علم ارتباطات

اشاره:

از این پس٬ قصد داریم مطالب متنوعی را با عنوان "مجله ی علم ارتباطات"در حوزه های متعدد جستار ها و مقاله ها ٬گفت و شنود٬ بخشی از یک کتاب یا سخن رانی و... را در قالب محتوای این وبلاگ-به صورت متن اصلی یا تالیف از یک یا چند نویسنده- قرار دهیم. اهمیت این حرکت دو هدف اصلی را به دنبال دارد:الف- تمرکز بر زمینه های موضوعی "علم ارتباطات" و ب- رسیدن به یک منطق مفهومی از مباحث جاری در این "حوزه و رشته". آن چه مواد متن ما را تشکیل می دهد هم به صورت "نوشته های مشترک" یا "ترجمه" از نویسندگان داخلی و خارجی ست و هم "نقد و نظر" یا "مجادله ها و مناقشه هایی" که در این قلمرو قابل طرح است. برای نمونه: فلسفه ی ارتباطات٬ تاریخ ارتباطات٬ نظریه های ارتباطات٬منطق ارتباطات٬مکتب های ارتباطات و ... . از این رو٬ اینجانب "غلامرضا آذری"-محقق ٬ مترجم ٬ مدرس ارتباطات و مسئول این وبلاگ- با همراهی مجدانه ی دوست و همکار گرانقدرم "استاد حسین کیانی"-محقق٬مترجم و سخن ران حوزه ی فلسفه٬دین٬ارتباطات و مسائل فلسفی فناوری- می کوشیم که به این مهم جامه ی عمل بپوشانیم. در شماره ی صفراین مجله ی علمی٬ ما با حفظ امانت و وفاداری کامل و ارائه ی متن اصلی و چکیده یی معیار از "دانشنامه ی نظریه ی ارتباطات "اثر لیتل جان و فوس(۲۰۰۹) ٬انتشارات سیج ٬به مرور مدخل "سنت های هفتگانه ی نظریه ی ارتباطات" به قلم رابرت تی. کریگ روی آورده ایم (نگ : ج۲٬صص۶۳-۹۵۸) ٬که پیشتر ترجمه ی فارسی آن به طور کامل در همین وبلاگ خدمت شما خوانندگان گرامی عرضه شد. به این ترتیب ٬ قصدمان آن بود که ضمن طرح متن اصلی٬ به زمینه ی مو ضوعی این مدخل٬ به طور اساسی ارزش نهیم و آن را فتح باب و آغاز مناسبی برای این دست از مباحث قرار دهیم. در صورتی که شما خوانندگان عزیز به این فعالیت علمیِ ما علاقه مندید٬ می توانید به بحث و نظر در این کارزار نظری و عملی بپیوندید.البته٬به یقین آنچه برای ما از ارزش بالا و اصیل برخوردار است٬ احترام متقابل و حفظ رابطه ی انسانی سالم در تمامی شئونات فکری -روشی واخلاقی و حیثیتی ست. امیدواریم که این فعالیت علمی قلمیِ محض و غیر جهت گیرانه آغاز راهی برای کارهای مهم تر در آینده باشد.

با احترام و ارادت  

غلامرضا آذری و حسین کیانی

Abstract

The entry on “Seven Traditions of Communication Theory” is translated into English language for the first time without any changes and also with full keeping the faithfulness and its necessity for presenting it in No. 0 of the present journal is made with respect to the experience of  translators and educators during continuous years of  teaching “Communication Theories” and the following cases: The source of this entry is “Encyclopedia of Communication Theory" edited by Littlejohn and  Foss,  published in two volumes by Sage Publication in 2009. Therefore, it could be a foundation for many of the important and key topics in teaching this lesson, and moreover, aiming to respond to the needs of many M.A and Ph.D students of communication, specially the lesson “Concepts and Theories of Mass Communication” and also the great demand of communication researchers and lecturers in the field of theories to have a fluent and reliable text to be able to use it in their studies and teachings. This writing in terms of its writers” emphasizes the fact that “Communication Theories” from their origin have always been attributed to different intellectual and methodical fields, and today they could be incorporated into seven distinct traditions. As such, this re-reading will help both the mental discipline of the researchers and their historical attention process in multi semantic-diagnostic scopes of the wonderful world of communication and media studies

Key words: Rhetoric, Semiotics, Phenomenology, Cybernetics, Social Psychology, Socio-cultural Theory, Critical Theory.    

