CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF STUDY

The term grapevine for this study is defined as an unofficial means of relying information,
especially through face-to-face communication. (Dictionary.com, nd) According to an article on
Collective Behavior in Encyclopedia Britannica (nd), grapevine also refers to the informal
transmission of information, gossip or rumor from person to person. Grapevine, loosely known
as rumors or gossips, is made to provide people with an outlet for their imaginations and
apprehensions as well. It also helps satisfy a natural desire to know what is really going on.
The history of grapevine can be traced back during United States Civil War. Due to frequent
moves from the battle fronts, army intelligence telegraph wires were loosely strung from tree to
tree across battlefields, much like grapevines
1
. Due to the reckless way the lines were hung, the
messages sent over them were often garbled and confusing, leading to inaccurate
communication. Thus, any rumor or unofficial news was said to have been heard "from the
grapevine. (Shahid, 2011)
This type of communication does not officially come from any position in the organization, and
does not necessarily flow along a chain of command or through an official channel or network
for communication. (Wells, 1994) In other words, news from the grapevine can be spread down,
horizontally, vertically and diagonally all within a short span of time. (Mishra, 1990) Directed
from the first paragraph, stories from the grapevine helps to satisfy humans natural desire to
know what is really going on. This statement can be supported using a research by Frederick
Koenig, a sociologist who studies rumors. He believes that people listen to and pass a rumor
because it satisfies some need. Even so, the levels of needs in rumors differ in each level of
society but all in all, the nature of people involved is important to create a successful rumor.
(Spinks, 1994)
Compared to formal communication, which is made up of meetings, official notices, reports,
classes, conferences and such, it is highly documented and as such has very little chance for
change. Informal communication, in a form of grapevine is undocumented hence open to
change and interpretation. (Shahid, 2011) Formal communication follows a certain direction
either vertical (superior to subordinate and vice versa) or horizontal (between team members)

1
any of numerous woody vines (genus Vitis of the family Vitaceae, the grape family) that usually climb by tendrils,
produce grapes, and are nearly cosmopolitan in cultivation (Merriam-Webster.com)
but whereas grapevine does not follow any specific direction. It can be vertical, horizontal or
diagonal or a combination of some or all of them. (Mishra, 1990)
Grapevine communication exists in organizations for many reasons. Grapevine communication
can carry useful information through the organization with amazing speed. The grapevine is
very useful in supplementing formal channels. As an early warning system, gossip allows
people to think through in advance what they will do if the rumors become the awful truth. (Hay,
nd) Khandwalla states that most researchers have found that most grapevine information is
either true or has within it a kernel of truth. (Mishra, 1990)

















1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
Before the birth of formal network, people communication informally. But even after the
emergence of formal communication, informal communication still ceases to exist. Based on a
classic study of the grapevine done by Keith Davis in 1953, he stated that the grapevine is a
natural part of an organizations total communication system.. it is a significant force within the
work group, helping to build teamwork, motivate people, and create identity. In an academic
setting particularly in schools and universities, grapevine communication happens on many
levels. But for this study, it will be narrowed down to informal communication among students
only.
Students are known to rely on informal communication much more than formal communication.
Interaction in dorms, during lunches, breaks, while doing their work in library, chat rooms, and
such will cause grapevine communication to happen. It is easier to relate to grapevine
communication than other method of communication because it is used in their every day lives.
This will also cause them to change their perception on informal communication into becoming
their very own means of formal communication. (Rakes, 2011)
From the daily interactions that occur among students in campus, stories will be passed around
as such that A tells B, who tells C, who tells D and so on. Each person passes the information
on to the next person. The longer the strand the more distortion and filtering affects the
information being passed until the last person in the chain may find the information
unrecognizable from the original message. (Shahid, 2011) Albeit the ambiguous and suspicious
content, students will still rely on grapevine communication and will continue engaging
themselves in it. (Cox, 1993)
Studies show that grapevine information tends to be about 80% accurate. Since many rumors
start from someone's account of an actual event, there are strong elements of truth in many
rumors. However, grapevine information often contains big errors as people put their own
interpretation onto an event or information they have seen, and then pass it on in a process of
partial or selective recall. Thus there are pros and cons in grapevine communication. Basically,
no matter how doubtful the news are it should be viewed as something to be understood and
managed rather than as something to be ignored or simply tolerated. (Rakes, 1993)


1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
This research proposes THREE (3) research questions within the context of teenagers
perceptions on application of grapevine communication in campus:
RQ1 How does grapevine communication relate to students in campus?
RQ2 What are the factors that make students rely on grapevine communication to
communicate?
RQ3 What are the effects of applying grapevine communication among students?

