Chapter Six
Theories of Symbolic
Organization
Social Scientific Approaches to
Symbolic Organization
Metaphors for Understanding
how people make sense of social
lives
Consistency seeker (e.g., cognitive
dissonance theory)
Naïve scientist (e.g., attribution
theory)
Cognitive miser (e.g., schema
theory)--efficiency
Schema Theory:
What are schemas?
Schemas are templates that help us
understand the social world (cognitive
economy)—have been studied as what
(content) and how (process of
activation)
Many types of schemas – self, other
people, roles, and events (Table 6.1)
Exist at various levels of abstraction
and may be organized into memory
organization packets
Schema Theory:
How do schemas work?
When are schema developed and
activated? When new situations arise
or when the current situation
“matches” an already developed
schema
How are schema changed? Several
models have been proposed:
bookkeeping, conversion, and
subtyping (most empirical support)
Schema Theory:
Applications in Communication
Consideration of memory organization
packets (MOPs) to understand
conversation
Consideration of schemas that guide
our expectations about relationships
Consideration of schemas in
imagined interactions
Consideration of schemas we hold for
mass communication programming
Schema
What are some schemas for funerals?
Are there MOPS?
How might the schema be altered?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfD
yTUiL8xs
Schema in the media:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvy
elwDA0Ws
Attribution Theory:
Basis Concepts
Views people as “naïve scientists” who
look for causal explanations in social life
(“why” questions)
Locus of attributions can be internal
(within the person) or external (within the
situation)
Fundamental attribution error (negative
vs. positive behaviors)
Attributions can also be seen in terms of
the stability and controllability of social
behavior
Attributions in Interpersonal
Contexts
Part of day-to-day talk
Influenced by relationship quality
(satisfaction)—see example, next two slides
Whether making an attribution in public or
privately to partner
If we believe that resistance is based on
controllable and internal attribution, we are
more persistent in persuasive strategies
such as guilt or appeals to altruism
Patterns of Attribution in Relationships:
Satisfied
Partner’s Behavior
Positive
Your Attribution
Internal
Partner’s Response
Positive
Stable
Controllable
External
Negative
Unstable
Uncontrollable
Positive
Patterns of Attribution in Relationships:
Dissatisfied
Partner’s Behavior
Positive
Your Attribution
External
Partner’s Response
Negative
Unstable
Uncontrollable
Internal
Negative
Stable
Controllable
Negative
Attribution Theory in Mediated
Communication
Media provides attributions for
events/behaviors
Movies influence viewers’ attributions
Third-person Effect
We assume that others are more
strongly influenced by the media than we
are (we have more common sense)
Interlude
Schema theory and Attribution theory
in social scientific theory building
What are the variables?
What are some propositions?
Humanistic Approaches to
Symbolic Organization
Humanistic approaches—not looking
for cognitive structures or causal
explanations
Looking for ways to making sense of
or understand the social and symbolic
world
Subjective and value-laden
Narrative Theory: Walter Fisher
The narrative paradigm can be
distinguished from a “rational world
paradigm.” (Table 6.3)
“Humans experience and comprehend
life as a series of ongoing narratives,
as conflicts, characters, beginnings,
middles, and ends.”
“…the narrative paradigm is a
philosophical statement that is meant
to offer an approach to interpretation
and assessment of human comm.”
Narrative Theory:
Analysis of Narrative Rationality
The “goodness” of a story can be
judged in terms of narrative
coherence and narrative fidelity
Narrative coherence considers the
integrity of a story’s structure
Narrative fidelity considers whether
the story “rings true” with the beliefs
of listeners
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjV
2AWzBQNo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylv
AovoO2kk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJllDFNGPg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH
D1uxujnFQ&feature=related
Question to consider: Fidelity
In some measure, fidelity is a judgment
call—what is truthful and humane in
everyday lives and the world
Fisher: imagines an audience that believes
in the values of truth, the good, beauty,
health, wisdom, courage, temperance,
justice, harmony, order, communion,
friendship, and oneness with the Cosmos
Do the stories of modern culture (rap
music, reality tv, movies, etc.) offer this?
Narrative Theory:
Applications and critiques
Applications have included consideration of
parental support groups (Toughlove story)
and of political party platforms
Some critiques of the narrative paradigm
have been raised about its use in the
analysis of a wide range of texts
Fisher, however, believes that all forms of
communication be analyzed as stories
Kenneth Burke’s Dramatism
Wide-ranging influence in rhetoric and
communication discipline
Burke’s work can be used to analyze
(1) language as a form of action
(2) human action as dramatic in form
(3) human action as rhetorical
(4) pluralistic and dialectical program for
analysis of human behavior
Dramatism:
Language as a Form of Action
Distinction between motion and action
is what distinguishes humans from
other animals—humans have agency
Humans engage in symbolic action
Several implications, including (1)
separation from natural world, (2)
reflexivity, (3) introduction of “the
negative,” and (4) introduction of
hierarchy
Humans are
the symbol-making, symbol-using, symbolmisusing animal
inventor of the negative
separated from our natural condition
by instruments of our own making
goaded by the spirit of hierarchy
acquiring foreknowledge of death
and rotten with perfection (qtd. in Coe 332333).
http://www.cla.purdue.edu/dblakesley/burke/human/index.html
Dramatism:
Action as Dramatic
Can consider the “grand sweep” of life’s
drama through the process of guilt and
redemption
This process involves mortification and
scapegoating
Can also consider smaller “dramas of life”
through consideration of dramatistic
pentad (act, scene, agent, purpose, and
agency)—language as a terministic
screen
Act: What happened? What is the action? What is
going on? What action; what thoughts?
Scene: Where is the act happening? What is the
background situation?
Agent: Who is involved in the action? What are their
roles?
Agency: How do the agents act? By what means do
they act?
Purpose: Why do the agents act? What do they want?
Of dramatism, Burke said: "If action, then drama; if
drama, then conflict; if conflict, then victimage.
http://rhetorica.net/burke.htm
An example: http://burton.byu.edu/Composition/Burke-Pentad_files/frame.htm
Question for Burke
How might a communication scholar
analyze the Iraq War using the
dramatistic pentad (act, scene, agent,
purpose, and agency) from the
perspective of someone
A. Opposed to the war (pull out now)
B. Supports finishing the war
ConsubstantiationIt’s more than
credibility
Dramatism: Application
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zF
KtgTsKDIg&feature=related
How does the speaker build (or not
build) consubstantion?
Choose an “act” in the story (e.g.,
“this spectacle”)—who is the agent?
Walk through the rest of the pentad.
Who are the villains (devil-term)?
Who can provide redemption?
Can you determine a pentadic ratio?