COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 1
COMM 495: Communication Capstone
Professor
Office
Office Hours
Office Phone
Dr. Brian H. Spitzberg
COMM Bldg 201
TTh 10-11:30, Th 1-2, & by Appt.
619.594.7097 (email preferred)
Semester
Schedule #
Classroom
Mailbox in:
FALL 2013
20854
LA-2203 (Library Annex)
COMM BLDG. 236/237
E-mail
Texts
spitz@mail.sdsu.edu
Class Time
Tue 4-6:40
Objectives
1. Stacks, D. W. & Salwen, M. B. (Eds.). (2009). An integrated approach to communication
theory and research (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
2. i>clicker “clicker” and current semester registration (register through Blackboard!).
3. Additional readings specified in syllabus.
This course seeks to both refresh and assess knowledge competencies in regard to the
field of communication, especially as represented in the SDSU School of Communication.
Think of it as “The 150 things every student should know about communication,” covering
the following:
I. CORE COMMUNICATION COMPETENCIES:
 DISCIPLINE: Demonstrate knowledge of key persons and events in the history of
the discipline of communication;
 COMMUNICATION: Specify and differentiate key principles regarding the
definition and nature of communication, language, nonverbal communication, and
their contexts;
 THEORIES: Specify and differentiate the nature of theories, their criteria for
evaluation, and paradigms;
 METHODS: Specify and differentiate key assumptions and practices of the major
methodological paradigms in the field of communication;
 RELATIONSHIPS: Specify and differentiate key principles of core societal relationships
formed through communication;
 SOCIETY: Specify and differentiate key principles of societal uses of communication
(e.g., persuasion, political communication, rhetorical movements, intercultural
communication).
II. CORE PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCIES: Demonstrate the following competencies.
 ABILITY TO WRITE: Demonstrates proficiency in grammar, syntax, semantics,
academic voice, application of APA style guidelines.
 ABILITY TO FORMULATE CLAIMS: Demonstrates ability to articulate researchable
claims specifying the interrelationship among variables.
 ABILITY TO ARGUE COMPETENTLY: Demonstrates ability to articulate
comprehensive arguments that include relevant and appropriate claims, warrants,
and evidence, and argue ethically (i.e., originality/avoiding plagiarism).
 ABILITY TO CONDUCT SCHOLARLY RESEARCH: Demonstrates ability to locate and
appropriately cite and list recent, relevant, and reasonable scholarly research,
consisting mostly of peer-reviewed journal sources.
 ABILITY TO SELECT RESEARCH TOPICS RELEVANT TO THE COURSE: Content
demonstrates relevance to the assignment and to the communication-based focus
expected of the assignment.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 2
COMM 495: CAPSTONE SCHEDULE*
Week
1
Date
F:13
08-27
Course Overview; ESSENTIALS
2
09-03
ESSENTIALS, Quiz on plagiarism and APA reference style
3
09-10
4
09-17
Disciplinary History
Architecture of The Discipline: Theories, Paradigms (“Islands”)
Disciplinary Introduction: Theories, Paradigms, methodologies
FALL 2013
Readings
Th: Quiz
Ch. 16
Chs. 1-2
Ch. 15
http://danielciurel.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/21stcenturycommunication2.pdf
5
09-24
Disciplinary Introduction: cont. [GUEST LECTURER]
Chs. 3-4
http://danielciurel.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/21stcenturycommunication2.pdf
Powers
Spitzberg
Renegar;
Levine;
Scheibel;
Agne & Tracy
6
10-01
7
10-08
8
10-15
9
10-22
10
10-29
Argument & Persuasion
Ch. 23
11
11-05
Conflict Management
Ch. 27
12
11-12
Organizational Communication
11-19
Intercultural Communication
Ch. 20
13
11-26
Political Communication
Ch. 29
14
12-03
Health Communication
15
12-10
16
12-17
Communication & Careers
IMPACCT
FINAL EXAM: 1-3 p.m. (1300-1500)***
Spitzberg
(Bb)
Ch. 34-35
*
This Schedule may be revised as the semester ensues. Fair notice will be announced in class and
Blackboard, and students are responsible for abiding by the most recent version of the schedule.
Paper submission is due (through Blackboard Turnitin, by the beginning of class)
NOTE: This is the final exam date! Inform family, friends, and the people who are getting married that
travel during this time on this date is not possible because it is scheduled as of the first day of class!
**
***
Verbal & Nonverbal Communication
Codes: Verbal/Nonverbal, Symbols, Codes, Interaction
Interpersonal/Relational Communication
Assignments
Interpersonal/Relational Communication
Discussion of Interim Paper Assignment
Ch. 22
Ch. 17
(syllabus)
Ch. 18
Th:MIDTERM
Th: PAPER**
Th: IMPACCT
FINAL EXAM
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 3
COMM 495: Assignments & Assessment
Assignment
Overview
Grade Scale
Late Work
The points are accumulated from the following assignments:
 Participation and Readings Comprehension: 2 points per class day
participation in clicker activities, and points for items on assigned
readings. There are 26-28 potential “clicker-eligible” lecture days, so a
student can miss 3 class periods without any effect on participation
points (and some of those points can be made up by the assigned
readings points on other lecture days) (up to & not to exceed 50 points).
 APA/Plagiarism Quiz: A 10-item objective exam on the APA style of
references format for scholarly journals, chapters in scholarly edited
books, and scholarly books, and the indicators of plagiarism. (50 points).
 Brief Proposition Paper: A 2-page version of the final proposition paper,
with 2-3 hypotheses, and 5 relevant scholarly journal citations. Submitted
online to course Blackboard Turnitin assignment site. Detailed
instructions provided (100 points).
 Midterm Exam: objective/multiple-choice, on lecture/text (100 points).
 Final Exam: objective, multiple-choice, covering lecture/text (100 points).
 Extra credit: Up to 10 extra credit points may be available through
participation in School of Communication sponsored research projects.
These points are added into the total accumulation of points, not to exceed
the potential points for the course total indicated in the grade scale below.
Further explanation of extra credit procedures follows (up to 10 points).
 Deduction points: Any written assignments that have not been
downloaded by the student within a week of the graded assignments
being available in Turnitin to examine feedback will result in a deduction
of 5 points from the assignment.
Grades are based on a total point system, in which ‘a point is a point, is a
point’. Letter grades are assigned based on .60, .70, .80, .90 main cuts, with
.x3, and .x7 mid-grade cuts. There is no normative curving.
372-400 = A
348-359= B+ 308-319= C+ 268-279= D+
360-371= A332-347= B
292-307= C
252-267= D
320-331= B280-291= C240-251= D000-239= F
Any paper turned in late will be reduced 10 points per weekday that passes
beyond the scheduled due date, excepted only for university or professor
recognized excuses. The credibility of excuse will depend in part on diligence in
apprising the instructor of the situation. In all instances in which an assignment
is late, an email should be sent to the instructor as soon as possible, with a
Word version of the assignment attached.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 4
COMM 495: Assignments & Assessment
Writing Style
Guide
Reevaluations
Attendance &
Participation
Clickers
This course, like the entire School of Communication, requires all written
assignments to use the APA (6th ed.) style guide for references, headings,
and other format considerations not otherwise specified by the course
assignment. A brief APA style guide will be uploaded to Blackboard for this
course, but students are recommended to possess an APA style guide.
GRADING WILL TAKE USE OF APA STYLE INTO ACCOUNT.
If you feel your written assignment was unjustly evaluated, please notify your
instructor within 2 weeks after the return or posting of your assignment grade.
An appeal is welcome, which requires: (a) scheduling an in-office appointment,
(b) an email at least 1 day prior to that appointment in which you articulate
your questions or concerns, along with whatever warrants or data available.
Please note, asking for an appeal and providing a rationale for concern does
not secure, nor imply, a change of grade. Further, any reevaluation implies a
complete reevaluation, meaning that new concerns will be identified that
were not initially identified in the assessment, thereby potentiating a grade
increase, no change, or a grade decrease.
Attendance is counted as participation in clicker activities. Any unexcused
absence on exam day will result in a letter grade reduction per school day
starting from the day of absence. Excuses are recognized for personal illness
serious enough to see a physician (thus, warranting an appointment slip),
family crisis, or participation in school-related activities (thus, warranting an
official notification from the activity coordinator). The latter requires that
prior arrangements be made. The former two are more credible with calls on
the day of absence, and personal conference as soon as possible thereafter.
Exams will not be given early for any reason. Record the dates of your final
exam NOW, and plan travel schedules accordingly. In particular, the final
exam date is set. DO NOT SCHEDULE ANYTHING AGAINST THIS DATE!
A classroom response system (aka clickers) will be used in this course. Use of
a clicker is part of the course participation requirement. Students must
purchase and register their clicker prior to the 2nd class meeting, and bring
the clicker to class on every day afterward prepared to participate. For the
class, students will register their i<Clicker IN Blackboard. Students may not
use other students' clickers; doing so is a violation of academic integrity.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 5
COMM 495: Assignments & Assessment
Extra Credit
Incompletes
Because the School of Communication seeks not only to distribute
knowledge through teaching, but also generate it through original research,
and because participation in such research provides important insights into
this process of knowledge generation, students in this class will be allowed
up to 10 extra credit points during the semester, out of the total number of
points available, based on participation in School of Communication
authorized research projects. Points will be provided upon evidence of
completed participation, with 2 points for each half-hour of research
participation. Students will be able to locate eligible research projects at the
following site: https://sites.google.com/site/commsdsuresearch/
1. Eligibility: Only research projects approved and listed on the site listed
above are eligible.
