COMM THEORY

CHAPTER I
WHAT IS A THEORY?

In broader term, it is defined as “An umbrella term for all careful, systematic, and self-
conscious discussion and analysis of communication phenomena” pero dahil nga ito ay
masyadong broad, wala itong tumbok na explanation on how to really define theory,
thus, it also has a lack of direction on how to construct one in the first place.

So paano natin madedefine ang theory?

Ayon kay Judee Burgoon, ang theory is nothing more than a “set of systematic hunches
about the way things operate” so naintriga si Em sa paggamit ng word na hunches o sa
ibang salita haka-haka. So, para kay Burgoon, a theory consists of a set of systematic,
informed hunches about the way things work.

Set of Hunches

If a theory is a set of hunches, it means we aren’t yet sure we have the answer.

Ayon kay Burgoon, with the use of set of hunches, a theory is not just one inspired
thought or an isolated idea.

Key takeaway: Ang theory ay may set of hunches, ang ibig sabihin nito, nabubuo ito ng
mga haka-haka na wala pang kasiguraduhan ang pagsagot. kung ang isang bagay ay
may obvious explanation na, hindi na ito dapat gawan ng theory. Ang theory kasi ay
binubuo ng elements na speculation or conjecture, you’re bound to question the
possibilities or the loopholes of the idea to come up with a well-conducted explanation.

Informed Hunches

Ayon kay Burgoon, it’s not enough to think carefully about an idea: a theorist’s hunches
should be informed.

Key takeaway: Before natin i-execute ang isang theory mahalaga na mafamiliarized
tayo sa alternative interpretations ng mga phenomena. So ang best way to dig deeper
unto our theory is to find if may existing articles na to read, kung ito ba ay pinag-
uusapan, kung ito ba ay ginawan na ba ng pagsusuri dahil lahat ng mga ways na ito ay
nagcacast ng light sa subject or dun sa idea natin. Theories tend to result when their
creators have prepared themselves to discover something in their environment, which
triggers the process of theory construction.

Hunches That Are Systematic

For scholars, the term theory is an integrated system of concepts.

A theory not only lays out multiple ideas, but also specifies the relationships among
them. In other words, it connects the dots. Key word: CORRELATION

Key takeaway: Kapag tayo ay nagbu-build ng mga informed hunches, unti unti nabubuo
yung pattern or nagkakaroon tayo ng hints regarding sa ating theory with the use of our
observation, explanations, and multiple ideas that correlates with each other. Kumbaga
nga sa sinabi ng explanation, we are connecting the dots.

Images of Theory

Theories as Nets: Ayon sa Philosopher of science na si Karl Popper, “theories are nets
cast to catch what we call ‘the world’… we endeavor to make the mesh ever finer and
finer.”

The term the world can be interpreted as everything that goes under the sun–thus
requiring a grand theory that applies to all communication, all the time.

Key takeaway: Sa pagkakaintindi ko po sa quote ni Karl Popper, ang theories ay nets

cast to catch what we call ‘the world’. The world has no specific identity, it can be
anything. It can be an idea, a hunch, an explanation, an observation, everything that
comes to your mind, but the sole purpose of it is to strengthen our theories and find the
answer to it. Mas nagiging refined yung theory natin when we pay attention and great
observation towards it. Katulad ng pag set ng hunches, or to provide factual information
that will help us to support our claim.

Theories as Lenses: The lens imagery highlights the idea that theories shape our
perception by focusing attention on some features of communication while ignoring
other features, or at least pushing them into the background.

Key takeaway: Sa pagkakaintindi ko sa lenses ay nagfofocus lang ito sa ibang

communication feature but will never focus sa lahat. A theory might have different
interpretations from other theorist based on what lenses they are using. Kumbaga,
siguro dahil nagce-create tayo ng multiple hunches or speculations, we tend to view a
theory differently from one another or we create our own perception on that theory.
Since iba iba ang nagiging interpretation ng isang theory, nadedevoid yung attempt of
finding what is real or true.
Theories as Map: A theory is like a map of a city on which you can view the streets,
housing developments, shopping cen- ters, picnic grounds, and rivers because there is
a key that helps you interpret what you see.

