Monday, January 21, 2013
Friday, May 8, 2009
USES AND GRATIFICATIONS THEORY
USES AND GRATIFICATIONS THEORY
Explanation of Theory:
Blumler and Katz’s uses and gratification theory suggests that media users play an active role in choosing and using the media. Users take an active part in the communication process and are goal oriented in their media use. The theorist say that a media user seeks out a media source that best fulfills the needs of the user. Uses and gratifications assume that the user has alternate choices to satisfy their need.
Theorists: Blumler and Katz
Date: 1974
Primary Article:
Blumler J.G. & Katz, E. (1974). The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Metatheoretical Assumptions:
Ontological Assumptions:
Deterministic----------------X---free will
Epistemological Assumptions:
Truth------------------------------X----Multiple Truths
Axiological Assumptions:
value neutral-----------------X----value laden
Individual Interpretations and Critique:
Uses and gratifications theory takes a more humanistic approach to looking at media use. Blumler and Katz believe that there is not merely one way that the populace uses media. Instead, they believe there are as many reasons for using the media, as there are media users. According to the theory, media consumers have a free will to decide how they will use the media and how it will effect them. Blumler and Katz values are clearly seen by the fact that they believe that media consumers can choose the influence media has on them as well as the idea that users choose media alternatives merely as a means to and end. Uses and gratification is the optimist’s view of the media. The theory takes out the possibility that the media can have an unconscience influence over our lives and how we view the world. The idea that we simply use the media to satisfy a given need does not seem to fully recognize the power of the media in today’s society.
Ideas and Implications:
Uses and gratification theory can be seen in cases such as personal music selection. We select music not only to fit a particular mood but also in attempts to show empowerment or other socially conscience motives. There are many different types of music and we choose from them to fulfill a particular need.
Relevant Researchers:
Palmgreen, Phillip
Harwood, Hake
Swanson, David
Relevant Articles:
Edwards, T. (1998). Lyrics to the rhythm: The uses and gratifications of rap music for African American teenagers. Thesis (Ph.D.). Lexington, Ky.
Harwood, J. (1999). Age identification, social identity, gratifications, and television viewing. Journal of Broadcast and Electronic Media. 43 (i), 123(1).
Swanson, D.L. (1987). Gratification seeking, media exposure, and audience interpretations: Some direction for research. Journal of Broadcast and Electronic Media, 31 (3) 237-255.
Location in Eight (8) Primary Communication Theory Textbooks:
Anderson, R., & Ross, V. (1998). Questions of communication: A practical introduction to theory (2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press.
Page 254
Cragan, J. F., & Shields, D.C. (1998). Understanding communication theory: The communicative forces for human action. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Page 268
Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Pages 310 and 364
Griffin, E. (1997). A first look at communication theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pages 338 and 377
Infante, D. A., Rancer, A. S., & Womack, D. F. (1997). Building communication theory (3rd ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
Page 374
Littlejohn, S. W. (1999). Theories of human communication (6th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Page 349
West, R., & Turner, L. H. (2000). Introducing communication theory: Analysis and application. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
Page 332
Wood, J. T. (1997). Communication theories in action: An introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Page N/A
Explanation of Theory:
Blumler and Katz’s uses and gratification theory suggests that media users play an active role in choosing and using the media. Users take an active part in the communication process and are goal oriented in their media use. The theorist say that a media user seeks out a media source that best fulfills the needs of the user. Uses and gratifications assume that the user has alternate choices to satisfy their need.