Traditions of Communication Theory

Communication theory is a field of thought that is

rich in diverse ideas, but lacks coherence. There is

no universally agreed upon general theory of communication.

There are, by some ways of counting, hundreds of different communication theories.

These theories not only focus on different aspects

of communication (such as persuasion, media, or

intercultural communication), but often they are

based on incompatible metatheories—that is, conflicting

assumptions about communication and

even the very idea of theory. Because there is no

consensus on a theory or a set of core theories,

textbooks continue to define the field in various

ways and cover different sets of theories. Advanced

research is fragmented into different theoretical

approaches with relatively little discussion about

those differences.

It can be argued that the field of communication

theory would be more productive if theorists working

in different areas were more attentive to relevant

ideas in other areas. For this purpose it is helpful to

have an overview of the field that covers both the

variety of approaches as well as points of debate or

possible convergence among approaches. This entry

provides such an overview. The following sections

discuss how the field of communication theory

originated, how theories of communication have

developed in several distinct intellectual traditions

that offer contrasting views of communication

problems, and the current trends in the field.

 Emergence of Communication Theory as a Field

Although some traditions of communication theory,

such as rhetoric and semiotics, are much older,

the term communication theory was not widely

used until the 1940s, and initially it had little to do

with those older theoretical traditions. The term

first appeared in electrical engineering, where it

referred to mathematical theories of signal coding,

transmission, and processing that could be used, for

example, to optimize the channel capacity of telephone

lines. Despite their rather technical nature,

these theories attracted widespread interest among

social scientists and others who saw them as a

possible basis for a new science of communication

with important social applications. Two influential

books that contributed to this trend were Claude

Shannon and Warren Weaver’s The Mathematical

Theory of Communication and Norbert Wiener’s

Cybernetics. Words like information, noise, and

feedback, which had precise technical meanings in

these theories, were borrowed by other fields and

soon entered the common language, albeit with less

precise meanings. The interest in these theories

reflected a spreading belief, in the wake of World

War II, that improvements in human communication

were urgently needed to prevent war and

address other social problems.

In line with that generally rising concern with

communication problems, social scientific communication

research was also growing rapidly in the

1940s and beginning to gain recognition as an interdisciplinary

field. Research and theoretical writings

on communication were scattered across numerous

academic disciplines, including not only the engineering

theories just mentioned, but also among

others, philosophical theories of language and meaning,

psychological theories of persuasion and verbal

behavior, sociological theories of group and mass

communication, and rhetorical theories of public

discourse and speech communication. Scholars began

referring to this collection of ideas from many disciplines

as communication theory, and some argued

that communication might eventually become a scientific

discipline in its own right by building a new,

integrated field of theory on this broad foundation.

As they gleaned relevant ideas from other disciplines,

communication scholars began to see the

history of those ideas as strands of their own field’s

history. Although the field had existed in name for

only a few years, it could claim lines of ancestry

going back thousands of years, for example, to

ancient Greek theories of rhetoric and poetics. In

retrospect, we can see that the idea of communication

has emerged more or less independently in

several traditions of thought that have contributed

to different modern disciplines and still have yet to

be integrated as a coherent whole—a field of communication

theory—that is clearly more than the

sum of its parts. When the traditions of communication

theory are examined in this light, it becomes

apparent that each tradition provides a useful

perspective on communication problems and that

the differences among the traditions raise questions

for reflection and debate across the field.

Communication theory may, therefore, achieve a

kind of intellectual coherence, not by reaching universal

consensus on one grand theory, but by promoting

dialogue and debate across the diverse

traditions of communication theory.

 Seven Traditions of Communication Theory

Seven major traditions that have contributed to the

present field of communication theory. Each is

sketched briefly in the following paragraphs with

regard to its history, how it characteristically

defines communication and frames communication

problems, and its salient differences from other

traditions. Experts in these traditions may well

regard these descriptions as simplistic or outdated,

but it is important to see them in light of their

intended purpose. These sketches are not intended

to represent the complexity of current thinking in

each tradition. Rather, they are intended to center

each tradition in a perspective that is both highly

traditional and clearly distinguishes it from other

traditions. To illustrate how the traditions can be

used to illuminate communication problems, family

communication problems will be used as a running

example.