Key takeaway: sa pagkakaintindi ko po ang theory as a map ay parang it’s a sense of

direction where it consists of explanations, interpretation, and observation that acts as
the destinations o mga lugar sa isang map. Kapag nageexplore ka ng isang theory, mas
napapadali ang pagtackle mo dito dahil sa mga content na nakaulat. These so-called
places in the map (or theoretical approach) is the key that helps you interpret what you
see.

WHAT IS COMMUNICATION?

Si Frank Dance ang kauna-unahang nag-publish ng comprehensive book tungkol sa

communication theory. Nakabuo siya ng more than 120 definitions of communications
50 years ago at ito’y nadadagdagan pa, pero sa lahat ng definitions na to ay walang
nag-set as a standard of defining communication itself. So naisip ni Dance na masyado
nang matrabaho ang paggawa ng concept of communication.

Dineklara ni Jennifer Slack na “there is no single, absolute essence of communication

that adequately explains the phenomena we study. Such a definition does not exist;
neither is it merely awaiting the next brightest communication scholar to nail it down
once and for all.”

So for the starters, nagbigay ng working definition ang book na “Communication is the
relational process of creating and interpreting messages that elicit a response.”

FIVE FEATURES OF COMMUNICATION

Messages

Ang messages daw ay ang core ng communication study. Ayon sa isang

communication professor na si Robert Craig, communication involves talking and
listening, writing and reading, performing and witnessing, or more generally, any acts na
may kaugnayan sa messages in any medium or situation.

Gumagamit ang mga communication theorist ng salitang text as a synonym for

messages that can be studied, regardless of the medium.

Text – a record of messages that can be analyzed by others. Katulad ng libro,

magazine, film, photograph, at iba pang mga medium na may kaugnayan sa messages.

Creation of Messages
Ang paggawa ng form of a text ay usually constructed, invented, planned, crafted,
constituted, selected, or adopted by the communicator. Ang mga terms na to ay nag-
iimply na ang communicator ay may kamalayan o aware siya sa pagpili ng form of
message.

Kapag nakikipag-usap tayo meron na tayong mga programmed phrases na pwede

nating magamit later on. Katulad ng salamat, walang anuman, ay sige sige or minsan
gumagamit pa tayo ng mga curse words to express our feelings. Only when we become
more mindful of the nature and impact of our messages will we have the ability to alter
them. That’s why consciousness-raising is a goal of several theories in this book—each
one seeks to increase our communication choices.

Interpretation of Messages

Messages do not interpret themselves. Maraming scholars ang naniniwala na words

don’t mean things, people mean things. Meaning, people will find a way to interpret a
message and people can build different interpretations.

Halimbawa sinabi sayo ng friend mo na “let’s spent the night together” syempre out-of-
context pagkakasabi niya don, so ikaw mag-assume ka, “what do they mean by that? Is
it sleeping together, pulling an all-nighter, manood ng movie, or mag-3am deep talks, or
mag-love making?” so ikaw na overthinker, it will depend on how you will interpret the
message.

A Relational Process

Ayon kay Heraclitus, “one cannot step into the same river twice.” Naniniwala ang mga
sholars sa kasabihang ito dahil ang communication ay isang proseso. Much like a river,
the flow of communication is always in flux, never completely the same, and can only be
described with reference to what went before and what is yet to come.

Halimbawa, sabi ng friend mo “we spent the night together” so hindi doon nagtatapos
ang story. Para malaman mo yung sagot, magtatanong ka sa kanilang dalawa kung
anong ibig nilang sabihin. Whether sagutin nila yung tanong mo o hindi, makakabuo ka
ng sarili mong interpretation sa nangyari. That’s because communication is a process,
not a freeze-frame snapshot.

Communication is a relational process not only because it takes place between two or
more persons, but also because it affects the nature of the connections among those
people.

