Kontext: Domänenspezifisches Schreiben. InN. Janich (Ed.), Textlinguistik. 15 Einführungen (pp.255–270). Tübingen: Narr.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Jakobs, E.-M., & Spinuzzi, C.
    (2014a) Professional domains: Introduction: Domain specific perspectives in text production research. InE.-M. Jakobs & D. Perrin (Eds.), Handbook of writing and text production (pp.325–332). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110220674.325
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110220674.325 [Google Scholar]
11. Jakobs, E.-M., & Spinuzzi, C.
    (2014b) Professional domains: Writing as creation of economic value. InE.-M. Jakobs & D. Perrin (Eds.), Handbook of writing and text production (pp.361–384). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110220674.359
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110220674.359 [Google Scholar]
12. Jakobs, E.-M., Spinuzzi, C., Digmayer, C., & Pogue, G.
    (2015) Co-creation by commenting: Participatory ways to write Quicklook reports. Proceedings of the IEEE International Professional Communication Conference 2015, 291–297.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Kendall Roundtree, A.
    (2017) Sizing up single-sourcing: Rhetorical interventions for XML documentation. InA. P. Lamberti & A. R. Richards (Eds.), Complex worlds: Digital culture, rhetoric and professional communication (pp.213–234). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Kleimann, S.
    (1993) The reciprocal relationship of workplace culture and review. InR. Spilka (Ed.), Writing in the Workplace: New Research Perspectives (pp.71–83). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Klewes, J., Popp, D., & Rost-Hein, M.
    (2017) Out-thinking organizational communications. The impact of digital organization. Berlin: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑41845‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41845-2 [Google Scholar]
16. Leijten, M., Van Waes, L., Schriver, K., & Hayes, J.
    (2014) Writing in the workplace: Constructing documents using multiple digital sources. Journal of Writing Research, 5(3), 285–337. 10.17239/jowr‑2014.05.03.3
    https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2014.05.03.3 [Google Scholar]
17. London, N., Pogue, G., & Spinuzzi, C.
    (2015) Understanding the value proposition as a co-created claim. Proceedings of the IEEE International Professional Communication Conference 2015, 298–305.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Paradies, J., Dobrin, D., & Miller, R.
    (1985) Writing at Exxon ITD: Notes on the writing environment of an R&D organization. InL. Odell & D. Goswami (Eds.), Writing in nonacademic settings (pp.281–307). New York, NY: Guilford.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Perrin, D.
    (2013) The linguistics of newswriting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aals.11
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.11 [Google Scholar]
20. Sauer, B.
    (2003) The rhetoric of risks. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 10.4324/9781410606815
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410606815 [Google Scholar]
21. Schindler, K.
    (2013) Texte beurteilen – Feedback geben. Kompetenzen für Lehramtsstudierende. InH. Brandl (Eds.), Mehrsprachig in Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft. Mehrsprachigkeit, Bildungsbeteiligung und Potenziale von Studierenden mit Migrationshintergrund (pp.57–68). Bielefeld: Zif.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Schindler, K., & Wolfe, J.
    (2014) Beyond single authors: Organizational text production as collaborative writing. InE.-M. Jakobs & D. Perrin (Eds.), Handbook of writing and text production (pp.159–173). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110220674.159
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110220674.159 [Google Scholar]
23. Spinuzzi, C.
    (2010) Secret sauce and snake oil: Writing monthly reports in a highly contingent environment. Written Communication, 27(4), 363–409. 10.1177/0741088310380518
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088310380518 [Google Scholar]
24. Spinuzzi, C., Nelson, R. S., Thomson, K. S., Lorenzini, F., French, R. A., Pogue, G., Burback, S. D., & Momberger, J.
    (2014) Making the pitch: Examining dialogue and revisions in entrepreneurs’ pitch decks. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 57(3), 158–181. 10.1109/TPC.2014.2342354
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2014.2342354 [Google Scholar]
25. Spinuzzi, C., Nelson, R. S., Thomson, K. S., Lorenzini, F., French, R. A., & Pogue, G.
    (2015) Remaking the pitch: Reuse strategies in entrepreneurs’ pitch decks. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 58(1), 45–68. 10.1109/TPC.2015.2415277
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2015.2415277 [Google Scholar]
26. Spinuzzi, C., Jakobs, E.-M., & Pogue, G.
    (2016) A good idea is not enough: Understanding the challenges of entrepreneurship communication. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Competitive Manufacturing Technologies, 547–552.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Spinuzzi, C.
    (2017) Introduction to special issue on the rhetoric of entrepreneurship: theories, methodologies, and practices. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 31(3), 504–507. 10.1177/1050651917695537
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651917695537 [Google Scholar]
28. Sun, H.
    (2012) Cross-cultural technology design: Crafting culture-sensitive technology for local users. New York, NU: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199744763.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199744763.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
29. Swarts, J.
    (2009) Recycled writing: Assembling actor networks from reusable content. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 24(2), 127–163. 10.1177/1050651909353307
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651909353307 [Google Scholar]
30. Wolfe, J.
    (2010) Team writing: A guide to working in groups. Boston, MA: Bedford-St. Martins.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Zehner, B., & Pletcher, G.
    (2017) Successful technology commercialization – Yes or no? Improving the odds. The quick look methodology and process. MINIB, 25(3), 81–102.
    [Google Scholar]