Rhetoric

Rhetoric, the oldest tradition of communication

theory, grew out of practices of oratory and debate

in the democratic polis (city-state) in ancient Greece

and was first theorized in writings of the sophists,

Plato, and Aristotle. Classical Roman rhetoricians,

especially Cicero, further elaborated the art of

rhetoric in treatises that influenced rhetorical education

for many centuries to come. Rhetorical theory

has a complex history, and recent work has

departed from the classical tradition in important

ways, yet rhetorical theory’s most distinctive contribution

to the larger field of communication theory

continues to be an idea at the heart of the

classical tradition: the concept of rhetoric, or communication

more generally, as a practical art of

discourse. In this tradition, communication is a

practice that requires skill and good judgment in

deciding what to say in challenging situations, some

people are better (more artful) communicators than

others, and the art of communication can be cultivated

by practice and criticism based on systematic

principles. With regard to our example of problems

in family communication, a rhetorical perspective

highlights the ways in which artful communication

is needed in family life, whether in parenting, negotiating

family relationships, or managing conflicts.

For example, a child coming out as gay may face

rhetorical challenges discussing this with some

family members, and rhetorical arguments used in

the current rhetoric about sexuality in society

are likely to influence what is said in those family

discussions.

Semiotics

A second tradition of communication theory is

semiotics, the study of signs. Semiotic theory conceptualizes

communication as a process that relies

on systems of signs (including language and all

kinds of nonverbal codes) to share meaning across

the gaps between subjective viewpoints. Because

we can never know directly what other people subjectively

think or feel, all communication relies on

the use of signs. For semiotic theory, communication

problems are misunderstandings or unconscious

differences in meaning that can be influenced

by the nature of semiotic codes and particular ways

of using signs. Modern semiotic theory began with

the 17th century English philosopher John Locke,

who wrote that communication requires attaching

clear ideas to words. The late 19th century American

pragmatist philosopher Charles S. Peirce and the

early twentieth century Swiss linguist Ferdinand de

Saussure founded distinct schools of semiotic theory.

Peirce analyzed the cognitive functions of

signs and distinguished different types of signs

(icon, index, and symbol). Saussure analyzed the

systematic structure of language and other sign

systems as social phenomena. More recently, poststructuralist

semiotic theories have held that signs

have unstable and contestable meanings. In contrast

to rhetoric, semiotic theory is more concerned

with problems of meaning than problems of what

to say. For example, family communication about

sexuality may be affected by generational differences

in the meanings of signs that are commonly

used to express gender and sexual identities.

Negotiating identities in the family may depend on

better understanding the different codes involved.

Phenomenology

A third tradition—the phenomenological—

conceptualizes communication as the experience of

self and other in dialogue. The problem of communication

for phenomenology, as for semiotics, arises in the gaps between subjective viewpoints:

One cannot directly experience another consciousness,

and the potential for intersubjective understanding

is thereby limited. Whereas semiotics

looks to the meanings of signs in approaching this

problem, phenomenology looks to the authenticity

of our ways of experiencing self and other. Barriers

to communication can arise from self-unawareness,

nonacceptance of difference, or strategic agendas

that preclude openness to the other. German philosophers

Edmund Husserl (1859–1938) and

Martin Heidegger (1889–1976) were key figures in

phenomenology. Martin Buber, Hans-Georg

Gadamer, Emanuel Levinas, and Carl Rogers

contributed different theories of dialogue and otherness,

all sharing an emphasis on authentic selfexpression

and openness to difference. Applying

this phenomenological perspective to problems in

family communication highlights, for example,

that modern people live busy lives, and family relationships

can become so minimal or routine that

members cease to experience each other as unique

individuals. No one really pays attention to what

Mom is thinking these days or how Melinda’s

sense of herself as Latina is changing as she struggles

through high school. In contrast to rhetoric’s

focus on communicative strategies and semiotics’

focus on signs and meanings, phenomenological

theory emphasizes the need for people to turn

toward one another, as Buber would put it, and

experience self and other in genuine dialogue.

