Afifi, T. (Ed.). (2015). Biological and physiological approaches to communication. Communication Monographs, 82, 1–3.Google Scholar

Baker, R., Angus, D., Smith-Conway, E., Baker, K. S., Gallois, C., Smith, A., Wiles, J., & Chenery, H. J. (2015). Visualizing conversations between care home staff and residents with dementia. Ageing and Society, 35, 270–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, S. C., & Watson, B. M. (Eds.). (2015). Understanding the health communication process. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34, 599–603.Google Scholar

Benckendorff, P., & Zehrer, A. (2013). A network analysis of tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research, 43, 121–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cargile, A., & Giles, H. (1996). Intercultural communication training: A critical review and new theoretical perspective. In Burleson, B. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 19 (pp. 385–423). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Cikara, M., Botvinick, M. M., & Fiske, S. T. (2011). Us versus them: Social identity shapes neural responses to intergroup competition and harm. Psychological Science, 22, 306–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clément, R., Bielajew, C., & Sampasivam, S. (2016). Towards the emergence of a social neuroscience of intergroup communication. In Giles, H. & Maass, A. (Eds.), Advances in intergroup communication. New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Coupland, N. (1984). Accommodation at work: Some phonological data and their implications. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 46, 49–70.Google Scholar

Coupland, N., & Giles, H. (Eds.). (1988). Communicative accommodation: Recent developments. Language and Communication, 8 (3 & 4).Google Scholar

Cuddy, A. J., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2008). Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: The stereotype content model and the BIAS map. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 61–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, C., Gamon, M., & Dumais, S. (2011). Mark my words! Linguistic style accommodation in social media. Proceedings of the 20th international conference on the World Wide Web (pp. 745–54). New York, NY: ACM.Google Scholar

Dragojevic, M., & Giles, H. (2014). The Reference Frame Effect: An intergroup perspective on language attitudes. Human Communication Research, 40, 91–111.Google Scholar

Ehala, M., Giles, H., & Harwood, J. (2016). Conceptualizing the diversity of intergroup settings: The Web Model. In Giles, H. & Maass, A. (Eds.), Advances in intergroup communication (pp. 301–316). New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Fiske, S. T. (2012). Journey to the edges: Social structures and neural maps of intergroup processes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 1–12.Google Scholar

Floyd, K., & Afifi, T. D. (2011). Biological and physiological perspectives on interpersonal communication. In Knapp, M. L. & Daly, J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (4th edn., pp. 87–130). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Floyd, K., & Riforgiate, S. (2009). Affectionate communication received from spouse predicts stress hormone levels in healthy adults. Communication Monographs, 75, 351–368.Google Scholar

Forbes, C. E. (2015). On social neuroscience methodologies and their applicability to group processes and intergroup relations. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 18, 348–365.Google Scholar

Gallois, C. (2003). Reconciliation through communication in intercultural encounters: Potential or peril? Journal of Communication, 53, 5–15.Google Scholar

Gallois, C., & Giles, H. (2015). Communication accommodation theory. In Tracy, K. (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of language and social interaction (pp. 159–176). Boston, MA: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Gangi, K., & Soliz, J. (2016). De-dichotomizing intergroup and interpersonal dynamics: Perspectives on communication, identity, and relationships. In Giles, H. & Maass, A. (Eds.), Advances in intergroup communication (pp. 35–50). New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Gasiorek, J., & Giles, H. (2012). Effects of inferred motive on evaluations of nonaccommodative communication. Human Communication Research, 38, 309–332.Google Scholar

Gasiorek, J., & Van de Poel, K. (2012). Divergent perspectives on language-discordant mobile medical professionals’ communication with colleagues: An exploratory study. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 40, 368–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giles, H. (Ed.). (1984). The dynamics of speech accommodation. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 46.Google Scholar

Giles, H., Gasiorek, J., & Soliz, J. (Eds.) (2015). Accommodating new vistas. Language and Communication, 41, 1–5.Google Scholar

Giles, H., & Hewstone, M. (1982). Cognitive structures, speech and social situations: Two integrative models. Language Sciences, 4, 187–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giles, H., Ota, H., & Foley, M. (2013). Tourism: An intergroup communication model with Russian inflections. Russian Journal of Communication, 5, 229–243.Google Scholar

Giles, H., & Soliz, J. (2014). Communication accommodation theory: A situated framework for interpersonal, family, and intergroup dynamics. In Braithwaite, D. O. & Schrodt, P. (Eds.), Engaging interpersonal theories (2nd edn., pp. 157–169). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Giles, H., & Stohl, M. (in press). Fans, rivalries, communities, and nations: An intergroup approach to communication and sports. In A. Billings (Ed.), Sports communication as a field. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Giles, H., Willemyns, M., Gallois, C. & Anderson, M. C. (2007). Accommodating a new frontier: The context of law enforcement. In Fiedler, K. (Ed.), Social communication (pp. 129–162). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Gudykunst, W. B. (2005). An anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory of strangers’ intercultural adjustment. In Gudykunst, W. B. (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 419–457). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Harwood, J., Soliz, J., & Lin, M-C. (2006). Communication accommodation theory: An intergroup approach to family relationships. In Brathwaite, D. O. & Baxter, L. A. (Eds.), Engaging theories in family communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 129–34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Hehman, J. A., & Bugental, D. B. (2015). Responses to patronizing communication and factors that attenuate those responses. Psychology and Aging, 30, 552–560.Google Scholar