1.4 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
This research have outlined THREE (3) objectives based on said research questions to provide
researchers a guideline on what to find out:
RQ1 To determine how students in campus are able to relate to grapevine
communication
RQ2 To investigate the factors that make students rely on grapevine communication
to communicate
RQ3 To find out the effects of using grapevine communication among students in
campus.








1.5 RATIONALE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
The rationale of this study is to find out teenagers perception on the usage of grapevine
communication among students in campus. Rumors and gossips circulate at every part of
groups in campus, as it is an institution in which each student is eventually connected with one
another. Thus, researcher wants to identify how grapevine communication is able to relate with
students life in campus.
Grapevine communication is an informal communication whereby it is undocumented and hence
open to change and interpretation. Probably, due to the fact that rumors originate from the
actual story, thus many will not ignore or brush it off easily. Researcher intends to investigate
why are stories from the grapevine considered a reliable source to students even with its
ambiguous characteristics.
Besides that, the purpose of this research is to find out the effects on the usage of grapevine
communication among students in campus. Researcher intends to investigate on the pros and
cons of making it as the general way of communication instead of using formal communication,
examples are official notices (student portal, student board), meetings, classes and such.
The informants of this particular research would be the students from six different course
programs in UiTM Lendu, Alor Gajah, Melaka. The participants are all undergoing their diploma
program. The research will be conducted from July 2012 until September 2012. An in-depth
interview would be done using selected samples to find out students perception on the usage of
grapevine communication among campus. Hence, this research will focus more on
communication on their level and how do they perceive such means of communication.







1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
1.6.1 POLICY
Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture (KPKK) would be the body responsible to
monitor and educate the proper ethics on how university students should communicate with
each other in order to build a strong personality as they graduate. This is important to give them
the exposure on which communication channels should they rely to and not succumb to gossips
and rumors all the time.
This ministry is also in charge of conducting research on communication difference between
local students and oversea students. As the research goes, this ministry can find out the impact
of informal communication to them. From the research also, the ministry can suggest students
to rely on both ways of communication, informal and formal.
Another ministry that can play a part in this would be Ministry of Human Resources as it is about
the workforces of an organization, business sector, or an economy. As grapevine
communication plays an integral part in business communication, and human resource is in
every business sector. The particular ministry can make a research on this and help the
communication in business sectors to be more efficient by providing a guideline on how should
managers manage stories, rumors and gossips. (citate)
In a nutshell, all departments in ministry can make a good use on this research because each of
them are made up of an organizations that requires internal communication in all directions,
upwards, downwards and even diagonally. This research topic is also essential for all
companies to be researched and documented for a better communication between employers
and employees.







1.6.2 PRACTICE
This research is applicable to all companies, organizations, groups that consist of huge
networking between each other. Using this research, communication flow between one another
can be improved and office gossips can be managed better and be dealt professionally.
The findings of this research can be used by teenagers too, particularly high school leavers who
wish to adapt in a new surrounding and searching for ways to communicate better among
others.
University administrators, lecturers and staff could pick up this research and replicate the
method of research to test on their perception of grapevine communication and find out how
strong their internal communication is. Suffice to say, grapevine communication does not
escape from the professionals or grown ups. In fact, grapevine communication helps to work
problems due to employees/colleagues verbally expressing themselves for changes. These
improvements sometimes result in increased efficiency for certain departments within the
organization.












CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 THE TRANSMISSION OF INFORMAL COMMUNICATION
According to (Kraut, Fish, Root, & Chalfonte, 1990), people working in organizations require
some degree of active cooperation and communication with others. Individual members of
groups need to communicate with each other to accomplish their production and social
functions, and within organizations, groups need to communicate with other groups. (Woodard,
2008) The communication they use is both formal and informal, but in this review only informal
network will be highlighted.
There are various types of communication chains that exists. The chain used by formal
communication may be very rigid, however, the informal chains tend to be very flexible.
According to (Tazrian Shahid, 2011) those prototypes vary according to sender, news, and
situation.
The transmission of informal network can be explained in four structures which are the single
strand chain, the gossip chain, the probability chain, and the cluster chain. For single strand
chain, it happens when A tells B, B tells C and the list goes on. Most inaccuracies happen via
this structure as information may be filtered by every sender. As for the gossip chain, A simply
tells everyone whom they contact. This pattern is considered slow in moving the information.
(Shahid, 2011)
As for probability chain, information is randomly passed along to anyone willing to listen. Some
hear the information, some dont. In this case say, A makes random contact with F and C and
tells a story. C hears but F doesnt. The type of person who communicates this way is usually
an outgoing or talkative person. Lastly, in cluster chain, it is the most predominant structure in
organizations and groups as selectivity is the basis of this pattern. In any organization,
individuals will generally feel more comfortable with their own group and therefore will only relay
information to those in their informal social groups. This flow pattern results in information
missing some individuals completely. (Shahid, 2011)