Theorists: Blumler and Katz
Date: 1974
Primary Article:
Blumler J.G. & Katz, E. (1974). The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Metatheoretical Assumptions:
Ontological Assumptions:
Deterministic----------------X---free will
Epistemological Assumptions:
Truth------------------------------X----Multiple Truths
Axiological Assumptions:
value neutral-----------------X----value laden
Individual Interpretations and Critique:
Uses and gratifications theory takes a more humanistic approach to looking at media use. Blumler and Katz believe that there is not merely one way that the populace uses media. Instead, they believe there are as many reasons for using the media, as there are media users. According to the theory, media consumers have a free will to decide how they will use the media and how it will effect them. Blumler and Katz values are clearly seen by the fact that they believe that media consumers can choose the influence media has on them as well as the idea that users choose media alternatives merely as a means to and end. Uses and gratification is the optimist’s view of the media. The theory takes out the possibility that the media can have an unconscience influence over our lives and how we view the world. The idea that we simply use the media to satisfy a given need does not seem to fully recognize the power of the media in today’s society.
Ideas and Implications:
Uses and gratification theory can be seen in cases such as personal music selection. We select music not only to fit a particular mood but also in attempts to show empowerment or other socially conscience motives. There are many different types of music and we choose from them to fulfill a particular need.
Relevant Researchers:
Palmgreen, Phillip
Harwood, Hake
Swanson, David
Relevant Articles:
Edwards, T. (1998). Lyrics to the rhythm: The uses and gratifications of rap music for African American teenagers. Thesis (Ph.D.). Lexington, Ky.
Harwood, J. (1999). Age identification, social identity, gratifications, and television viewing. Journal of Broadcast and Electronic Media. 43 (i), 123(1).
Swanson, D.L. (1987). Gratification seeking, media exposure, and audience interpretations: Some direction for research. Journal of Broadcast and Electronic Media, 31 (3) 237-255.
Location in Eight (8) Primary Communication Theory Textbooks:
Anderson, R., & Ross, V. (1998). Questions of communication: A practical introduction to theory (2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press.
Page 254
Cragan, J. F., & Shields, D.C. (1998). Understanding communication theory: The communicative forces for human action. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Page 268
Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Pages 310 and 364
Griffin, E. (1997). A first look at communication theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pages 338 and 377
Infante, D. A., Rancer, A. S., & Womack, D. F. (1997). Building communication theory (3rd ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
Page 374
Littlejohn, S. W. (1999). Theories of human communication (6th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Page 349
West, R., & Turner, L. H. (2000). Introducing communication theory: Analysis and application. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
Page 332
Wood, J. T. (1997). Communication theories in action: An introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Page N/A
TECHNOLOGICAL DETERMINISM THEORY
TECHNOLOGICAL DETERMINISM THEORY
Explanation of Theory:
Technological Determinism state that media technology shapes how we as individuals in a society think, feel, act, and how are society operates as we move from one technological age to another (Tribal- Literate- Print- Electronic).
Theorists: Marshall Mcluhan
Date: 1962
Primary Article:
Mcluhan, M. (1962). The Gutenberg Galaxy: The making of Typograhic Man. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Individual Interpretations:
We learn and feel and think the way we do because of the messages we receive through the current technology that is available. The radio required us to only listen and develop our sense of hearing. On the other hand, television engages both our hearing and visual senses. We then transfer those developed senses into our everyday lives and we want to use them again. The medium is then our message.
Metatheoretical Assumptions:
Ontological Assumptions:
Humans do not have much free will at all. Whatever society as a whole is using to communicate, they too will use to communicate. Therefore they will adapt to the medium they are using so that they can send and receive messages like everyone else.
Epistemological Assumptions:
We know that there is one truth by observing what has happened over time. As the medium changes so does society's way of communicating. People can only use the medium for which it was created (phone for talking over lines or electronic mail for talking via computer). If the medium is impersonal (television) then the message too is impersonal.
Axiological Assumptions:
This theory is objective in that everyone will act and feel the same no matter what the medium they are using provided that they are using the same medium. Values are not involved because evidence is seen strictly through observation.
Critique: Scientific Theory
Explanatory Power: It explains when new systems of technology are developed, the culture or society is immediately changed to reflect the senses needed to use the new technology.
Predictive Power: It predicts that with every new system of media technology, society will change and adapt to that technology.
