MARVIN D TALAN

BACR2-1N

ADVANCE COMMUNICATION THEORIES AND MODELS

DIMENSION OF THEORY

PHILOSOPICAL ASSUMPTIONS

Ontological issue relates to the nature of reality and its characteristics. When researchers conduct qualitative research, they are embracing the idea of multiple realities.
Different researchers embrace different realities, as do the individuals being studied and the readers of a qualitative study. When studying individuals, qualitative
researchers conduct a study with the intent of reporting these multiple realities. Evidence of multiple realities includes the use of multiple forms of evidence in themes
using the actual words of different individuals and presenting different perspectives. For example, when writers compile a phenomenology, they report how individuals
participating in the study view their experiences differently (Moustakas, 1994).

With the epistemological assumption, conducting a qualitative study means that researchers try to get as close as possible to the participants being studied. Therefore,
subjective evidence is assembled based on individual views. This is how knowledge is known—through the subjective experiences of people. It becomes important, then,
to conduct studies in the “field,” where the participants live and work—these are important contexts for understanding what the participants are saying. The longer
researchers stay in the “field” or get to know the participants, the more they “know what they know” from firsthand information. For example, a good ethnography
requires prolonged stay at the research site (Wolcott, 2008a). In short, the researcher tries to minimize the “distance” or “objective separateness” (Guba & Lincoln, 1988,
p. 94) between himself or herself and those being researched.

All researchers bring values to a study, but qualitative researchers make their values known in a study. This is the axiological assumption that characterizes qualitative
research. How does the researcher implement this assumption in practice? In a qualitative study, the inquirers admit the value-laden nature of the study and actively
report their values and biases as well as the value-laden nature of information gathered from the field. We say that they “position themselves” in a study. In an interpretive
biography, for example, the researcher’s presence is apparent in the text, and the author admits that the stories voiced represent an interpretation and presentation of
the author as much as the subject of the study (Denzin, 1989a).

The procedures of qualitative research, or its methodology, are characterized as inductive, emerging, and shaped by the researcher’s experience in collecting and analyzing
the data. The logic that the qualitative researcher follows is inductive, from the ground up, rather than handed down entirely from a theory or from the perspectives of
the inquirer. Sometimes the research questions change in the middle of the study to reflect better the types of questions needed to understand the research problem.
In response, the data collection strategy, planned before the study, needs to be modified to accompany the new questions. During the data analysis, the researcher
follows a path of analyzing the data to develop an increasingly detailed knowledge of the topic being studied.
TRADITIONS OF COMMUNICANICATION THEORY

The semiotic tradition is one discipline that brings to light the importance of signs and symbols and how they come to represent ideas and concepts through our own
experiences and perceptions. This comes to project the thought that through our own perception, we come to interpret meanings for objects that hold a symbolic
presence rather than it merely being just an object of reality. Two main important attributes of this theory are the definitions of signs and symbols. A Sign meaning “a
stimulus designating or indicting some other condition” and a symbol “designating a complex sign with many meanings, including highly personal ones” (Littlejohn & Foss
35). Signs, more so, are connected to an object in reality and symbols having more of a subjective realization. One person might look at a photograph of Asia and see a
foreign and exotic landscape, whereas a person who has lived or travelled there might look at it completely different, as home or a place with specific memories or
experience, despite the fact that it is the same image being shown. The meaning, according to to this tradition, therefore, is a bound relationship of three things (the
object, the person, and the sign) as Charles Saunders dictates, calling it the Triad of Meaning (Littlejohn & Foss 35). To branch out a little further in semiotics, there are
also three subdivisions that separate the vastness of this tradition: Semantics (what signs represent), Syntactics (relationships between signs), and Pragmatics (utility of
signs) (Littlejohn & Foss 36). The semiotic tradition is important in the aspect that we are governed by icons, signs, and symbolic forms of information consistently. It is
within the relationship between the symbols and us that tells us not to drink the bottle with the skull symbol on it or not to cross the street when the light is red.

The phenomenological tradition has a different focus than that of the semiotic. Its focus is more on the individual interpreter rather than the function and symbolic nature
of the sign itself. People interpret messages and experiences by filtering the comprehension through their own values and understanding and therefore deciphering the
world through this. An individual comes to know the world as they participate and engage within it and how they relate to an object is how they assess the meaning
behind it (Littlejohn & Foss 37). This is why the process of interpretation is at the central point of this tradition, stating that it is literally what forms the reality of the
information or existence for that individual (Littlejohn & Foss 38). Direct experience is therefore very important in this theory. The phenomenological tradition is also split
into three schools of thought: classical phenomenology, the phenomenology of perception, and hermeneutic phenomenology. Edmund Husserl, considered the founder
of modern phenomenology, held an almost controversial view that instead of seeing things through our own psyches, we should take ourselves away from our biases and
see things in an objective way in order to be able to interpret the actual experience (Littlejohn & Foss 38). Many scholars disagreed and thus the phenomenology of
perception came to be. This is the concept that says we only know things through our own experiences. Hermeneutic phenomenology is similar to this but goes a little
bit deeper and connects communication and language more in depth.

