Introduction to Communication Theory: Your Essential Student Guide

TL;DR: A Quick Overview

This guide provides an introduction to communication theory, explaining what theories are, how communication is defined, and the fundamental differences between objective and interpretive approaches. Based on Em Griffin's "A First Look at Communication Theory," it covers the core concepts of systematic, informed hunches, the relational process of communication, and the criteria for evaluating theory quality. Understand these foundational ideas to excel in your communication studies!

What is Communication Theory? Understanding the Basics

When delving into the fascinating field of communication, it's crucial to first understand what a "theory" actually is. According to University of Arizona communication theorist Judee Burgoon, a theory is simply a "set of systematic, informed hunches about the way things operate." This definition highlights three key aspects:

• A Set of Hunches: A theory isn't just one isolated idea; it involves multiple thoughts or possibilities. It means we don't have all the answers yet, and there's an element of speculation involved. A good theory will offer an explanation and indicate its scope.
• Informed Hunches: These aren't just wild guesses. Theorists must do their homework—reading articles, talking to people, observing actions, or running experiments—to ensure their hunches are educated and consider alternative explanations. As Pepperdine professor Fred Casmir notes, theories are "educated guesses."
• Systematic Hunches: A theory is an integrated system of concepts. It connects the dots, clearly drawing relationships among the informed hunches so that a unified pattern emerges, tying ideas together into a whole.

Metaphors to Grasp Theory

To further visualize what theories do, Em Griffin presents three helpful metaphors:

• Theories as Nets: Philosopher Karl Popper described theories as "nets cast to catch what we call ‘the world’." This highlights the ongoing effort of theorists to make the "mesh ever finer." However, it raises questions about human freedom if everything could be "snagged."
• Theories as Lenses: Similar to camera lenses, theories shape our perception, focusing attention on some aspects of communication while pushing others into the background. For example, two theorists might view an argument differently based on their theoretical lens.
• Theories as Maps: Theories act as maps of how communication works, guiding us through unfamiliar territory. They depict truths about objective behaviors or subjective meanings. However, remember that the map is not the territory; real-life interaction is always richer and more complex than any theory can chart.

Defining Communication: More Than Just Talking

Despite over 120 definitions cataloged by Frank Dance decades ago, and Jennifer Slack's observation that "there is no single, absolute essence of communication," a working definition helps focus our study. Em Griffin's working definition for this book is: "Communication is the relational process of creating and interpreting messages that elicit a response." Let's break down its five crucial features:

1. Messages: These are the core of communication study. A "text" is any message that can be studied, whether a book, a conversation transcript, a video, or a song. Robert Craig suggests communication involves "talking and listening, writing and reading, performing and witnessing."
2. Creation of Messages: This refers to the content and form of a message being deliberately constructed, invented, or selected by the communicator. It implies conscious choice, though some communication is preprogrammed or habitual. Many theories aim for "consciousness-raising" to expand our communication choices.
3. Interpretation of Messages: Messages don't interpret themselves; meaning resides with people, not just words. Herbert Blumer's truism, "Humans act toward people or things on the basis of the meanings they assign to those people or things," is key. Words are "polysemic"—open to multiple interpretations. Consider the example of the cryptic text: "Pat and I spent the night together," where the meaning is highly dependent on interpretation.
4. A Relational Process: Like Heraclites' river, communication is always in flux, never exactly the same, and affects the connections between people. University of Georgia theorist Celeste Condit emphasizes it's primarily a "process of relating," influencing relationships rather than just transferring information.
5. Messages That Elicit a Response: For something to be considered communication, the message must stimulate some reaction—cognitive, emotional, or behavioral—from the receiver. A non-response is different from understanding and reacting (like the characters in Paul Newman’s Cool Hand Luke).

Two Paths to Understanding: Objective vs. Interpretive Theories

Communication theories can broadly be categorized into two distinct approaches: objective and interpretive. To illustrate this, consider the analysis of a MasterCard commercial featuring Peyton Manning by two scholars: Glenn Sparks, a behavioral scientist, and Marty Medhurst, a rhetorician.

