Theory — lenses for seeing life. They help us see more clearly, help us see things we wouldn’t be able to see with the naked eye. Lenses can focus our attention on specific things and things we may not have realized are important. Can help us to see things we didn’t see before

Micro-level theories — very narrow and look at a specific type of communication in a specific context (Are sisters competitive? Why? Are vegans healthier than carnivores? Do vegans miss eating meat?)

Macro-level theories — help us see the big picture about how each of us are affected or impacted by norms and social structures that permeate every aspect of our lives. (why do people post hate speech? Why are people leaving Facebook? Why do people become vegan?)

Developing Communication Theory: A Step-by-Step Guide

Theory development is a cornerstone of communication scholarship. It provides frameworks for understanding, explaining, and predicting communication phenomena. This section outlines a systematic approach to developing communication theories.

Part 1: Conceptualization and Formulation

1. Identifying a Communication Problem or Question:
• Begin by observing the communication world around you. What recurring patterns, puzzles, or paradoxes do you notice? What communication phenomena lack adequate explanation?
• Ask “why” questions to uncover the underlying causes of communication behaviors and their effects.
• Explore connections between seemingly unrelated communication events or processes.
• For example, you might ask: “Why do some online communities thrive while others fail?” or “How does social media use impact interpersonal relationships?”

2. Grounding Theory in Existing Laws & Research:

• Explore existing communication laws, models, and theories relevant to your chosen problem.
• A scientific law describes an observed communication phenomenon, but it doesn’t clarify why the phenomenon occurs or what causes it. The explanation behind the phenomenon is known as a scientific theory.
• What explanations have already been proposed? What evidence supports or contradicts them?
• Identify gaps in the existing literature. Is there a need for a new perspective, a refinement of existing theories, or an integration of different approaches?

• Use academic databases, journals, and books to conduct a thorough literature review.
• Learning from past communication research can help you avoid repeating mistakes.
• Leverage existing knowledge to deepen your understanding of the subject. This includes relevant communication models, observations, and established theories.
• Ensure that your theory hasn’t already been proposed. If you can’t find any existing work on the topic, go ahead and develop your theory. If similar theories already exist, review them carefully and see if there’s room to build on their findings.
3. Formulating a Communication Theory:
• Craft a theoretical statement that explains the communication phenomenon of interest. This statement should identify key concepts, specify relationships between them, and offer a causal explanation.
• For example: “The strength of social bonds within an online community is positively related to the level of active participation, which in turn, increases community resilience.”
4. Developing Hypotheses:
• Derive testable hypotheses from your theory. A hypothesis is a specific, informed prediction about the relationship between communication variables.
• Frame hypotheses as “if, then” statements, clearly specifying the independent and dependent variables.
• Independent variable: A factor you can manipulate or control.
• Dependent variable: The phenomenon you observe or measure.
• Ensure your hypotheses are measurable and falsifiable, allowing for empirical testing.
• For example: “If individuals perceive a high level of trust in an online community (independent variable), then they will exhibit greater willingness to share personal information (dependent variable).”
• Develop multiple hypotheses to explain your findings. Compare them and analyze where they align or differ.

5. Distinguishing Between Theory and Hypothesis:
• Understand that every theory begins as a hypothesis, but it’s important to distinguish between the two. A theory is a thoroughly tested explanation for why a pattern occurs, whereas a hypothesis is merely a proposed reason for that pattern. A theory is supported by substantial evidence, while a hypothesis is just a potential outcome that may or may not prove to be correct.

Part 2: Empirical Testing and Evaluation

1. Designing Research Methods:
• Select appropriate research methods to test your hypotheses. This might include quantitative methods (e.g., surveys, experiments, content analysis) or qualitative methods (e.g., interviews, focus groups, ethnographic studies).

By Spaynton – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=40839256

• Ensure your methods are rigorous, valid, and reliable.
• Operationalize your variables, defining how they will be measured or observed in your study.
2. Seeking Resources and Expertise:
• Depending on your area of research, conducting detailed experiments might require specialized equipment and resources, which can be costly and difficult to obtain.
• Consult with experienced researchers and mentors for guidance on research design and data analysis.
• Collaborate with others to enhance the quality and scope of your research.
3. Collecting and Analyzing Data:
• Maintain detailed records of your data collection process to ensure transparency and replicability.
• Apply appropriate statistical or qualitative analysis techniques to examine the relationships between your variables.
• Objectively interpret your findings, considering both supporting and contradictory evidence.
4. Interpreting and Confirming Findings:
• Compare your predictions with the outcomes of your experiments. Look for recurring patterns and consider whether the results offer any new insights.
• Regardless of whether the data supports the hypothesis, be sure to account for any external or “exogenous” variables that could have impacted the results.
• If the results don’t support your hypothesis, consider the prediction to be incorrect. If the hypothesis is validated, then the theory moves closer to being confirmed.
• Ensure that the results remain consistent each time you conduct the experiment. Repeat the tests until you are confident in your findings.

Part 3: Refinement, Dissemination, and Impact

1. Drawing Conclusions and Revising Theory:
• Based on your findings, assess the validity and scope of your theory.
• Does the evidence support your theoretical claims? Do the findings suggest the need for revisions, qualifications, or extensions of the theory?
• Avoid presenting your theory as an undeniable fact.
2. Disseminating Research:
• Share your research findings with the broader communication community through publications, presentations, and other scholarly outlets.
• Present your process in a clear, logical structure: start with an “abstract” summarizing your theory, followed by your hypothesis, experimental methods, and results. Try to break your theory down into key points or arguments. Conclude the paper by explaining your final conclusions.
• A well-structured report will guide the reader through every step that led to your conclusion.
• Describe how you framed your question, the approach you used, and the way you tested it.
3. Engaging in Peer Review:
• Actively participate in the peer-review process, both as an author and a reviewer.
• Welcome constructive criticism and use it to improve your theory and research.