Parsimony: There is a simple cause and effect analysis between the introduction of new technology and the changes in society's way of thinking, feeling, acting, or believing.
Falsifiability: The theory could be proved false if a new technology is invented and nothing changes.
Internal Consistency: There is a logical flow of proof evidenced over time.
Heuristic Provocativeness: Would this theory only work in the USA or would it vary culture to culture within or outside the United States? Does it vary in the electronic age between those who can afford the new technology and those who can not?
Organizing Power: We know that we have developed and we know that we have changed. This theory provides a way to see why this has happened.
Example:
With everyone electronically mailing each other today, there is no longer a need to write a joke down to remember it. You can just forward it to a friend. We also do not communicate with distant friends as over the telephone anymore. We have started to only communicate through the impersonal use of the e-mail system.
Relevant Research:
Adler, R. B. (1995). Teaching Communication Theories with Jungle Fever. Communication Education, 44, 157-164.
Aufderherde, p. 91991) Public Television and the Public Sphere. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 8, 168-183.
Schiller, D. (1994) From Culture to Information and Back Again: Commodization as a Route to Knowledge. Critical Studies in Mass Communications, 8, 39-59.
Location in Eight (8) Primary Communication Theory Textbooks:
Anderson, R., & Ross, V. (1998). Questions of communication: A practical introduction to theory (2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press. N/A
Cragan, J. F., & Shields, D.C. (1998). Understanding communication theory: The communicative forces for human action. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. N/A
Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. pp 313-325.
Griffin, E. (1997). A first look at communication theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 341-352.
Infante, D. A., Rancer, A. S., & Womack, D. F. (1997). Building communication theory (3rd ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. N/A
Littlejohn, S. W. (1999). Theories of human communication (6th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. pp. 329-330.
West, R., & Turner, L. H. (2000). Introducing communication theory: Analysis and application. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield. N/A
Wood, J. T. (1997). Communication theories in action: An introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. pp. 283-291.
Explanation of Theory:
Technological Determinism state that media technology shapes how we as individuals in a society think, feel, act, and how are society operates as we move from one technological age to another (Tribal- Literate- Print- Electronic).
Theorists: Marshall Mcluhan
Date: 1962
Primary Article:
Mcluhan, M. (1962). The Gutenberg Galaxy: The making of Typograhic Man. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Individual Interpretations:
We learn and feel and think the way we do because of the messages we receive through the current technology that is available. The radio required us to only listen and develop our sense of hearing. On the other hand, television engages both our hearing and visual senses. We then transfer those developed senses into our everyday lives and we want to use them again. The medium is then our message.
Metatheoretical Assumptions:
Ontological Assumptions:
Humans do not have much free will at all. Whatever society as a whole is using to communicate, they too will use to communicate. Therefore they will adapt to the medium they are using so that they can send and receive messages like everyone else.
Epistemological Assumptions:
We know that there is one truth by observing what has happened over time. As the medium changes so does society's way of communicating. People can only use the medium for which it was created (phone for talking over lines or electronic mail for talking via computer). If the medium is impersonal (television) then the message too is impersonal.
Axiological Assumptions:
This theory is objective in that everyone will act and feel the same no matter what the medium they are using provided that they are using the same medium. Values are not involved because evidence is seen strictly through observation.
Critique: Scientific Theory
Explanatory Power: It explains when new systems of technology are developed, the culture or society is immediately changed to reflect the senses needed to use the new technology.
Predictive Power: It predicts that with every new system of media technology, society will change and adapt to that technology.
Parsimony: There is a simple cause and effect analysis between the introduction of new technology and the changes in society's way of thinking, feeling, acting, or believing.
Falsifiability: The theory could be proved false if a new technology is invented and nothing changes.
Internal Consistency: There is a logical flow of proof evidenced over time.
Heuristic Provocativeness: Would this theory only work in the USA or would it vary culture to culture within or outside the United States? Does it vary in the electronic age between those who can afford the new technology and those who can not?
