Module 2 Overview of Communication Theory 2024 PDF

COM1103: COMMUNICATION THEORY MODULE 2: OVERVIEWOF COMMUNICATIONTHEORY EXPECTED LEARNING OUTCOMES At the end of this module, the learner should be able to: 1. Define communication theory; 2. Differentiate the two classifications of communication theory; 3. Present communication theo...

COM1103: COMMUNICATION THEORY MODULE 2: OVERVIEWOF COMMUNICATIONTHEORY EXPECTED LEARNING OUTCOMES At the end of this module, the learner should be able to: 1. Define communication theory; 2. Differentiate the two classifications of communication theory; 3. Present communication theories that highlight the characteristics of paradigm of thought where they belong.  MODULE 2: OVERVIEW OF COMMUNICATION THEORY Defining Communication Theory The Significance of Communication Theory Criteria for Evaluating Communication Theory Two Worldviews in Communication Theory Standards of Objective and Interpretive Theories  DEFINING COMMUNICATION THEORY ! Communication theory usually refers to the body of theories for understanding the communication process. ! A set of propositions that show the relationship between the various variables that are at work in the communication process. EXAMPLE The Shannon-Weaver Model of Communication Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver, 1949 EXAMPLE Wiener's Interactive Model of Communication Norbert Wiener, 1967 EXAMPLE Berlo's SMCR Model of Communication David Berlo, 1960 EXAMPLE Osgood and Schramm's Model of Communication Wilbur Schramm & Charles E. Osgood, 1954 ! Communication theory can refer to a single theory, or it can be used to designate the collective wisdom found in the entire body of theories related to communication. EXAMPLE Link: Encyclopedia of Communication Theory (Stephen W. Littlejohn & Karen A. Foss) EXAMPLE EXAMPLE EXAMPLE ! Communication theory is a set of constructs linked together, relational statements consistent with each other and that explain what happens in communication. ! Another way one can look at communication theory is by seeing it as propositions concerning the various things we do in communication. In communication theory, we try to explain the various phenomena that constitute communication.  THE SIGNIFICANCE OF COMMUNICATION THEORY Communication is one of our most pervasive, important, and complex clusters of behavior. If there is a need to know about our world, that need extends to all aspects of human behavior, especially communication. Specifically, theories of communication help you become more competent and adaptive. You need to gain an understanding of what happens during communication and an ability to adapt to circumstances. By developing an understanding of the variety of the theories to explain communication, you can interpret communication experiences in more flexible, useful, and discriminating ways. The basic justification for studying theories of communication is that they provide a set of conceptual tools. Lastly... Theories function as guidebooks that help us understand, explain, interpret, judge, and participate in the communication happening around us.  CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING COMMUNICATION THEORY As you encounter theories of communication, you will need a basis for judging one against another. The following is a list of criteria that can assist you in systematically evaluating theories. All have limitations, so you will not find a theory for which each of these criteria holds "true" with equal weight. Furthermore, certain criteria will be more important to certain kinds of theories. Criteria for Evaluating Communication Theory Scope Testability Parsimony Utility Heurism 1. Scope How much does the theory describe and explain? A theory's scope is its comprehensiveness or inclusiveness. A theory that covers a sufficiently broad domain is considered a good theory. One of the powers of a good practical theory is that it can be applied to richly different situations and still be helpful. The greater the number of phenomena a theory explains, the more powerful the theory. 2. Testability Is it testable? The claims advanced by a theory can be investigated to determine whether they are accurate or not. If a theoretical claim or predictions is faulty, we should have a way to detect this. We should also be able to verify theoretical predictions that are correct. If we can't test a theory, we can’t evaluate its accuracy. 3. Parsimony Is it appropriately simple? If two theories are equally valid, the one with the simplest logical explanation is better. A theory should be as simple as possible without sacrificing completeness. We need to be careful with parsimony, however, as highly parsimonious explanations may be overly simple and may leave out many important factors that expand our insight into what is happening. 4. Utility Is it useful? A good theory should have a practical use. The goals of theories are to increase understanding, prediction, and/or quality of life. How we evaluate the practical utility of a theory should be based on the goals of that particular theory. 5. Heurism Does it generate new thoughts or insights? A good theory provokes new ideas, insights, thinking, and research which will expand the horizons of knowledge. Will the theory generate new ideas for research and additional theory? Does it have heuristic value? 1. How much does the theory describe and explain? 2. Can the theory be tested? 3. Is the theory as simple as it can be? 4. Does the theory have practical utility? 