{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01702127659574468, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00851063829787234, 'mean_word_length': 5.660377358490566, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Sociotechnical communication in engineering: an exploration and unveiling of common myths

As an area of scholarly interest, engineering communication has begun to come into its own. Its emergence as a dynamic area is not new, but recent efforts have greatly promoted the importance of engineering communication in multiple contexts. Historical accounts accentuate the degree to which the development of engineering communication is linked to technical communication. Indeed, from its inception in the US ‘until the 1950s technical writing and engineering writing were synonymous.’ At different junctures over the past 40 years, US engineering communication has been buffeted by several factors, including