• Glenn Sparks' Objective Approach: As a social scientist, Glenn aims to be objective, predict, and explain. He might apply theories like source credibility theory (Hovland & Weiss) to see if Manning's expertise and trustworthiness persuade viewers, or Herbert Kelman's theory of opinion change to examine identification. His approach involves objective testing, such as tracking new credit card applications or charges, because "in science, theory and research walk hand in hand."
• Marty Medhurst's Interpretive Approach: As a rhetorical critic, Marty focuses on the meaning and value of communicative texts. He might use Kenneth Burke's dramatistic pentad (act, scene, agent, agency, purpose) to interpret the commercial as a mini-drama where Manning (agent) coaches an attitude (act) to encourage MasterCard use (purpose). Marty suggests a symbolic transformation occurs, equating manliness with money through the ad's narrative.

Objective vs. Interpretive Worldviews: Core Differences

These two approaches reflect contrasting assumptions about fundamental aspects of knowledge and humanity:

• Ways of Knowing (Epistemology):
• Scientists: Assume truth is singular and objective, waiting to be discovered through unbiased sensory observation. They aim for a collective body of knowledge. Galileo's observations are an example.
• Interpretive Scholars: Believe truth is socially constructed and subjective, often through communication. Meaning is highly interpretive, and language creates realities always in flux. They maintain that "objectivity is a myth" and that multiple meanings are possible. As James Anderson states, "Truth is a struggle, not a status."
• Human Nature: Determinism or Free Will?
• Scientists: Tend to stress determinism, viewing human behavior as caused by heredity and environment, often outside conscious awareness. They use passive language like "I had to..." and seek causal explanations, where individual freedom reduces predictability.
• Interpretive Scholars: Focus on free will, emphasizing conscious choices and human agency. They use active language like "I decided to..." and believe people are free agents. C.S. Lewis highlighted the paradox of denying freedom while expecting responsible choices.
• Highest Value: Objectivity or Emancipation?
• Scientists: Value objectivity, ensuring research isn't biased by ideological commitments. Glenn Sparks, for instance, seeks empirical evidence and is frustrated by unvalidated claims, echoing George Homans' view: "When nature... still has a chance to say 'no'—then the subject is science."
• Interpretive Scholars: Value emancipation, seeking to liberate people from oppression (economic, political, etc.) and expand free choice. Marty Medhurst's analysis, for example, critiques underlying economic boosterism. They believe "knowledge is never neutral" and advocate for socially relevant research. Stan Deetz frames this as prioritizing either effectiveness (objective) or participation (interpretive).
• Purpose of Theory: Universal Laws or Interpretive Guides?
• Scientists: Aim to uncover universal laws of human behavior that can predict and explain phenomena across various situations, like tailoring "one size fits all" principles.
• Interpretive Scholars: Strive to interpret particular communication texts within specific contexts, using theory to make sense of unique events and inform their understanding, much like styling a "one-of-a-kind, custom creation."

Why These Differences Matter for Your Studies

Understanding the distinction between objective and interpretive approaches is vital because:

• You can't fully grasp a theory without knowing its underlying assumptions about truth, human nature, purpose, and values.
• It helps classify and organize diverse theories, making them easier to comprehend and compare.
• It can guide your choice of coursework, as different communication concentrations often lean towards one approach.
• Both camps believe their work ultimately helps improve relationships and society, whether by clarifying social reality or fostering free choice.

Judging Theory Quality: Criteria for Evaluation

Not all theories are created equal. Both objective and interpretive theories have specific criteria for determining their worth. Here, we focus on what makes an objective theory good:

Standards for a Good Objective Theory

A credible objective theory fulfills the twin objectives of scientific knowledge: it explains the past and present, and it predicts the future. Key criteria include:

1. Explanation of the Data: A good objective theory clarifies confusing situations, brings order out of chaos, and explains why events or behaviors occur. For instance, while Willie Sutton's "because that's where the money is" explains what he did, it lacks explanatory power for why he robbed banks. Theories like interpersonal deception theory are critiqued if they lack an "explanatory glue."
2. Prediction of Future Events: Scientific theories aim to forecast what will happen, often in cause-and-effect terms. While absolute certainty is rare in social sciences, good theories speak in terms of probabilities and tendencies. They predict that specific communication types trigger responses (e.g., mutual self-disclosure creates intimacy) or that communication quality results from pre-existing factors.
3. Relative Simplicity (Parsimony): A good objective theory should be as simple as possible while still accounting for the phenomenon it explains. It should be elegant and straightforward, avoiding unnecessary complexity.
4. Testability (Falsifiability): The theory must be able to be tested and potentially proven false.
5. Practical Utility: It should be useful in solving practical problems or offering guidance.
6. Quantifiable Research: Objective theories often rely on measurable, numerical data to support their claims.

Your Guide to Communication Theory for Students: What to Expect from Griffin's Book

Em Griffin's "A First Look at Communication Theory" is designed for students with no prior background, offering an accessible entry point to 32 specific theories. The book is structured to aid comprehension:

• Overview (Chapters 1-4): Provides a foundational framework, including objective vs. interpretive approaches, evaluation criteria, and seven traditions of communication theory.
• 32 Theory Chapters: Each 10-15 page chapter focuses on a single theory, preventing them from blurring together. These are grouped into four major communication contexts:
• Interpersonal Communication
• Group and Public Communication
• Mass Communication
• Cultural Context
• Integration (Chapter 37): Distills core ideas common across multiple theories, offering a comprehensive review.

Key Features to Enhance Learning

Griffin's text incorporates several features to make learning engaging:

• Extended Examples: Real-life scenarios, college campus situations, and scenes from films (Bend It Like Beckham, Thank You for Smoking, Erin Brockovich, When Harry Met Sally), books (Toni Morrison's Beloved), and speeches (Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X) illustrate how theories work.
• Theorist-Theory Links: Names like Deetz, Giles, Walther, Baxter, Berger, and Burke are associated with their creations to promote recall and respect.
• Critique Sections: Each chapter concludes with an evaluation of the theory's strengths and weaknesses against established criteria.
• Questions to Sharpen Your Focus: Thought-provoking questions encourage students to connect ideas and apply theories to their own lives.
• A Second Look: Annotated bibliographies for further study.
• Cartoons: Humorously illustrate significant points.
• Conversations with Communication Theorists: Video clips of interviews with theorists, accessible at www.afirstlook.com, offer direct insights.
• Collaborators and Updates: The 8th edition notably includes contributions from special consultants Glenn Sparks and Andrew Ledbetter, and Emily Langan, who crafted the instructor's manual. Significant changes included updates to social judgment theory, social information processing (SIP) now addressing Facebook, new examples for functional perspective, and a restructured cultivation theory chapter. New theories introduced are Sandra Petronio's communication privacy management, Ernest Bormann's symbolic convergence theory, and Elihu Katz's uses and gratifications.

Studying communication theory might seem daunting, but it adds clarity and competence to how you interact with the world. Embrace these theories, and you'll find yourself thinking strategically about communication, enriching your daily interactions.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What is Em Griffin's definition of theory?

Em Griffin, drawing on Judee Burgoon, defines theory as a "set of systematic, informed hunches about the way things operate." This highlights that theories are multiple, educated, and logically connected ideas about how communication works.

How does Griffin define communication?

Griffin's working definition is: "Communication is the relational process of creating and interpreting messages that elicit a response." This emphasizes messages, their creation and interpretation, the ongoing relational nature of interaction, and the necessary outcome of a response.

What are the main differences between objective and interpretive theories?

Objective theories (like those by Glenn Sparks) seek universal laws, emphasizing singular truth, determinism, and objectivity through empirical evidence. Interpretive theories (like those by Marty Medhurst) focus on unique meanings, valuing multiple socially constructed truths, free will, and emancipation through contextual analysis and socially relevant research.

Why is it important to understand communication theory?

Understanding communication theory is crucial for students to grasp the underlying assumptions of communication studies, classify diverse theories, choose appropriate coursework, and gain competence in analyzing and improving relationships and society through informed communication practices.