Hewett, D., Watson, B. M., & Gallois, C. (2015). Communication between hospital doctors: Underaccommodation and interpretability. Language and Communication, 41, 71–83.Google Scholar

Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York, NY: Guildford Press.Google Scholar

Kenny, D. A., & Ledermann, T. (2010). Detecting, measuring, and testing dyadic patterns in the actor-partner interdependence model. Journal of Family Psychology, 24, 359–66.Google Scholar

Marlow, M., & Giles, H. (2008). Who you tink you, talkin propah? Hawaiian Pidgin demarginalized. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 3, 53–68.Google Scholar

McDonald, D. D., Gifford, T., & Walsh, S. (2011). Effect of a virtual pain coach on older adults’ pain communication: A pilot study. Pain Management Nursing, 12, 50–56.Google Scholar

Morton, T. A., Wright, R. G., Peters, K., Reynolds, K. J., & Haslam, S. A. (2012). Social identity and the dynamics of organizational communication. In Giles, H. (Ed.), The handbook of intergroup communication (pp. 319–330). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Nettle, D., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (1997). Social markers and the evolution of reciprocal exchange. Current Anthropology, 38, 93–99.Google Scholar

Noller, P. (1984). Nonverbal communication and marital interaction. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.Google Scholar

O’Donnell, M. B., Falk, E. B., & Lieberman, M. D. (2015). Social in, social out: How the brain responds to social language with more social language. Communication Monographs, 82, 31–63.Google Scholar

Page-Gould, E., & Akinola, M. (2015). Incorporating neuroendronice methods into intergroup relations research. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 18, 366–383.Google Scholar

Parcha, J. M. (2014). Accommodating twitter: Communication accommodation theory and classroom interactions. Communication Teacher, 28, 229–235.Google Scholar

Peters, K., Morton, T. A., & Haslam, S. A. (2010). Communication silos and social identity complexity. In Giles, H., Reid, S. A., & Harwood, J. (Eds.), The dynamics of intergroup communication (pp. 221–34). New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Pfister, D. S. (2014). Networked media, networked rhetorics: Attention and deliberation in the early blogosphere. State College, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar

Pitts, M., & Harwood, J. (2015). Communication accommodation competence: The nature and nurture of accommodative resources across the lifespan. Language and Communication, 41, 89–99.Google Scholar

Rauchbauer, B., Majdandžić, J., Hummer, A., Windischberger, C., & Lamm, C. (2015). Distinct neural processes are engaged in the modulation of mimicry by social group-membership and emotional expressions. Cortex, 70, 49–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. M. (1990). Japanese foreigner talk: Convergence or divergence? Journal of Asian-Pacific Communication, 1, 135–189.Google Scholar

Ryan, E. B., Meredith, S. D., MacLean, M. J., & Orange, J. B. (1995). Changing the way we talk with elders: Promoting health using the communication enhancement model. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 41, 89–107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Shaw, R., & Frost, N. (2015). Breaking out of the silo mentality. The Psychologist, 20, 638–41.Google Scholar

Soliz, J., & Giles, H. (2014). Relational and identity processes in communication: A contextual and meta-analytical review of Communication Accommodation Theory. In Cohen, E. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 38 (pp. 106–43). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Soliz, J., & Rittenour, C. (2012). Family as an intergroup arena. In Giles, H. (Ed.), The handbook of intergroup communication (pp. 331–43). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Spence, P. R., Westerman, D., Edwards, C., & Edwards, A. (2014). Welcoming our robot overlords: Initial expectations about interaction with a robot. Communication Research Reports, 31(3), 272–280.Google Scholar

Thakerar, J. N., Giles, H., & Cheshire, J. The psychological and linguistic parameters of speech accommodation theory. In C. Fraser & K. R. Scherer (Eds.), Advances in the social psychology of language (pp. 205–55). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Ting-Toomey, S. (2005). Identity negotiation theory: Crossing cultural boundaries. In Gudykunst, W. B. (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 235–56). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Watson, B. M., Angus, D., Gore, L., & Farmer, J (2015). Communication in open disclosure conversations about adverse events in hospitals. Language and Communication, 41, 57–70.Google Scholar

Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J. H., & Jackson, D. (1967). Pragmatics of human communication. New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar

Weber, R., Popova, L., & Mangus, M. (2012). Universal morality, medicated narratives, and neural synchrony. In Tamborini, R. (Ed.), Media and the moral mind (pp. 26–42). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar