Communication is found in everyday life situations. Though the definition of communication has multiple varieties, the concept of communicating remains the same. Communication consists of several components. It is a diverse area of study and has several views of its history. Today, the communication discipline has three major areas of...
Communication is found in everyday life situations. Though the definition of communication has multiple varieties, the concept of communicating remains the same. Communication consists of several components. It is a diverse area of study and has several views of its history. Today, the communication discipline has three major areas of study that have developed since it first became a formal discipline. Overall, communication is an ever-changing concept that demands analysis.
Duck and McMahan (2018) attempt to define communication as the transactional use of symbols, influenced, guided, and understood in the context of relationships. Communication is more than just the exchange of a message. Communication is described as having seven key characteristics: symbolic, requires meaning, cultural, relational, involves frames, presentational and representational, and is a transaction (Duck and McMahan, 2018). All communication is characterized using symbols which is an arbitrary representations of something else such as an object, an idea, a place, a person, or a relationship (Duck and McMahan, 2018). Communication requires that symbols convey meaning. Culture influences communication and communication creates and reinforces these cultural influences (Duck and McMahan, 2018). Relationships are assumed each time you communicate with someone (Duck and McMahan, 2018). An additional characteristic of communication is that it involves frames. The use of frames helps people make sense of matters. A communication frame draws a boundary around the conversation and pulls our attention toward certain things and away from others (Duck and McMahan, 2018). Communication can also describe facts or convey information or give one person’s version of the facts of events. Lastly, communication is an action, interaction, and transaction (Duck and McMahan, 2018).
Communication research and theory development and change as scholars labor in their studies (Duck and McMahan, 2018). In modern times, the communication discipline was formalized for academic study out of studies of rhetoric, elocution, and speech (Duck and McMahan, 2018). Communication later became a discipline devoted to the study of public speaking (Duck and McMahan, 2018). Communication focuses on how people use messages to generate meanings within and across various contexts and is the discipline that studies all forms, modes, media, and consequences of communication through humanistic, social scientific, and aesthetic inquiry (What is Communication, 2019). Communication cuts across contexts and situations; it is the relational and collaborative force that strategically constructs the social world. Knowledge and understanding of communication and strong communication skills allow people to create and maintain interpersonal relationships; employers in all sectors seek employees with strong communication skills; and society needs effective communicators to support productive civic activity in communities (What is Communication, 2019).
There are many approaches to the study of communication, but there are three with the most influence: social scientific, interpretivism, and critical (Duck and McMahan, 2018). Scholars frequently engage in more than one approach. The social scientific approach views the world as objective, casual, and predictable. Those who use this approach seek to describe communication activities and discover connections between phenomena or casual patterns (Duck and McMahan, 2018). Social scientific methods often involve quantitative data collection and research approaches such as surveys and experiments. From this perspective, intercultural communication is seen as a pattern of interaction, and we seek to explain and understand these patterns through clear measurement and identification of key independent variables (Oetzel, Pant, and Rao, 2016). The interpretive approach views communication as creative, uncertain, and unpredictable, and thus rejects the idea that a single reality exists or can be discovered. Those who use this approach primarily seek to understand and describe communication experience (Duck and McMahan, 2018). Interpretive methods often involve qualitative data collection and research approaches such as interviews and ethnographic observation. From this perspective, intercultural communication and meaning are created through interaction, and we seek to understand these meanings by exploring the perspectives of people who participate as members of cultural communities (Oetzel, Pant, and Rao, 2016). Lastly, the critical approach seeks to identify the hidden but formidable symbolic structures and practices that create or uphold the disadvantage, inequity, or oppression of some groups in favor of others (Duck and McMahan, 2018). Critical methods often involve qualitative data collection and research approaches such as interviews and textual critique. From this perspective, intercultural communication involves inequalities that can be attributed to power and distortions created from (mis)use of this power. Critical scholars seek to unmask domination and inequality (Oetzel, Pant, and Rao, 2016).
Though a combination and variation of these approaches are used by scholars and researchers, each approach has advantages and disadvantages. To begin, the social scientific approach lays an easy foundation for studies to be conducted. Also, different types of social scientists often strongly agree about the way in which assessments can be made of behavior. Lastly, this approach can explain patterns of observations theoretically and derive new predictions from previous works. Contrary to being predictive, one disadvantage is that this approach is often challenged stating that human behavior is in fact, not predictable (Duck and McMahan, 2018). There are multiple variables involved with the social scientific approach making it difficult to find identifiable variables. This type of research is also culturally insensitive as dominant social views are privileged over others (Duck and McMahan, 2018). The interpretive approach provides a deep understanding of communication that cannot be gained through other perspectives. Another advantage is that communication is more likely to be studied in a natural context. This approach also claims that scholars can never be truly objective as all observers have their own biases and interpretive styles (Duck and McMahan, 2018). Disadvantages of the interpretive approach include a limited scope of understanding, questioning of the researcher’s accuracy and perspective, and methods that are often time-consuming (Duck and McMahan, 2018). The critical approach has proven important in redirecting the thinking of scholars toward the awareness of inequities in society at large. These theorists have made it their goal to identify imbalances and remove them. Some have argued that this approach gives itself power and the right to identify the nature of inequity and how it may be challenged (Duck and McMahan, 2018). The challenge of critical scholars is dealing with the question of how the public knows they are correct (Duck and McMahan, 2018).
Despite which approach is primarily used, communication remains important. Knowledge and understanding of communication and strong communication skills allow people to create and maintain interpersonal relationships.
References
- Duck, S., & McMahan, D. T. (2018). Communication in everyday life: a survey of communication (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
- Oetzel, J., Pant, S., & Rao, N. (2016). Methods for Intercultural Communication Research. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.202
- What is Communication? (2019, March 21). Retrieved from https://www.natcom.org/about-nca/what-communication.
531