Messages That Elicit a Response

Ang last component na ito ay may kinalaman sa epekto ng massage on people who
receive it. Ayon kay dance, ang communication daw in its broadest interpretation may
be defined as eliciting of a response. Kung wala kang cognitive, emotional, at
behavioral reaction, hindi na matatawag na communication yon. Kumbaga it refers as
“falling on a deaf ears” o pagpapatay malisya.

Halimbawa, naglalaro ng valorant yung roommate mo. Tinanong mo siya kung kumain
na ba siya dahil nagdala ka ng makakain niyong dalawa. Eh hindi siya sumagot sa
tanong mo. Is that communication? Hindi. Kasi hindi naman sayo nakatuon yung focus
niya, masyando siyang engrossed sa laro na hindi niya nga namalayan na dumating ka
na. But if ever na narinig ka niya at nagpatay malisya lang o nagkaroon siya ng internal
reaction, there is a communication.

CHAPTER II
Glenn – Behavioral Scientist

Marty – Rhetorician

TWO COMMUNICATION SCHOLAR VIEW A HEARTWARMING AD

Glenn: An Objective Approach

Objective Approach: The assumption that truth is singular and is accessible through
unbiased sensory observation; committed to uncovering cause-and-effect relationships.

Nung natapos yung Budweiser Super Bowl 2013 commercial, a research company
announced na ang year’s commercial winner ay ang advertisement na Clydesdale ayon
sa kanilang data analysis. Nagtaka yung mga scientist kung bakit nagkaroon ng positive
feedback ang commercial na Clydesdale. They’re not intrigued about the number of
positive feedbacks but because of how enthusiastic the viewers are. So, they want to
explain and predict human behavior. So, through observation, nakabuo ang mga
scientist ng theory at ginamit nila yung theoretical idea ni Tony Schwartz sa resonance
principle of communication.

According to Schwartz, successful persuasive messages evoke past experiences that

create resonance between the message content and a person’s thoughts or feelings.
Schwartz believed that resonance leads to persuasion. It’s not arguments that persuade
people as much as it is memories of personal experiences triggered by the message.

The advertisement was made to be heartwarming in the first place because their
objective is to touch people’s heart as it triggers personal experiences within them.
Ganon nila ipersuade ang viewers nila. To get them overwhelmed from their emotions
because the advertisement is wholesome. So maaring maset aside yung thought ng
ibang viewers na there’s a health risk in drinking beer, kasi it seems that the company is
not too focused on advertising their alcoholic beverage, but rather, they are more fixated
on how the Clydesdale have been taken care of instead, and it triggers the viewers’
memories especially yung mga nag-aalaga din ng pets. In this case, persuasion may be
measured both in beer sales and positive thoughts about Budweiser—a company well
aware that its success may lead to alcohol abuse among consumers and a bad
corporate reputation.

Theories needs to be validated. Para sa mga scientists, ang theory ay hindi pa sapat
para ma-identify, rather, it needs to be tested to determine whether the theory is faulty
or valid.

Marty: An Interpretive Approach

Interpretive Approach: The linguistic work of assigning meaning or value to

communicative texts; assumes that multiple meanings or truths are possible.

Para kay Marty, the entire ad is structured by an archetypal mythic pattern of birth-
death-rebirth. Archetypal myths are those that draw upon a universal experience or
yung tinatawag ni Carl Jung na “collective unconscious.”

The use of such archetypes, according to rhetorical theorist Michael Osborn, touches off
“depth responses” that emotionally resonate at the core of our being.

So kung i-aapply natin itong archetypes dun sa ad, ang Birth ay tumutukoy doon sa
newborn colt at inaalagaan siya ng kanyang breeder hanggang sa paglaki. The Death
signifies as void and absence when the Budweiser 18-wheeler arrives to take the
Clydesdale. At nagkaroon lang ng rebirth after three years when the horse and the
breeder reunited. So yung dati nilang relationship na nabuwag (Death) ay narestore ulit
dahil sa reunion ng horse at ni kuyang nag-aalaga (Rebirth). The emotions evoked by
this ad are strong because we are dealing with life and death, with loss and restoration.