2.2 MANAGING GRAPEVINE COMMUNICATION IN AN ORGANIZATION
The major medium for informal communication is "grapevine" or "rumor". The grapevine is
tangled throughout the organization with branches going in all directions. They spread quickly,
uncontrollably and are often hard to stop. (Crampton, Hodge, Mishra 1998) But according to
(Keith Davis, 1971) he stated that, although grapevine communication is generalized as evil and
unethical, some find it as a good thing because it acts as a safety valve and carries news fast.
Others regard it as very mixed blessing.
With this being discussed, rumors and gossip are concluded to be a part and parcel of being
human. There are ways to manage the stories from the grapevine, and all best laid plans must
contend with human nature. According to Dj Dobrige, individuals must be vigilant in keeping
communication flow open. As a member in an organization, be it in workplace or an institution,
ongoing communication to the entire population is important. Those who play a different role for
example leaders, every sources owned must be used to reach others.
Apart from that, opinion-leaders must be identified. Dj Dobrige added, opinion leaders are
usually visible and vocal. They are a very important resource in communication process. Make
them a part of the communication loop of verified information. They can help in the accuracy of
what is passed to the population. In an academic setting, opinion leaders can be administrators,
lecturers and student bodies.
Last but not least, a member in organizations or groups must not ad-lib when dealing with
information. Emotions and opinions can leak into what really must be said. If there is uncertainty
in a situation, or if all the factual information is not available, do not assume and simplify
whatever that is given. Thus, according to (Michelson et al, 2010), only provide information if
everything is known, or else refer to those who are able to provide actual facts.






2.3 USING INFORMAL COMMUNICATION IN AN ACADEMIC SETTING
The effective communication of information to stakeholders is important to the functioning of any
organization, particularly schools. As stated by Davis and O'Connor (1977), the types of
communication found within any given organization are usually determined by the relationships
of the people involved. In an academic setting, those who are involved would be administrators,
department chairs, academic and non-academic leaders, student bodies, and students in that
matter. Two types of communication are used, formal and informal. But for this review, the
usage of informal communication in academic organization will be reviewed.
Informal communication has always played an important role in educational communication
(Baptista & Ferreira, 2007). Through informal communication with others and by experiencing
the dilemmas associated with being an educator, teachers work their way through the
socialization process (Simonds, 2001). For example, educators can use a personal approach by
explaining a subject content to set of individuals and demands it to be passed around for the
benefit of others.
Their formal network typically consists of established channels and reflects the organizational
chart. The formal channels, however, are often inadequate to carry all of the needed information
in an organization. Thus, grapevine communication supplements this formal network. This
informal network, based by Johnnie Woodard (2011) provides people with an outlet for
resourcefulness and the ability to understand what is important for sharing, retrieving, of
educational material. This includes the passing of information through individuals from different
classes through casual interactions during lunch breaks, walking back home, and such.
(Anonymous, nd)
Even through grapevine communication is largely connected with business organizations and
companies, but it plays a huge role to other organizations such as schools and universities.
Based on social relationships, informal communication or rather known as grapevine, is a
powerful force in the communication flow within a academic setting. (Rakes, 1993)




