Columbia Accident Investigation Board.Report of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board. Volume I. GPO and NASA, Washington, D.C., August 2003.
2.
SmithS., What is ‘Good’ Technical Communication? A Comparison of the Standards of Writing and Engineering Instructors, Technical Communication Quarterly, 12: 1, pp. 7–24, 2003.
3.
DornheimM. A., One-in-Two-Hundred Chance, Aviation Week & Space Technology, pp. 30–33, March 3, 2003.
4.
WinsorD., The Construction of Knowledge in Organizations: Asking the Right Questions about the Challenger, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 4: 2, pp. 7–20, 1990.
5.
HerndlC. G.FennellB. A., and MillerC. R., Understanding Failures in Organizations: The Accidents at Three Mile Island and the Shuttle Challenger,” Textual Dynamics of the Professions: Historical and Contemporary Studies in Writing in Professional Communities, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 1991.
6.
MooreP., When Politeness is Fatal: Technical Communication and the Challenger Accident, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 6: 3, pp. 269–292, 1992.
7.
GrossA. and WalzerA. E., Positivists, Post-Modernists, Aristotelians, and the Challenger Disaster, College English, 56, pp. 420–433, 1994.
8.
DombrowskiP. M., Challenger and the Social Contingency of Meaning: Two Lessons for the Technical Communication Classroom, Technical Communication Quarterly, 1: 3, pp. 73–86, 1992.
9.
PaceR. C., Technical Communication, Group Differentiation, and the Decision to Launch the Space Shuttle Challenger, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 18: 3, pp. 207–220, 1988.
10.
SauerB. A., The Rhetoric of Risk: Technical Documentation in Hazardous Environments, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey, 2003.
11.
DombrowskiP. M., The Lessons of the Challenger Disaster, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 43: 4, pp. 211–216, 1991.
12.
United States.Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident, Report to the President by the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident, 86–16083, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1986.
13.
United States.Congress, House, Investigations of the Challenger Accident: Report of the Committee on Science and Technology, House of Representatives, Ninety-ninth Congress, 87–4033, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1987.
14.
FeynmanR. P., Personal Observations on Reliability of Shuttle, Report of the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident. Vol. II, Appendix F., U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., June 6, 1986.
15.
LeFevreK. B., Invention as a Social Act, Published for the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, Illinois, 1987.
16.
BazermanC., Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 1988.
17.
BlylerN. R. and ThrallsC., Professional Communication: The Social Perspective, Sage, Newbury Park, California, 1993.
18.
RudeC., Toward an Expanded Concept of rhetorical Delivery: The Uses of Reports in Public Policy Debates, Technical Communication Quarterly, 13: 3, pp. 271–288, 2004.
19.
CabbageM. and HarwoodW., Comm Check …: The Final Flight of the Shuttle Columbia, Free Press, New York, New York, 2004.
20.
VaughanD., The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 1996.
21.
DombrowskiPaul M.Ethics in Technical Communication. Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, Massachusetts, 2000.
22.
DombrowskiPaul M.Humanistic Aspects of Technical Communication, Baywood, Amityville, New York, 1994. DombrowskiPaul M.Language and Empiricism, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 32: 1, 2002.
23.
DombrowskiPaul M.Challenger and the Social Contingency of Meaning: Two Lessons for the Technical Communication Classroom, Technical Communication Quarterly, 1: 3, 1992.
24.
DombrowskiPaul M.Can Ethics Be Technologized? Lessons from Challenger, Philosophy, and Rhetoric, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 38: 3, 1995.
25.
DombrowskiPaul M.Plastic Language for Plastic Science: The Rhetoric of Comrade Lysenko, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 31: 3, 2001.
26.
DombrowskiPaul M.The Lessons of the Challenger Investigations, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 34: 4, 1991.