The ad subtly suggests that Budweiser beer is our constant mainstay. Pinaparating ng
ad na kahit sa anong hamon ng buhay, Budweiser never changes, never disappear.
Budweiser is portrayed as your companion and your comforter.

OBJECTIVE OR INTERPRETIVE WORLDVIEWS: SORTING OUT OF THE LABELS

Although parehong nagfocus ang dalawang scholar sa warm emotions ng viewers, ang
kanilang approach when conducting a starting point, method, and conclusion ay may
great differences. Si Glenn ay isang social scientist na nagfofocus sa objective.
Samantalang si Marty naman ay isang rhetorical critic na nagfofocus sa interpretive
study.

Humanistic scholarship: Study of what it’s like to be another person in a specific time
and place; assumes there are few important panhuman similarities.

While it’s true that all rhetorical critics do interpretive analysis, not all interpretive
scholars are rhetoricians. Karamihan sa kanila ay humanists at pinag-aaralan nila ang
sitwasyon ng iba’t ibang tao as they put themselves into that spot. The separate
worldviews of interpretive scholars and scientists reflect contrasting
assumptions about ways of arriving at knowledge, the core of human nature,
questions of value, and the purpose of theory.

WAYS OF KNOWING: DISCOVERING TRUTH OR CREATING MULTIPLE

REALITIES

How do we know what we know, if we know it at all? This is the central question
addressed by a branch of philosophy known as epistemology.

Epistemology: The study of the origin, nature, method, and limits of knowledge.

Ontology: a set of concepts and categories in a subject area or domain that shows
their properties and the relations between them.

Axiology: It includes questions about the nature and classification of values and about
what kinds of things have value.

Scientists assume that Truth is singular. They see a single, timeless reality “out there”
that’s not dependent on local conditions. It’s waiting to be discovered through the five
senses of sight, sound, touch, taste, and smell. Syempre wala pang tao ang
nakakaalam ng lahat, kaya naman nagcoconduct ng mga research ang mga scientists
and builds a collective body of knowledge on how to world works.

Objective theorists are confident that once a principle is discovered and validated, it will
continue to hold true as long as conditions remain relatively the same. That’s why Glenn
believes the theory of resonance can explain why other media messages succeed or
fail.

Interpretive scholars seek truth as well, but many interpreters regard that truth as
socially constructed through communication. They believe language creates social
realities that are always in flux rather than revealing or representing fixed principles or
relationships in a world that doesn’t change. Knowledge is always viewed from a
particular standpoint.
Text never interpret themselves. Karamihan sa mga scholars ay naniniwala na ang
katotohanan ay greatly subjective– that meaning is highly interpretive.

Therefore, rhetorical critics maintain that objectivity is a myth; we can never entirely
separate the knower from the known. Convinced that meaning is in the mind rather than
in the verbal sign, interpreters are comfortable with the notion that a text may have
multiple meanings.

HUMAN NATURE: DETERMINISM OR FREE WILL?

Determinism: The assumption that behavior is caused by heredity and environment.

One of the great philosophical debates throughout history revolves around the question
of human choice.

Sabi ng Hard-line determinists na every move we make is the result of heredity (“biology
is destiny”) and environment (“pleasure stamps in, pain stamps out”).

Samantalang ang free-will purists insist that every human act is ultimately voluntary (“I
am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul).

The difference between these two views of human nature ay kung paano nila cinoc-
construct ang sentence nila. Individuals who feel like puppets on string might say, “I had
to…”, whereas people who feel like they pull their own string says, “I decided to…”

Parang scenario na “napatigil ako sa pag-aaral kasi ang ingay nung mga kapitbahay na
nag-aaway, di tuloy ako makafocus.” samantalang yung isa naman, “tumigil ako sa pag-
aaral dahil gusto kong malaman kung ano yung pinag-aawayan ng kapitbahay namin.”

Behavioral scientists usually describe human conduct as occurring because of forces

outside the individual’s awareness. Their causal explanations tend not to include
appeals to mental reasoning or conscious choice. They usually describe behavior as the
response to a prior stimulus.

While interpretive scholars tend to use explanatory phrases such as in order to and so
that because they attribute a person’s action to conscious intent. Their word selection
suggests that people are free agents who could decide to respond differently under an
identical set of circumstances.