5. Does the theory generate new thinking? Most theories will not fully meet all five of these evaluative criteria. Thus, you will have to decide which criterion or criteria are most important to your evaluations of theories. Evaluating theories is not an objective activity. Instead, the criteria we use to judge theories reflect on our subjective values, preferences, perspectives, and goals. As we study theories all throughout the semester, keep in mind these standards and criteria.  SEATWORK # 6 Choose a metaphor for theorizing. In your opinion, is doing theory like a ”Lens” or should we compare it to a “Mirror”? Explain your argument.  TWO WORLDVIEWS IN STUDYING COMMUNICATION THEORY Two Worldviews in Studying Communication Theory Objective Theory Interpretive Theory 1. Objective Theory The assumption that truth is singular and is accessible through unbiased sensory observation; committed to uncovering cause-and-effect relationships (Griffin et al., p. 14). 2. Interpretive Theory The linguistic work of assigning meaning or value to communicative texts; assumes that multiple meanings or truths are possible. (Griffin et al., p. 15).  Objective Theory Interpretive Theory There is a scientific There is no objective knowledge out there that knowledge out there can be discovered by the waiting to be discovered. human mind. [Reality is constructed [Cause and effect/ through the meanings objective social facts] created by individuals.]  Objective Theory Interpretive Theory Researchers simply find, Researchers actively seek observe, describe and/or to acknowledge, identify, or predict human behavior, unmask the ideology behind particularly through the the message under testing theory. scrutiny. [The testing of theory is [They are interested in where the scientific understanding human method comes into play.] experiences.]  Objective Theory Interpretive Theory Social scientists see the For interpretivists, reality is world in a very objective, created through social realist ontological point of interaction. The social view. interaction, and thus reality, are primarily what people If we can see and/or touch perceive them to be something through our (experiences and meaning). research, then it really is not complex at its basic Our subjective experiences root. create our individual realities. This means people construct reality out of their own experiences.  Objective Theory Interpretive Theory Social scientists strongly believe An interpretive researcher that research should be free of should not be a interference from religious, political, and other personal disinterested, objective influences that may alter the scholar who reports the objectivity of a researcher's phenomena. process and/or findings. Instead, an interpretive A researcher should be a researcher is a subjective disinterested scholar, one who participant who is actively observes and reports on involved in the research phenomena without allowing process. morals or values to interfere.  SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS In your own opinion, do media products influence their consumers (viewers/ listeners/readers)? In what way? Explain. EXAMPLE EXAMPLE EXAMPLE For example, while a social scientist might try to predict a relationship between how much someone plays World of Warcraft and their violent behavior(s), an interpretivist is more likely to try to understand how a player understands and/or experiences the violence in the game. EXAMPLE Social scientists could be interested in the relationship between levels of violence and how much someone plays video games, such as World of Warcraft or Resident Evil. This relationship will differ quite a bit depending on countless variables: what kind of video games does the person play, how long do people play the games per day, the person’s psychological state before and during the play, their relational status, their sex/gender, and the list goes on and on. EXAMPLE The study on video game moral concerns is a prime example of how interpretive researchers are interested in exploring how human nature evolves around a particular issue in a given context. A paramount idea is that the morality of the players is socially constructed. EXAMPLE When you see rain falling to the ground we all experience this reality differently. The constructions of "rain" differ, which lead to different realities. EXAMPLE A researcher would have a hard time trying to explain from an empirical and objectivist (social scientific) point of view the varied interpretations of what the cubist face means to each one of you. All of us come to the picture with different lived experiences or backgrounds. The subjective nature of art makes it interesting and brings to the table the broad diversity of opinions. EXAMPLE An interpretive researcher could conduct in-depth interviews with individuals on their understanding of the painting. The researcher will more than likely get numerous responses. How have social interactions, upbringing, and culture shaped how participants perceive the face? How does the background of the researcher influence how they see the face? The extent to which the researcher is involved in the process is an important factor to consider. EXAMPLE As a researcher, you are studying a group of people and trying to convey their experiences. Your interpretation of their experiences should make sense if they read it. It should also make sense so others can also understand the experiences of the group(s) you studied. Examples of Objective and Interpretive Theories EXAMPLE Objective Theory EXAMPLE Cultivation Theory George Gerbner EXAMPLE Heavy Viewers EXAMPLE Heavy Viewers EXAMPLE Theory of Planned Behavior/ Reasoned Action Icek Ajzen and Martin Fishbein Why do we do what we do and act the way we act? If we planned to do it, we're more likely to do it. In this theory, our aim is to know predictors of intentions to know why individual do what he does.  ATTITUDE TO BEHAVIOR / THE BEHAVIOR BEHAVIORAL ACTION INTENTION SUBJECTIVE NORMS PERCEIVED BEHAVIORAL CONTROL Enjoyable and good benefits Supported by wife and friends/ influenced by health magazine More likely to Stronger engage in behavior intentions Feel in control and are capable of doing behavior Interpretive Theory EXAMPLE Symbolic Interactionism George Herbert Mead and Herbert Blumer EXAMPLE Symbolic interaction theory is frequently used in the study of the influence of advertising because advertisers often succeed by encouraging the audience to perceive their products as symbols that have meaning beyond the products' actual function. This is called "product positioning". EXAMPLE Car is a symbol of mobility. BMW or Mercedes Benz is a sign of wealth and success. EXAMPLE We have decided that an array of blue, red, white and yellow with symbols of sun and stars, represent not only our nation but its values and beliefs. The flag has meaning because we have given it meaning, and that meaning now governs certain behavior toward the flag.  Culture Industry Theodor Ardono and Max Horkheimer EXAMPLE EXAMPLE EXAMPLE EXAMPLE EXAMPLE EXAMPLE EXAMPLE EXAMPLE EXAMPLE  SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS Choose a metaphor for theorizing. In your opinion, is doing theory like a ”Lens” or should we compare it to a “Mirror”? Explain your argument.  STANDARDS OF OBJECTIVE AND INTERPRETIVE THEORIES  Objective Theory Interpretive Theory Prediction of future events Clarification of values Explanation of the data New understanding of people Relative simplicity Aesthetic appeal Hypotheses that can be tested Community of agreement Practical utility Reform of society Quantitative Research Qualitative Research Griffin, E., Ledbetter, A., & Sparks, G. (2019). A First Look at Communication (10th ed). McGraw-Hill Education. Theory What makes an objective theory good? 1. Prediction of future events Objective Theory A good objective theory predicts what will happen. Prediction is possible only when we are dealing with things we can see, hear, touch, smell, and taste over and over again. As we repeatedly notice the same things happening in similar situations, we begin to speak of invariable patterns or universal laws. 2. Explanation of the data Objective Theory A good objective theory explains an event or human behavior. An objective theory should bring clarity to an otherwise jumbled state of affairs; it should draw order out of chaos. A good social science theory describes the process, focuses our attention on what’s crucial, and helps us ignore that which makes little difference. When you evaluate an objective theory, keep in mind that the reason something happens becomes as important as the fact that it does. 3. Relative simplicity Objective Theory A good objective theory is as simple as possible— no more complex than it has to be. “Shave off” any assumptions, variables, or concepts that aren’t necessary to explain what’s going on. The rule of parsimony—another label for the same principle—states that given two plausible explanations for the same event, we should accept the less complex version. 4. Hypothesis that can be tested Objective Theory A good objective theory is testable. If a prediction is wrong, there ought to be a way to demonstrate the error. Falsifiability - the requirement that a scientific theory be stated in such a way that it can be tested and disproved if it is indeed wrong. If it isn’t possible to gather clear evidence that goes against a theory’s claims, then it’s also impossible to collect evidence that clearly supports those claims. 5. Practical utility Objective Theory Over time, a good objective theory is useful. Since an oft-cited goal of social science is to help people have more control over their daily lives, people facing the types of thorny social situations that the theory addresses should be able to benefit from its wisdom. The wider the scope of a theory’s application, the greater its practical utility. 6. Quantitative research Objective Theory As the heading suggests, scientists tend to appeal to numbers as they gather evidence to support their theories. Since objective theorists aim to mirror reality, it makes sense for them to measure and report what they discover in precise numerical terms rather than in linguistic terms, which are open to interpretation. More than other quantitative methods, objective theorists use experiments and surveys to test their predictions.  Positivist Theory General attempt to transfer the methods of natural sciences to social sciences and to identify causal relationships in social sciences (cause and effect). Positivism is the idea that knowledge could be gained only through empirical, observable, measurable phenomena examined through the scientific method.  Positivist Theory This fascination for the understanding of causality in communication reflects the scientific and positivistic paradigm in communication research, which is particularly interested in revealing causes and effects. Examples of these are the sets of theories that show the evolution of theoretical perspectives that explain the effects of media on individual audiences and society at large.  