2.4 COMMUNICATION THEORY
2.4.1 ATTRACTION-SELECTION-ATTRITION MODEL
Attraction Selection Attrition model is theory holding that individuals are attracted to
organizations whose members are similar to themselves in terms of personality, values,
interests, and other attributes. The other point is organizations are more likely to select those
who possess knowledge, skills, and abilities similar to the ones their existing members possess;
and over time, those who do not fit in well are more likely to leave. Based on these three factors,
the personal characteristics of those who work for an organization are likely to become more
similar over time, leading to the consolidation of organizational culture. (Dictionary of Business
Management Encyclopedia.com, 2006)
In general, everyone including students will want to know stories and issues that will perk their
interest. Thus, those who are deem to be knowledgeable about something will make more
contact thus creating a stigma where everyone needs to know something in order to be
approachable. (University of Twente, 2010) Based on the latter, this creates a tendency for
students to share stories that they have heard and pass it to their contacts even if it is not 100%
accurate. By being able to provide information, stories, gossips and such, individuals with
similar interest will be attracted among each other rather than those with nothing to be disclosed
about.
Based on the model and its relation with our issue above, this model is suitable for our research
topic as it highlights the reason why grapevine communication becomes a reliable source for
students. Also, it gives us an insight to why this informal network can relate to their lives in
campus.








2.5 RESEARCH FRAMEWORK











Students' perceptions on applying grapevine
communication in campus.
The relation of grapevine
communication to
students in campus.
The factors that make
students rely on
grapevine
communication to
communicate.
The effects of using
grapevine
communication among
students.
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 DATA COLLECTION STRATEGIES
3.1.1 UNIT ANALYSIS
The unit analysis in this research is the application of grapevine communication among students
in campus.
3.1.2 SAMPLE
3.1.2.1 PURPOSIVE SAMPLING
Purposive sampling targets a particular group of people. When the desired population for the
study is rare or very difficult to locate and obtained for a study, purposive sampling may be the
only option. Teds Palys (nd) states that this non-probability sampling method is synonymous to
qualitative research. Usually, the sample being studied is quite small, being that it has a high
ratio gap between sample and population. The goal of purposive sampling is with the intention
of making generalizations (i.e. statistical inferences) from that sample to the population of
interest that is not selected randomly. Thus, a source of bias based on the selection of sample
may be introduced. (Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2005)
Using the research method above, six students from UiTM Lendu, Alor Gajah, Melaka who are
considered qualified for this research is sampled. They are from six (6) different programs and
are divided into three (3) groups: Social Science (Communication and Mass Media, Art and
Design), Economics (Accounting, Business Management) and Sciences (Computer Science,
Actuarial Science).
The participants for this research are as follows:
1. Puteri Hazirah Ayuni binti Megat Jamil (Diploma in Communication and Media Studies
MC110)
2. Sery Safia binti Abdul Razak (Diploma in Graphics and Digital Media AD111)
3. Adhwa bin Abdul Latif (Diploma in Computer Science CS110)
4. Siti Nur Diyana binit Mohd Sani (Diploma in Business Studies BM111)
5. Razlan bin Jaffri (Diploma in Accountancy AC110)
6. Nur Fakheera binti Tajaldin (Diploma in Actuarial Science CS112)

3.1.3 IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW
In-depth interviews are one of the most common qualitative methods. Main reason for their
popularity is that interviews are very effective in giving a human face to research problems.
(Boyce, Neale, 2006) Based on a module in Family Health International (2004) it is stated that in
depth interview is a technique to draw out concrete responses based on participants'
perspective on the research topic. Researchers engage with participants by asking questions in
casual manner, listening attentively to their answers, and giving follow-up questions and probes
based on previous statements. Researchers must not encourage participants to provide
particular answer nor discourage them by disapproving what they say.
Thus for this research, in-depth interview has been chosen to provide findings for the report.
The interview will be in a form of open ended questions. Informants are needed to give relevant
answers and justify their answers with examples, situations they can relate from past
experiences or general knowledge. Exchange of thoughts on the questions asked is also
welcomed. Besides in-depth interview, researchers will also use unstructured interview which
gives the freedom to interviewers to generate extra questions or alter them so it can meet
participants intelligence, or belief. It is also to provide a detailed explanation on their responses.
(Zhang, Wildemuth, nd)
As for evidence and referencing purposes, researchers will jot down their responses using pen
and notebook, whilst pictorial evidences will be taken using camera to document the process.
Other than that, answers obtained will be recorded using a recording application in mobile
phones.