Organizing Power: We know that we have developed and we know that we have changed. This theory provides a way to see why this has happened.
Example:
With everyone electronically mailing each other today, there is no longer a need to write a joke down to remember it. You can just forward it to a friend. We also do not communicate with distant friends as over the telephone anymore. We have started to only communicate through the impersonal use of the e-mail system.
Relevant Research:
Adler, R. B. (1995). Teaching Communication Theories with Jungle Fever. Communication Education, 44, 157-164.
Aufderherde, p. 91991) Public Television and the Public Sphere. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 8, 168-183.
Schiller, D. (1994) From Culture to Information and Back Again: Commodization as a Route to Knowledge. Critical Studies in Mass Communications, 8, 39-59.
Location in Eight (8) Primary Communication Theory Textbooks:
Anderson, R., & Ross, V. (1998). Questions of communication: A practical introduction to theory (2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press. N/A
Cragan, J. F., & Shields, D.C. (1998). Understanding communication theory: The communicative forces for human action. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. N/A
Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. pp 313-325.
Griffin, E. (1997). A first look at communication theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 341-352.
Infante, D. A., Rancer, A. S., & Womack, D. F. (1997). Building communication theory (3rd ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. N/A
Littlejohn, S. W. (1999). Theories of human communication (6th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. pp. 329-330.
West, R., & Turner, L. H. (2000). Introducing communication theory: Analysis and application. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield. N/A
Wood, J. T. (1997). Communication theories in action: An introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. pp. 283-291.
Spiral of Silence Theory
Spiral of Silence Theory
Explanation of Theory:
The Spiral of Silence theory explains why people often feel the need to conceal their opinions/preference/views/etc. when they fall within the minority of a group.
Theorist: Elizabeth Noelle-Neumann
Date: 1984
Primary Article:
Noelle-Neumann, E. (1984). The Spiral of Silence. University of Chicago, Chicago.
Metatheoretical Assumptions:
Ontological Assumption:
In this sense, the theory is extremely scientific. Spiral of Silence believes that there is fate- opinions are dependent on the majority opinion of the group.
Epistemological Assumption:
The theory is also quite scientific in the relationship between the research being done and the researcher. What is researched is not dependent on the observer, there is one truth; an absolute if you will concerning the Spiral of Silence. People are quiet with their opinions and that is that.
Axiological Assumption:
I feel that Spiral of Silence is scientific in the values sense as well. Research being done is value neutral and unbiased on the researchers' behalf since they would have no reason or means to skew the findings in any way.
Critique:
The Spiral of Silence theory is a scientific theory that for the most part is quite sound in situations in which opinions are not of great consequence. For example, if my opinion is a strong conviction and I am unwilling to bend in my beliefs then the theory may not apply to me to such an extent. Also, if I am an opinion leader, (from the Diffusionof Innovations theory) that is I am the one voicing my opinion and affecting other people; then I also may not bend in my opinions either.
Ideas and Implications:
The Spiral of Silence is useful to apply in situations when trying to explain why people cover up or change their opinions when in a group setting especially when they think they are alone in their opinions.
Example:
An example to help illustrate the Spiral of Silence theory is a person going out with a new group of people or on a date with someone you do not know very well. When ordering pizza for this theory, I would conform to the mushroom lovers because I feel I am in the minority since I do not like mushrooms and i think everyone else does. Therefore I do not want to be rejected or alone in my opinions.
Relevant Research:
Jeffres, L., Neuendorf, K.A., Atkin, D. (1999). "Spiral of Silence: expressing opinions when the climate of opinion is unambiguous." Political Communication.
Glynn, C.J, Hayes, A.F., Shanahan, J. (1997). "Perceived support for one's opinions and willingness to speak out: a meta analysis of survey studies on the 'Spiral of Silence.'" Public Opinion Quarterly.
Oshagan, H. (1996). "Reference group influence on public expression." International Journal of Public Opinion Research.