Postpositivist Theory The postpositivist paradigm evolved from the positivist paradigm. This theory is based on empirical observation guided by the scientific method, but it recognizes that humans and human behavior are not as constant as elements of the physical world.  Social Science Social science borrows heavily from the scientific method. Social science is an organized method of research combining empirical observations of behavior with inductive and deductive logic to confirm and test theories that are then used to describe and/or predict human activity. What makes an interpretive theory good? 1. Clarification of values Interpretive Theory A good interpretive theory brings people’s values into the open. The theorist actively seeks to acknowledge, identify, or unmask the ideology behind the message under scrutiny. Of course, not all interpretive scholars occupy the same moral ground, but there are core values most of them share. Critical theorists, in particular, insist that scholars can no longer remain ethically detached from the people they are studying or from the political and economic implications of their work. 2. New understanding of people Interpretive Theory Interpretive scholarship is good when it offers fresh insight into the human condition. As opposed to social science theorists who attempt to identify communication patterns common to all people, an interpretive scholar typically examines a one-of-a- kind speech community that exhibits a specific language style. Science wants an objective explanation; humanism desires subjective understanding. 3. Aesthetic appeal Interpretive Theory The way a theorist presents ideas can capture the imagination of a reader just as much as the wisdom and originality of the theory he or she has created. As with any type of communication, both content and style make a difference. Objective theorists are constrained by the standard format for acceptable scientific writing— propositions, hypotheses, operationalized constructs, and the like. But interpretive theorists have more room for creativity, so aesthetic appeal becomes an issue. By artfully incorporating imagery, metaphor, illustration, and story into the core of the theory, the theorist can make his or her creation come alive for others. 4. Community of agreement Interpretive Theory We can identify a good interpretive theory by the amount of support it generates within a community of scholars who are interested and knowledgeable about the same type of communication. Interpretation of meaning is subjective, but whether the interpreter’s case is reasonable or totally off the wall is ultimately decided by others in the field. An interpretive theory can’t meet the community of agreement standard unless it becomes the subject of widespread analysis. 5. Reform of society Interpretive Theory A good interpretive theory often generates change. Critical interpreters are reformers who can have an impact on society. They want to expose and publicly resist the ideology that permeates the accepted wisdom of a culture. Theory has the capacity to challenge the guiding assumptions of the culture, to raise fundamental questions regarding contemporary social life, to foster reconsideration of that which is “taken for granted,” and thereby to generate fresh alternatives for social action. Along with many interpretive scholars, critical theorists tend to reject any notion of permanent truth or meaning. They see society’s economic, political, social, religious, and educational institutions as socially constructed by unjust communication practices that create or perpetuate gross imbalances of power. The aim of their scholarship is to unmask these communication practices in an attempt to stimulate change. 6. Qualitative research Interpretive Theory While scientists use numbers to support their theories, interpretive scholars use words. That’s the basic difference between quantitative and qualitative research. Qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or to interpret, phenomena in terms of the meaning people bring to them. The interpretive scholar’s qualitative tools include open-ended interviews, focus groups, visual texts, artifacts, and introspection. But textual analysis and ethnography are the two methods most often used to study how humans use signs and symbols to create and infer meaning.  Interpretive Communities Interpretive scholars refer to themselves with a bewildering variety of brand names: rhetorical critic, humanists, social constructionists, critical theorists, hermeneuticists, poststructuralists, deconstructivists, phenomenologists, cultural studies researchers, and social action theorists, as well as combinations of these terms. There’s no common term like scientist that includes them all. So from this point on we’ll use the designation interpretive scholars or the noun form interpreters to refer to the entire group, and use rhetoricians, humanists, postmodernists, or critical scholars only when singling out a particular subgroup. QUESTIONS? SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS ANNOUNCEMENT MODULE 2: OVERVIEW OF COMMUNICATION THEORY READINGS: VIDEOS: "Mapping the Theories of "The Idea of Theory" (Stephen W. Communication" (Kathleen Littlejohn & Karen A. Foss) McConnell & Andrew F. Wood) "Launching Your Study of "Introduction to Communication Communication Theory" (Em Griffin, Theory" (Dr. Ron Thomas, Jr.) Andrew Ledbetter, & Glenn Sparks) "Talk About Theory" (Em Griffin, Andrew Ledbetter, & Glenn Sparks) "Understanding and Evaluating Mass Communication Theory" (Stanley J. Baran & Dennis K. Davis) THANK YOU