Cybernetics

Fourth, a cybernetic tradition of communication

theory grew from those mid-20th century theories

in electrical engineering mentioned earlier. A relatively

new tradition, even though it originated the

field of communication theory, cybernetics conceptualizes

communication as information processing.

All complex systems, including computers and

other electronic devices, DNA molecules, plants

and animals, the human brain and nervous system,

social groups and organizations, and whole societies,

process information, and in that sense communicate.

Cybernetic theory downplays the differences

between human communication and other kinds of

information processing systems. Information storage,

transmission, and feedback, network structures,

and self-organizing processes occur in every

sufficiently complex system. Problems of communication

can arise from glitches in information

processing such as positive feedback loops that

amplify noise. The anthropologist Gregory Bateson

and a group of therapists known as the Palo Alto

Group developed a cybernetic theory of relationships

and family systems in the 1950s and 1960s.

They analyzed relationships as patterns of interaction

and feedback that tend to maintain themselves

regardless of what the individuals involved might

intend. For example, a couple can get stuck in a

nag-withdrawal pattern or one of escalating conflicts.

From a cybernetic point of view, family communication

problems are not essentially problems

of what to say (rhetoric), or the meaning of signs

(semiotics), or lack of authenticity (phenomenology);

instead, they are unwanted patterns of interaction

that can be difficult to change except by

disrupting the family system in some way.

Social Psychology

Social psychology, a fifth tradition of communication

theory, conceptualizes communication as

social interaction and influence. Communication

always involves individuals with their personality

traits, attitudes, emotions, and cognitive processes.

These psychological factors affect the communication

process, often with little awareness by communicators

of the underlying causes at work.

Influence occurs among individuals and on larger

scales through mass media. The practical problem

of communication from a sociopsychological perspective

is how to use communication variables

effectively, based on scientific research, to achieve

preferred outcomes. Social scientific communication

research has always been closely identified

with social psychology, so it is not surprising that

classic mid-20th century theories of group dynamics

(Kurt Lewin), persuasion (Carl Hovland), and

cognitive dissonance (Leon Festinger) were quickly

absorbed into communication theory and were

joined by many later theories either borrowing

from psychology or originated by communication

scholars. From a sociopsychological perspective,

problems of family communication are indicated

by outcomes such as low marital satisfaction or

destructive family conflict that can be attributed in

part to communication variables. For example, a

couple might seek training to learn about thecauses of marital satisfaction and techniques

they can use to improve their communication, thus

increasing their satisfaction. Like the rhetorical

tradition, sociopsychological theory is concerned

with effective communication. However, rhetoric

is a humanistic tradition that emphasizes moral,

aesthetic, and rational judgments of what is said in

particular situations, whereas social psychology is

a scientific tradition that emphasizes understanding

the causes that statistically determine communication

outcomes.

Sociocultural Theory

Sociocultural communication theory, which

derives from sociological and anthropological

thought, is a sixth tradition. Charles H. Cooley

and George H. Mead were early 20th century

American sociologists who contributed importantly

to this tradition. Sociocultural theory

conceptualizes communication as a process of

interaction that produces and reproduces shared

meanings, rituals, and social structures. There is a

tension in sociocultural theory between macro and

micro approaches. Macro approaches begin with

society as a whole and show how society functions

through communication while at the same time,

stable social structures and cultural patterns are

also necessary for communication to be possible.

Micro approaches begin with everyday social interaction

and show how meanings and social relations

are created, maintained, and altered in local,

moment-to-moment communication. From either

view, communication is involved with the coordination

of activities among individuals and groups,

and communication problems become evident

in difficulties and breakdowns of coordination.

Returning to the example of family communication,

sociocultural communication theory frames

problems in ways that relate families to larger

social structures and cultural communities. How to

talk to one’s kids about the use of illegal drugs,

family generational conflicts about preserving ethnic

cultural traditions, or the need for family rituals

to provide occasions for interaction are family

communication problems that arise from forces in

the larger society beyond those individual families.

By the same token, each family must construct its

own meanings and patterns of interaction within

that larger social context.