Websites:
http://www.orst.edu/instruct/theory/spiral.html
http://www.ic.arizona.edu/~comm300/mary/mass/spiral.html
Location in Eight (8) Primary Communication Theory Textbooks:
Anderson, R., & Ross, V. (1998). Questions of communication: A practical introduction to theory (2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press. pp. 263-264
Cragan, J. F., & Shields, D.C. (1998). Understanding communication theory: The communicative forces for human action. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. N/A
Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. pp. N/A
Griffin, E. (1997). A first look at communication theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 337, 375, 387-398, 476, 484, 496.
Infante, D. A., Rancer, A. S., & Womack, D. F. (1997). Building communication theory (3rd ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. N/A
Littlejohn, S. W. (1999). Theories of human communication (6th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. pp. 342-343
West, R., & Turner, L. H. (2000). Introducing communication theory: Analysis and application. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield. pp. 327, 333, 346-360.
Wood, J. T. (1997). Communication theories in action: An introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. N/A
Explanation of Theory:
The Spiral of Silence theory explains why people often feel the need to conceal their opinions/preference/views/etc. when they fall within the minority of a group.
Theorist: Elizabeth Noelle-Neumann
Date: 1984
Primary Article:
Noelle-Neumann, E. (1984). The Spiral of Silence. University of Chicago, Chicago.
Metatheoretical Assumptions:
Ontological Assumption:
In this sense, the theory is extremely scientific. Spiral of Silence believes that there is fate- opinions are dependent on the majority opinion of the group.
Epistemological Assumption:
The theory is also quite scientific in the relationship between the research being done and the researcher. What is researched is not dependent on the observer, there is one truth; an absolute if you will concerning the Spiral of Silence. People are quiet with their opinions and that is that.
Axiological Assumption:
I feel that Spiral of Silence is scientific in the values sense as well. Research being done is value neutral and unbiased on the researchers' behalf since they would have no reason or means to skew the findings in any way.
Critique:
The Spiral of Silence theory is a scientific theory that for the most part is quite sound in situations in which opinions are not of great consequence. For example, if my opinion is a strong conviction and I am unwilling to bend in my beliefs then the theory may not apply to me to such an extent. Also, if I am an opinion leader, (from the Diffusionof Innovations theory) that is I am the one voicing my opinion and affecting other people; then I also may not bend in my opinions either.
Ideas and Implications:
The Spiral of Silence is useful to apply in situations when trying to explain why people cover up or change their opinions when in a group setting especially when they think they are alone in their opinions.
Example:
An example to help illustrate the Spiral of Silence theory is a person going out with a new group of people or on a date with someone you do not know very well. When ordering pizza for this theory, I would conform to the mushroom lovers because I feel I am in the minority since I do not like mushrooms and i think everyone else does. Therefore I do not want to be rejected or alone in my opinions.
Relevant Research:
Jeffres, L., Neuendorf, K.A., Atkin, D. (1999). "Spiral of Silence: expressing opinions when the climate of opinion is unambiguous." Political Communication.
Glynn, C.J, Hayes, A.F., Shanahan, J. (1997). "Perceived support for one's opinions and willingness to speak out: a meta analysis of survey studies on the 'Spiral of Silence.'" Public Opinion Quarterly.
Oshagan, H. (1996). "Reference group influence on public expression." International Journal of Public Opinion Research.
Websites:
http://www.orst.edu/instruct/theory/spiral.html
http://www.ic.arizona.edu/~comm300/mary/mass/spiral.html
Location in Eight (8) Primary Communication Theory Textbooks:
Anderson, R., & Ross, V. (1998). Questions of communication: A practical introduction to theory (2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press. pp. 263-264
Cragan, J. F., & Shields, D.C. (1998). Understanding communication theory: The communicative forces for human action. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. N/A
Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. pp. N/A
Griffin, E. (1997). A first look at communication theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 337, 375, 387-398, 476, 484, 496.