3.2 DATA ANALYSIS
3.2.1 THEMATIC ANALYSIS
Thematic analysis is historically a conventional practice in qualitative research which involves
searching through data to find out any similar patterns. It is also a descriptive presentation of
qualitative data. (Jodi Aronson, 1994) However according to Rosemarie Anderson (2007), as a
method it has received little detailed attention and accounts of how to carry out a thematic
analysis are scarce. Thus, many researchers take pride over what they did when carrying out
thematic analysis. (Pearson Education, 2010)
For this research, credible information must be achieved to proceed with our objectives. Other
instruments for evidence and reference purposes will be used such as camera, recording device
on mobiles, notes and papers to create transcripts. Using transcripts collected from the
interview, the answers will be categorized by searching through data to identify recurrent ideas.
Through thematic analysis, informants answers and opinions will be considered. Thus, the
application of thematic analysis is hoped to be able to provide insights towards teenagers
perceptions on grapevine communication in campus.










CHAPTER 4: REFERENCES

Anderson, R. (2007). Descriptive Presentation of Qualitative Data. Thematic Content Analysis
(TCA) - , 1-4.
Aronson, J. (1994). A Pragmatic View of Thematic Analysis. The Qualitative Report , 50-62.
Barron Wells, N. S. (1994). Managing Your Grapevine: A Key to Quality Productivity. Executive
Development , 24-27.
Bisen, V. P. (2008). Business Communication. Bangalore.
Carolyn Boyce, P. N. (2006). Conducting In-Depth Interviews A Guide for Designing In Depth
Interviews for Evaluation Output. Pathfinder International Tool Series - Montoring and
Evaluation (2) C , 3-6.
Davis, K. (1971). Management Communication and the Grapevine. 43-45.
Dictionary of Business Management. (2006). Attraction-Selection-Attrition Model. Retrieved July
Wednesday, 2012, from Encyclopedia.com : http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O18-
attractionselectnttrtnmdl.html
Dobidge, D. (n.d.). I heard it through the Grapevine: Generating Rumors is an Unsafe Sport. p.
1.
Encyclopedia Britannica. (2012). Collective Behavior (Sociology). Retrieved July Wednesday,
2012, from Encyclopedia Britannica:
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/125544/collective-behaviour#toc25293
Family Health International. (2004). Module 3 - In depth Interview. Retrieved July Thursday,
2012, from Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector's Field Guide:
http://www.fhi360.org/nr/rdonlyres/eprvylcljxmbssmuizj3rcnycde2pnlowtoa7nxedbjl23jqjpitifimwv
6v2tmsmyocepirpjpfrd/interviews1.pdf
Grant Michelson, A. v. (2010). Gossip in Organizations: Contexts, Consequences, and. Group
and Organization Management , 371-374.
Hay, R. D. (n.d.). A Brief History of Internal Communication Through the 1940s. The Journal of
Business Communication , 1.
Lund Research Ltd. (2010). Purposive Sampling: An Overview. Retrieved July Monday, 2012,
from Laerd Dissertation: http://dissertation.laerd.com/articles/purposive-sampling-an-
overview.php
Mishra, J. M. (1990). Managing the Grapevine. 213-215.
Palys, T. (n.d.). Purposive Sampling. 1-4.
Pearson Education. (2010). Chapter 21: Thematic Analysis - Overview. Retrieved July
Thursday, 2012, from Pearson:
http://wps.pearsoned.co.uk/ema_uk_he_howitt_resmethpsy_2/77/19811/5071812.cw/index.html
Shahid, T. (2011). Significance of Grapevine Networks in Internal Communications For
Business Today. Dhaka.
Suzanne M Crampton, J. W. (2001). The Informal Communication Network: Factors Influencing
Grapevine Activity. 569-586.
University of Twente. (2010). ATTRACTION-SELECTION-ATTRITION FRAMEWORK.
Retrieved July Wednesday, 2012, from University of Twente:
http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Public%20Relations%2C%20A
dvertising%2C%20Marketing%20and%20Consumer%20Behavior/Attraction-Selection-
Attrition_Framework(ASA).doc/
Wadsworth Cengage Learning. (2005). Non-Probability Sampling Strategies. Retrieved July
Thursday, 2012, from Sampling Methods:
http://www.wadsworth.com/psychology_d/templates/student_resources/workshops/res_methd/s
ampling/sampling_29.html
Woodard, J. D. (2008). INFORMAL COMMUNICATION: A CASE STUDY OF HIGH
SCHOOLCOMMUNICATION FREQUENCIES, PATTERNS, AND ATTITUDES TOWARD
Change. Minneapolis.
Yan Zhang, B. M. (n.d.). Unstructured Interviews. Retrieved July Wednesday, 2012, from
http://www.ischool.utexas.edu/~yanz/Unstructured_interviews.pdf