Cybernetics is a little bit different than the previous two traditions. It examines the overall workings of communication in relation to systems. A system being “a system of
parts, or variables, that influence one another, shape and control the character of the overall system” (Littlejohn & Foss 40). To put this in an easier way to understand,
we’ll use an example of a classroom system. The relationships between the students and teacher, students and each other, subject matter, environment of the classroom,
cultural diversity of students, and homework all come together to form a cycle of networks and connections. Basic system theory (the outside observations of the actual
flow and structure of systems), cybernetics (the study centred on circular networks and feedback loops), general system theory (the relation of similarities of systems
across other platforms), and second-order cybernetics (the affect the observer has on a system as well as how it affects the observer) are four variants of the cybernetic
tradition. This tradition gives a great overview of how the system works but because of this, it does not take into consideration the smaller individual pieces and influences
that interact with each other (Littlejohn & Foss 41). By understanding the cybernetic tradition in relationship to communication, it shows the intricate and elaborate
network of possibilities that people adapt and are absorbed in.
The next tradition, socio-psychological, is linked very closely to the cybernetic tradition in the sense that even as individuals, we are more likely to adhere and accept any
new communication that abides to already set systems of knowledge, beliefs, or values. The socio-psychological tradition stems from psychological theories and is focused
heavily on the individual as a socialized entity, a part of a network of people, but still independent in their actions (Littlejohn & Foss 42). Trait theory, a major focus in this
tradition, explores attitude and the connection between personality and one’s communication. It is easy to understand the collaboration between communication and
psychology in the sense that one’s personality or psychological influence will impact how they react to certain messages, accepting them or being biased against them,
and how they communicate their own values, in the form of coming across in certain stereotypical behaviour.

The socio-cultural tradition in comparison to socio-psychological tradition is the study of one’s relationship as a whole to a culture rather than individual differences.
Reality is the sum of all the parts when viewing people as components and the influence the sum has on the individual (Littlejohn & Foss 43). To put this is lament terms,
we are a product of how people see us and represent ourselves accordingly. How we present ourselves is how we wish to be perceived by other people and how they
perceive us, although initial views might be stereotypical, is a direct instigator on how they act towards us and thereby reaffirming our identities.
The critical tradition is centered around very idealistic views. To be involved with the critical tradition, acquiring knowledge is not enough but action is also a very
fundamental key value. Sociological change through communicate is essential as studies within this variation tend to pivot around the powers, oppressions, inequalities,
and demographically different privileges of a society (Littlejohn & Foss 45). Marxism (study on economy and production in alliance to society), postmodernism (the
emergence of the information age and powers of media), and feminist studies (the critique and study on gender roles, race and sexuality) are all main disciplines of the
critical tradition. Usually theorists of these parties are involved in activist organizations and community groups, challenging standard norms and roles.

the rhetorical tradition because of the use of human symbol use, many scholars broadly link this to where initially the discipline of communication came to be dating back
to 5th Century BC Greece (Littlejohn & Foss 49). In a nutshell, rhetoric is “adjusting ideas to people and people to ideas” (Littlejohn & Foss 49) through the use of language
and symbols. The art of persuasion is embedded within this section, as communication and information go hand in hand with educated societies and individuals.
Although all seven traditions outline and have depth in each specialized area of expertise, they themselves are connected together and each cannot survive on its own to
explain all aspects of communication. Certain traditions clash against each other (semiotic and cybernetic) whereas others work together and help explain one another
(cybernetic and socio-psychology) but nonetheless, they all form a puzzle that tries to piece together what communication is all about. Keeping this in mind, I find the
socio-cultural tradition, in my experience, to be one of the most valuable when it comes to communication. Although individual traits do have a strong role in the act of
communication, cultural influences such as family, society, media, and religion all create rules and regulations on what, why, where, and how we are to communicate
and act. Slangs and terminology in different genres or cultures dictate a certain understanding of the particular group when used and can be a determining aspect on
one’s identity. Even those who choose to not conform to these views, within their rebellion, are conforming to another set of rules established by society’s views on
revolt or resistance. Because of the undeniable force and power of today’s media, with the bombardment of advertisements and targeted television shows, it is more
crucial to understand socio-culturalism in the sense that our culture is being sold to us through these mediums.

In conclusion, the study of communication has many variables associated with it. Even within every tradition, there are subgroups, all attempting to explain the
complexities on how we interact, communicate, interpret and explore our reality. From the moment we wake up to the moment we fall asleep at night, we are apart of
an intricate system of receiving and shipping ideas that govern, identify, and influence us as individuals and as a culture.