Infante, D. A., Rancer, A. S., & Womack, D. F. (1997). Building communication theory (3rd ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. N/A
Littlejohn, S. W. (1999). Theories of human communication (6th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. pp. 342-343
West, R., & Turner, L. H. (2000). Introducing communication theory: Analysis and application. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield. pp. 327, 333, 346-360.
Wood, J. T. (1997). Communication theories in action: An introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. N/A
Rules Based Theory
Rules Based Theory
Explanation of Theory: Lull’s rules-based theory describes three rule-governed behaviors during family television viewing. Habitual rules are non-negotiable with negative consequences for violation. Parametric rules are somewhat more negotiable and are understood boundaries (not always verbalized). Lull’s last rule is tactical, which are set by the culture in general.
Theorists: J. Lull
Date: 1980
Primary Article: Lull, J. (1980). Family communication patterns and the social uses of television. Communication Research, 7 319-34.
Metatheoretical Assumptions:
Ontological Assumptions:
determanistic--------X-----------free will
Epistemological Assumptions:
Truth-----------------X-----------------truths
Axiological Assumptions:
value neutral-X--------------------value laden
Individual Interpretations and Critique: Lull’s rules-based theory is rests in the middle between scientific and humanistic. Epistemologically, the rules-based theory believes that although families all have television viewing rules they all do it in different ways. The theory is value neutral. Lastly, the theory rests in the middle between free will and deterministic. Lull’s rules-based theory does not do much more then describe an everyday, common sense action. Lull does put names to things most people are familiar with; however, the theory does little more.
Ideas and Implications: It is easy to see the rules-based theory in work anytime a parent tells a child that they can not watch television after ten o’clock or not to change the channel without asking.
Relevant Researchers:
Chaney, David
Relevant Articles: Chaney, D. (1996). Media, communication, culture: A global approach. The Sociological Review. August v44 n3 p 565(10).
Location in Eight (8) Primary Communication Theory Textbooks:
Anderson, R., & Ross, V. (1998). Questions of communication: A practical introduction to theory (2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press.
Page N/A
Cragan, J. F., & Shields, D.C. (1998). Understanding communication theory: The communicative forces for human action. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Page N/A
Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Page N/A
Griffin, E. (1997). A first look at communication theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Page N/A
Infante, D. A., Rancer, A. S., & Womack, D. F. (1997). Building communication theory (3rd ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
Page 381
Littlejohn, S. W. (1999). Theories of human communication (6th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Page N/A
West, R., & Turner, L. H. (2000). Introducing communication theory: Analysis and application. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
Page 44
Wood, J. T. (1997). Communication theories in action: An introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Page N/A
Explanation of Theory: Lull’s rules-based theory describes three rule-governed behaviors during family television viewing. Habitual rules are non-negotiable with negative consequences for violation. Parametric rules are somewhat more negotiable and are understood boundaries (not always verbalized). Lull’s last rule is tactical, which are set by the culture in general.
Theorists: J. Lull
Date: 1980
Primary Article: Lull, J. (1980). Family communication patterns and the social uses of television. Communication Research, 7 319-34.
Metatheoretical Assumptions:
Ontological Assumptions:
determanistic--------X-----------free will
Epistemological Assumptions:
Truth-----------------X-----------------truths
Axiological Assumptions:
value neutral-X--------------------value laden
Individual Interpretations and Critique: Lull’s rules-based theory is rests in the middle between scientific and humanistic. Epistemologically, the rules-based theory believes that although families all have television viewing rules they all do it in different ways. The theory is value neutral. Lastly, the theory rests in the middle between free will and deterministic. Lull’s rules-based theory does not do much more then describe an everyday, common sense action. Lull does put names to things most people are familiar with; however, the theory does little more.
Ideas and Implications: It is easy to see the rules-based theory in work anytime a parent tells a child that they can not watch television after ten o’clock or not to change the channel without asking.
Relevant Researchers:
Chaney, David
Relevant Articles: Chaney, D. (1996). Media, communication, culture: A global approach. The Sociological Review. August v44 n3 p 565(10).