2. Announcement of Opportunities: It is the students' responsibility to
avail themselves of such opportunities--ongoing announcements and
solicitations on the part of the instructor may or may not be made
during the semester as opportunities arise.
3. Availability of Opportunities: Research in a program ebbs and flows.
Participation is only available during the active windows of time
specified by each study. Opportunities for participation may or may not
be available in any particular semester, or at any particular time of the
semester.
4. Record of Participation: It is the responsibility of each individual
researcher to generate a valid list of student participation to return to
the instructor of record. It should be apparent in each research project
how the student's participation is to be recorded and evidenced.
5. Grade: No more credit is available than is indicated above—there are no
"additional" projects or sources for achieving extra credit in the course.
6. Ethics: Any attempt to falsify participation in research for the sake of
receiving unearned credit, or to surreptitiously claim credit for more
than one course, are forms of academic dishonesty, and will be a basis
for failure of a course and initiation of proceedings with the office of
Student Rights & Responsibilities.
An “I” grade is assigned when a faculty member concludes that a student
cannot meet a clearly identifiable portion of course requirements within the
academic term for unforeseen reasons. An incomplete is not provided
because a course or schedule is too difficult or because time was not
managed sufficiently.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 6
COMM 495: Exams
Exam Grading
Items that are overly difficult, not discriminating or unreliable are adjusted
based on statistical analyses (overall item discrimination, item reliability,
item difficulty, response options with greater reliability than the keyed
option). There will be no curving of grades after these adjustments are
made. Grades are uploaded to Blackboard only after these adjustments are
made.
Exam Retention Please note that exams in this class will not be returned. However, you are
welcome to make an appointment to see and review your exam. All exams
and answer sheets will be destroyed at the end of the following semester.
Exams
Exams are objective format (multiple-choice, true/false), covering lecture,
and any materials distributed to the class. The final exam may be cumulative
and comparative across topics of the semester. Detailed review sheets will
be made available prior to each exam. Optical scanning answer sheets
(ParSCORE “small red”) and No. 2 pencils are the student’s responsibility on
exam days. No electronic devices (i.e., cellphones, earphones, MP3 devices,
cameras, tape recorders, calculators, e-books, e-tablets, laptop computers,
or electronic dictionaries) are permitted during exams. Any evidence of any
such device in sight of a student will result in that student’s failure on that
exam, and if there is evidence of any attempt at recording or copying exam
materials, or making use of other stolen materials, the student may be failed
for the course and reported to Student Rights & Responsibilities.
Tips for
First, as an overview of multiple-choice (MC) exams, study comparatively. A
Studying for
good item has to present a condition (i.e., root) that one and only one
Exams
answer (i.e., stem) correctly fulfills. However, the remaining stems (i.e., foils)
must seem correct to the unstudied mind. For foils to seem correct, they
often use words and concepts that are legitimate content for the course, but
that do not uniquely fit the condition identified in the item root. A student
who merely skims or memorizes materials will see several stems that “look”
correct, when only one stem actually legitimately fulfills the item root. In
order to know which stem is correct requires not only that the stems are
recognized, but also what makes the concepts distinct and different from one
another, and how they relate to the condition specified in the root. This
means studying comparatively, which in turn suggests several study
techniques.
(1) Memorization is important, but only a small part of the picture.
Memorization helps with definitions, lists, model components, and
stages or sequences. However, it does not help much with comparison,
contrast, analysis and synthesis.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 7
Cont.
(2) When studying a concept, ask how it relates to other similar but
different concepts. For example, it would not be unusual for a textbook
to discuss both impression formation and attribution theory. These are
different areas of research and study, but they are also related. The
textbook/lectures may or may not discuss their relationship to one
another, but there may still be test items about attribution theory with
item foils derived from the materials in the discussion of impression
formation. Thus, it is important to analyze the differences between
these concepts.
(3) Successive integrative outlining may help. This means to outline the
class notes into a more concise set of notes, and then outline text
chapters into a concise set of notes, and then combining student
outlines. This activity leads to compare and contrast “where things
belong in relation to each other.” The resulting integrative outline can
then serve as a final study document. This practice is time-consuming,
but can also be very beneficial.
Second, manage test anxiety. Anxiety can diminish test performance.