Critical Theory

The seventh and last tradition of communication

theory to be presented is that of critical theory,

which defines communication as discursive reflection

or discourse in which the implicit assumptions

behind what is said—such as whether an assertion

is really true or whether a particular way of speaking

is appropriate—can be freely questioned and

discussed as needed to achieve genuine mutual

understanding. Communication that prevents this

open questioning of assumptions is defective from a

critical perspective, and critical theories argue that

power structures in society prevent genuine communication

by systematically excluding the voices

of less powerful groups or otherwise thwarting discursive

reflection. This interpretation of critical

theory is due to Jürgen Habermas, a German social

theorist who developed the key concept of systematically

distorted communication and the contrasting

concept of ideal speech situation, which describes

a situation in which discursive reflection is possible.

The tradition of critical theory can be traced to Karl

Marx (1818–1883), who argued that dominant

ideologies like capitalism reflect the interests of the

ruling classes and bolster the economic status quo

in society. The Frankfurt School critical theorists of

the 1930s were not orthodox Marxists, but continued

to critique the effects of capitalist ideology on

culture and communication. Recent critical theory

includes newer schools of thought such as critical

cultural studies, feminism, and postcolonial theory

that largely reject Marxism, but continues to pursue

the goal of promoting emancipation and enlightenment

by lifting ideological blinders that perpetuate

social oppression. Applications of critical theory to

family communication problems would emphasize

the ways in which unquestioned assumptions about

race, class, gender, and sexuality distort the communication

process in families. Even the very idea

of a family needs to be questioned from a critical

standpoint, as debates over the legitimacy of homosexual

marriages illustrate.

Current Trends

The traditions of communication theory are constantly

evolving. Indeed, an advantage of thinking

about theories in relation to intellectual traditions is

that we can see more clearly what each new theory

contributes and how it builds upon or rejectselements of earlier theories. Moreover, intellectual

traditions are not walled off from one another.

Traditions influence each other over time and may

splinter, merge, or combine in new ways. Current

thinking on communication often integrates ideas

from different traditions in a creative process that

contributes to innovation in the field. Current theories

draw from various traditions and often cannot

be classified neatly in any one of them. Poststructuralist

theory, for example, draws from both

semiotics and phenomenology, is often regarded as a

kind of rhetorical theory, and has significantly influenced

recent sociocultural and critical theories.

The future of communication theory cannot be

known with certainty, but new or previously unrecognized

traditions of communication theory may

now be emerging to prominence. One is a pragmatist

tradition that defines communication as a pluralistic

community oriented to the need for cooperation

under conditions of diversity and interdependence.

There are also indications of a feminist tradition that

defines communication as an embodied connectedness

to others that implicates gendered meanings

and identities. Finally, there has recently been

much discussion of non-Western communication

theories—theories based on Asian, African, and other

cultural traditions that challenge the Eurocentric

bias of the current field and suggest entirely different

ways of theorizing communication.

Robert T. Craig

See also Critical Theory; Cybernetics; Metatheory;

Philosophy of Communication; Semiotics and

Semiology; Rhetorical Theory; Theory

Further Readings

Anderson, J. A. (1996). Communication theory:

Epistemological foundations. New York: Guilford Press.

Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field.

Communication Theory, 9, 119–161.

Craig, R. T. (2007). Pragmatism in the field of

communication theory. Communication Theory, 17,

125–145.

Craig, R. T., & Muller, H. L. (Eds.). (2007). Theorizing

communication: Readings across traditions. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dance, F. E. X. (Ed.). (1967). Human communication

theory: Original essays. New York: Holt, Rinehart &

Winston.

Littlejohn, S. W., & Foss, K. A. (2005). Theories of

human communication (8th ed.). Belmont, CA:

Thomson Wadsworth.

Mattelart, A. (1996). The invention of communication

(S. Emanuel, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of

Minnesota Press.

Mattelart, A., & Mattelart, M. (1998). Theories of

communication: A short introduction (J. A. Cohen &

S. G. Taponier, Trans.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Peters, J. D. (1999). Speaking into the air: A history of

the idea of communication. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press.

Schiller, D. (1996). Theorizing communication: A history.

New York: Oxford University Press.