So the original question was something along these lines:
A Monk/Sorc casts shocking grasp and attacks with his unarmed strike, scoring a critical. Does the shocking grasp multiply as well?
No.
Simple explanation:
'Unarmed Strike' by a monk is a melee attack that is no different than a fighters weapon based melee attack. The SRD (and the PHB) both clearly indicate that a unarmed attack by a monk (or anyone with improved unarmed strike) is an 'armed' attack. Thus, the 'enchanted' weapons of the monk are no different than the 'enchanted' weapons of the fighter. I.E. An 'unarmed strike' by the monk that scores a critical doubles his unarmed strike damage, then adds shocking grasp damage, and any other additional damage such as rogue sneak attack damage.
The character could take Improved Critical (weapon) and specify unarmed attack as his weapon, thereby threatening a crit on 19-20. The character could take Improved Critical (weapon) specifying the spell Shocking Grasp as his weapon since this choice was clarified as valid by the much disrespected Sage and other errata sources, and thusly the character would threaten a critical on a roll of 19-20 when performing the 'touch attack' attack action with the spell cast. If she hits, she doubles the shocking grasp damage, and adds sneak attack damage if applicable, but does not get the unarmed strike damage from being a monk as it was not an unarmed strike.
This makes some sense when you consider that a monk, as a magically enhanced martial artist (like 3ed would have you perceive), will attack and not care about your armor other than trying to hurt you through it - he's just trying to 'hit' you for damage with his hands, elbows, shoulder, knees, feet, head, etc. whereas the Sorceror is trying to touch you anywhere they can to discharge their spell. They can touch your little toe on your off foot to hurt you - the monk has to actually hit you somewhere where he can damage you.
That's per the rules.
Now, if you happen to be in my game, and you're playing a monk with enough levels to actually hit something and do damage, and enough sorc/wizard levels to actually access some useful spells for your level - then in my opinion, you've sufficiently mucked yourself over enought that I'll take some pity on you and rule that if you cast the touch attack spell and attack with the unarmed strike, I'll tell you to roll with the unarmed strike bonus to your attack, but use the better of the two crit ranges (imp crit Shock Grsp or imp crit Unarm Strike). Threaten a crit, roll to confirm for both, double whichever confirms (or both) and then add the two together.
My reasoning? A touch attack works anywhere on the foe - even the little toe. An unarmed strike is a bit more restricted - you actually have to hit somewhere damaging. The unarmed strike locations could easily be perceived as a subset of the melee touch attack locations, and thus, any hit by the unarmed strike should be considered a hit for the touch attack.
Additionally, should your unarmed strike miss, I'd check to see if what you rolled would hit on a touch attack AC. If so, you'd still do your shocking grasp damage, but not your unarmed strike damage.
Also, in no case is the sneak attack damage doubled.
This thought should hold regardless of not being a monk and striking unarmed or not being a magic user and striking with a ring of shocking grasp (though I'd argue that if you are not a magic user using imp crit (shocking grasp) or at least casting the spell - how do you get a critical strike with the spell?? Only on a natural 20 would I allow that)
My 2 cents.
Wasn't there a question about trip? I seem to have lost that one ...