4. Continuous Refinement:

This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

Introduction to Communication Theory/Evaluating Theory

What makes a theory “good”? Six criteria might be said to be properties of a strong theory. (The terminology presented here is drawn from Littlejohn, Theories of Human Communication, but a similar set of criteria are widely accepted both within and outside the field of communication.)

Theoretical Scope
How general is the theory? That is, how widely applicable is it? In most cases, a theory that may only be applied within a fairly narrow set of circumstances is not considered as useful as a theory that encompasses a very wide range of communicative interactions. The ideal, of course, is a theory that succinctly explains the nature of human communication as a whole.
Appropriateness
Theories are often evaluated based upon how well their epistemological, ontological, and axiological assumptions relate to the issue or question being explained. If a theory recapitulates its assumptions (if it is tautological), it is not an effective theory.

Heuristic value
Some theories suggest the ways in which further research may be conducted. By presenting an explanatory model, the theory generates questions or hypotheses that can be operationalized relatively easily. In practical terms, the success of a theory may rest on how readily other researchers may continue to do fruitful work in reaction or support.
Validity
It may seem obvious that for a theory to be good, it must also be valid. Validity refers to the degree to which the theory accurately represents the true state of the world. Are the arguments internally consistent and are its predictions and claims derived logically from its assumptions? Many also require that theories be falsifiable; that is, theories that present predictions that–if they prove to be incorrect–invalidate the theory. The absence of such questions significantly reduces the value of the theory, since a theory that cannot be proven false (perhaps) cannot be shown to be accurate, either.
Parsimony
The principle of parsimony (Occam’s razor) dictates that a theory should provide the simplest possible (viable) explanation for a phenomenon. Others suggest that good theory exhibits an aesthetic quality, that a good theory is simple (as beauty nor nature can be complex}. That it leads to an “Aha!” moment in which an explanation feels as if it fits.
Openness
Theories, perhaps paradoxically, should not exist to the absolute exclusion of other theories. Theory should not be dogma: it should encourage and provide both for skepticism and should–to whatever degree possible–be compatible with other accepted theory.
It is important to note that a theory is not “true,” or “false” (despite the above discussion of falsifiability), but rather better or worse at explaining the causes of a particular event. Especially within the social sciences, we may find several different theories that each explain a phenomenon in useful ways. There is value in being able to use theories as “lenses” through which you can understand communication, and through which you can understand the world together with other scholars.

As a task, apply the aforementioned criteria to the Universal Communication Law. How does the Universal Law fit?

Quantitative & Qualitative & Mixed Methods Research

Research goals will differ between individual scientists and project demands. There are many studies based on research which is accomplished through interviews and social participation with members of cultural groups (see: Ethnomethodology). This type of research is known as qualitative research. It is the task of the author to convey the connection between their research subjects and thesis. Their goal is to describe a phenomenon, to portray a situation so as to enlighten the readers of their work. They stand in stark contrast to quantitative researchers.

Qualitative

Quantitative

Where qualitative research often attempts to understand the themes of a group’s experiences through regular interactions with research participants, quantitative research frequently attempts to find patterns in numerical data that can help explain or predict a phenomenon. The quantitative researcher may also participate within the speech community of their subject, looking for numerical data that they can record. They may for instance, interview a person, taking note of personal affects and vocalizations. A sociolinguist, for example, will record every utterance of the letter “r”. They’ll compile the data and compare it with data from a distinct economic class or a similar group. By keeping a count of every “r” spoken with an accent, for instance, the sociolinguist is able to write a quantitative analysis. They are able to identify patterns that may suggest a useful correlation. Accents, for example, will often identify which members of a larger speech community a person identifies with. Predictability is a strong criteria for a quantitative researcher. Thus this type of research is often used in marketing studies. Marketing companies want to know how to effect their audience, and to what degree. Though it is futile to predict marketing effects on a single individual, it is quite possible to predict an overall effect within a large group. Marketers will use various post-positivist studies to enhance the effects of marketing exposure. “Sex sells” can be proven and studied through quantitative means.

Mixed Methods Research

License (for all of the George Mason videos)

These two methods are by no means mutually exclusive. Though they are two different routes they can both be used to further a hypothesis or field of inquiry. Media studies and Semiotics are two strong implementations of both techniques. They may demand a researcher to wade through thousands of pieces of media to develop a cogent thesis. The researcher may take note of every sexually suggestive image broadcast within Primetime television viewing hours for a given month. This could be compared against other markets to develop a claim. But the researcher could also view single popular series, and again develop a claim as to the motivation for such content. The field of news-entertainment is often criticized for its choice of scare-stories (see: Cultivation Theory and Agenda-Setting Theory). Only after a series of strong studies, both qualitative and quantitative, can a researcher authoritatively claim that news-entertainment does indeed market trauma, by egregious coverage of violence and catastrophe (if it bleeds it leads). Only then can a researcher credibly claim that such coverage has an effect on television consumers. Only at that point can a study be carried out to identify what that effect is.

Griffin in his textbook, “A First Look at Communication Theory”, provides a small chart meant to aid in the evaluation of quantitative and qualitative theory.

Scientific (Quantitative) Theory

Explanation of Data

Prediction of Future

Relative Simplicity

Testable Hypotheses

Practical Utility

Interpretive (Qualitative) Theory
Understanding of People
Clarification of Values
Aesthetic Appeal
Community of Agreement
Reform of Society

References

Littlejohn, Stephen W., and Karen A. Foss. Theories of Human Communication. Long Grove, IL: Waveland, 2011. Print.