Katulad nung sa Clydesdale, ginamit ni Marty yung voluntary action instead of knee-jerk
behavior. Pwede namang hindi na pumunta yung lalaki sa Chicago, but he made a
choice to go see the Clydesdale he used to take care.

Human choice is problematic for the behavioral scientist because as individual freedom
goes up, predictability of behavior goes down.
THE HIGHEST VALUE: OBJECTIVITY OR EMANCIPATION?

When we talk about values, we’re discussing priorities, questions of relative worth.
Values are the traffic lights of our lives that guide what we think, feel, and do.

Since most social scientists hold to a distinction between the “knower” and the “known,”
they place value on objectivity that’s not biased by ideological commitments. Because
humanists and others in the interpretive camp believe that the ability to choose is what
separates humanity from the rest of creation, they value scholarship that expands the
range of free choice.

Emancipation: Liberation from any form of political, economic, racial, religious, or

sexual oppression; empowerment.

Stan Deetz believe that every general communication theory has two properties–
effectiveness and participation. Effectiveness is concerned with successfully
communicating information, ideas, and meaning to others. Kabilang na dito ang
persuasion.

Participation is concerned with increasing the possibility that all points of view will affect
collective decisions and individuals being open to new ideas. It also encourages
difference, opposition, and independence.

Which concern has higher priority?

Ang objective theorists ay forda go sa effectiveness. Samantalang, ang interpretive

theorists naman ay forda go sa participation.

So, for me, it has to be balanced.

PURPOSE OF THEORY: UNIVERSAL LAWS OR INTERPRETIVE GUIDES?

As a behavioral scientist, Glenn is working to pin down universal laws of human

behavior that cover a variety of situations. As a rhetorical critic, Marty strives to
interpret a particular communication text in a specific context.

Kumbaga daw sa fashion design, si Glenn ay nagfofocus sa paggawa ng coat na

pwedeng pagbagayan sa kahit anong occasion at available for all sizes. While Marty
would apply fashion design principles to create a one-of-a-kind, custom creation. To
showcase uniqueness. Glenn adopts a theory and then tests it to see if it covers
everyone. Marty uses theory to make sense of unique communication events.

Since theory testing is the basic activity of the behavioral scientist, Glenn starts with a
hunch about how the world works—perhaps the idea that stories are more persuasive
than arguments. He then crafts a tightly worded hypothesis that temporarily commits
him to a specific prediction. As an empiricist, he can never completely “prove” that he
has made the right gamble; kaya nga niya tinetest ang validity ng hypothesis.

The interpretive scholar explores the web of meaning that constitutes human
existence. When Marty creates scholarship, he isn’t trying to prove theory. However, he
sometimes uses the work of rhetorical theorists like Michael Osborn to inform his
interpretation of the aural and visual texts of people’s lives.

Sabi ng ani Robert Ivie, “We cannot conduct rhetorical criticism of social reality without
benefit of a guiding rhetorical theory that tells us generally what to look for in social
practice, what to make of it, and whether to consider it significant.”

OBJECTIVE OR INTERPRETIVE: WHY IS IT IMPORTANT?

The first answer is because you can’t fully understand a theory if you aren’t familiar with
its underlying assumptions about truth, human nature, the purpose of the theory, and its
values. If you’re clueless, things can get confusing fast. When you understand what
each type of theorist is about, your comfort zone will expand, and your confusion will
diminish.

There’s another reason to master these metatheoretical differences. After exposure to a

dozen or more theories, you may find that they begin to blur together in your mind.
Classifying them as scientific or interpretive is a good way to keep them straight.

Metatheory Theory: about theory; the stated or inherent assumptions made when
creating a theory.

Understanding these objective/interpretive choice points can also help you decide the
direction you want to take in your remaining course work. The scientist is convinced that
knowing the truth about how communication works will give us a clearer picture of social
reality. The interpreter is equally sure that unearthing communicator motivation and
hidden ideologies will improve society by increasing free choice and discouraging unjust
practices.