Location in Eight (8) Primary Communication Theory Textbooks:
Anderson, R., & Ross, V. (1998). Questions of communication: A practical introduction to theory (2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press.
Page N/A
Cragan, J. F., & Shields, D.C. (1998). Understanding communication theory: The communicative forces for human action. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Page N/A
Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Page N/A
Griffin, E. (1997). A first look at communication theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Page N/A
Infante, D. A., Rancer, A. S., & Womack, D. F. (1997). Building communication theory (3rd ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
Page 381
Littlejohn, S. W. (1999). Theories of human communication (6th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Page N/A
West, R., & Turner, L. H. (2000). Introducing communication theory: Analysis and application. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
Page 44
Wood, J. T. (1997). Communication theories in action: An introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Page N/A
Media Equation
Media Equation
Explanation of Theory:
This theory predicts why people respond unconsciously and automatically to communication media as if it were human.
Theorist: Byron Reeves and Clifford Nass
Date: 1996
Primary Article:
Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Individual Interpretation:
This theory looks at interpersonal communication between an individual and the media. We talk back to our computers, and we use the same personal spacing techniques with media as we would if that particular medium were a real person. We unconsciously act as if the media are people. There’s something unique about this theory. It is relatively new, and considers new forms of interpersonal communication
Critique:
This theory is scientific in nature, and according to Chaffee & Berger’s 1997 criteria for scientific theories, it is an okay one.
* It predicts that people will treat the media (according to interpersonal theory) as they would treat a real person.
* It explains ways the audience is active.
* It is relatively simple to understand.
* It is internally consistent on the scientific side (one truth, determinism, value nuetral).
* It helps organize knowledge about the action of the audience.
Example:
When the television you are watching is real small, you tend to sit closer, and when it is large, you tend to sit further away from it. Ask a friend to randomly watch you when you are watching someone you like, admire, or think is attractive on television. You can do the same for them as well. I notice that I tend to sit closer to the television, smile, and keep eye contact when I am watching someone I like on television. However, I walk away, make ugly faces, or ignore people I don’t like when I am watching television.
More Research on Media Equation:
Moon, Y., & Nass, C. (1996). How real are computer personalities? Psychological responses to personality types in human-computer interaction. Communication Research, 23, 651-674.
Media Equation in Texts:
Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill, 309, 349, 373-385, 476.
Explanation of Theory:
This theory predicts why people respond unconsciously and automatically to communication media as if it were human.
Theorist: Byron Reeves and Clifford Nass
Date: 1996
Primary Article:
Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Individual Interpretation:
This theory looks at interpersonal communication between an individual and the media. We talk back to our computers, and we use the same personal spacing techniques with media as we would if that particular medium were a real person. We unconsciously act as if the media are people. There’s something unique about this theory. It is relatively new, and considers new forms of interpersonal communication
Critique:
This theory is scientific in nature, and according to Chaffee & Berger’s 1997 criteria for scientific theories, it is an okay one.
* It predicts that people will treat the media (according to interpersonal theory) as they would treat a real person.
* It explains ways the audience is active.
* It is relatively simple to understand.
* It is internally consistent on the scientific side (one truth, determinism, value nuetral).
* It helps organize knowledge about the action of the audience.
Example:
When the television you are watching is real small, you tend to sit closer, and when it is large, you tend to sit further away from it. Ask a friend to randomly watch you when you are watching someone you like, admire, or think is attractive on television. You can do the same for them as well. I notice that I tend to sit closer to the television, smile, and keep eye contact when I am watching someone I like on television. However, I walk away, make ugly faces, or ignore people I don’t like when I am watching television.
More Research on Media Equation:
Moon, Y., & Nass, C. (1996). How real are computer personalities? Psychological responses to personality types in human-computer interaction. Communication Research, 23, 651-674.
Media Equation in Texts:
Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill, 309, 349, 373-385, 476.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)