There are many practices that can assist in managing test anxiety, including
test workshops conducted by the campus counseling and testing offices,
systematic body relaxation, preparation and organization, studying with a
companion, using flash-cards, student writing of test items over the
materials, cognitive restructuring or visualization, employing additional time
for testing, and consultation with the instructor.
Third, develop hypotheticals and examples. Not all objective exams
use hypothetical examples. However, it may help relate to materials by
attempting to apply the concepts of the course to practical experiences or
situations. This also helps differentiate subtle distinctions among related
concepts.
Fourth, study past exams. The professor permits students to look over
their own exams. Such review can help “get into the mind” of the instructor.
It can also improve familiarity with the exam style, which can help
preparation for the next exam. Sometimes patterns are noticed (e.g., missing
items later on an exam due to fatigue, missing items earlier than later on the
exam due to anxiety, missing syllabus vs. textbook items, missing “second
guess” items, etc.). Finally, occasionally a student can demonstrate to the
instructor that there is another way of interpreting a concept that fits the
conditions of the course materials, and as a result, there may be credit given.
Finally, use study groups to assess preparation, but not to study. This
is clearly only an opinion, but study groups can be very inefficient, and are
not likely to do much good unless the members have studied hard prior to
studying as a group. The value of the group is to provide different ways of
seeing the material, to test knowledge with questions any given student
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 8
would not ordinarily derive, and to occasionally correct errors in thinking.
Overview
SDSU
Definitions
THE ACADEMIC DISHONESTY POLICY OF
THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION
In any case in which an instructor identifies evidence for charging a student
with violation of academic conduct standards or plagiarism, the presumption
will be with that instructor’s determination. The instructor(s) will confer with
the School Director to confirm the evidence. Once confirmed, the student will
be informed and presented with the evidence. Some conditions and terms
below clarify the School policy and procedure.
“Cheating: Cheating is defined as the act of obtaining or attempting to obtain
credit for academic work by the use of dishonest, deceptive, or fraud- ulent
means. Examples of cheating include, but are not limited to
 copying, in part or in whole, from another's test or other examination;
discussing answers or ideas relating to the answers on a test or other
examination without the permission of the instructor;
 obtaining copies of a test, an examination, or other course material
without the permission of the instructor;
 using notes, cheat sheets, or other devices considered inappropriate
under the prescribed testing condition;
 collaborating with another or others in work to be presented without the
permission of the instructor;
 falsifying records, laboratory work, or other course data;
 submitting work previously presented in another course, if contrary to the
rules of the course;
 altering or interfering with the grading procedures;
 plagiarizing, as defined; and
 knowingly and intentionally assisting another student in any of the above.
Plagiarism:
Plagiarism is defined as the act of incorporating ideas, words, or specific
substance of another, whether purchased, borrowed, or otherwise obtained,
and submitting same to the university as one's own work to fulfill academic
requirements without giving credit to the appropriate source. Plagiarism shall
include but not be limited to:
 submitting work, either in part or in whole, completed by another;
 omitting footnotes for ideas, statements, facts, or conclusions that belong
to another;
 omitting quotation marks when quoting directly from another, whether it
be a paragraph, sentence, or part thereof;
 close and lengthy paraphrasing of the writings of another;
 submitting another person's artistic works, such as musical compositions,
photographs, paintings, drawings, or sculptures; and
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 9
 submitting as one's own work papers purchased from research
companies.” (source: http://www.sa.sdsu.edu/srr/cheating-plagiarism.html)
Intellectual
Intellectual contents include all forms of ‘text’ produced by another person or
contents
persons. It includes: writings, course syllabi, course lectures and recordings of
lectures, visual information such as models, videos, lyrics, software, etc.
Intellectual
The syllabus, lectures and lecture outlines are personally-copyrighted
Property
intellectual property of the instructor, which means that any organized
recording for anything other than personal use, duplication, distribution, or
profit is a violation of copyright and fair use laws.
Proper source Proper attribution occurs by specifying the source of content or ideas. This is
attribution
done by (a) providing quotation marks around text, when directly quoted, and
(b) clearly designating the source of the text or information relied upon in an
assignment.
Self-plagiarism Students often practice some form of ‘double-dipping,’ in which they write on
a given topic across more than one course assignment. In general, there is
nothing wrong with double-dipping topics or sources, but there is a problem
with double-dipping exact and redundant text. It is common for scholars to
write on the same topic across many publication outlets; this is part of
developing expertise and the reputation of being a scholar on a topic.
Scholars, however, are not permitted to repeat exact text across papers or
publications except when noted and attributed, as this wastes precious
intellectual space with repetition and does a disservice to the particular
source of original presentation by ‘diluting’ the value of the original
presentation. Any time that a writer simply ‘cuts-and-pastes’ exact text from
former papers into a new paper without proper attribution, it is a form of selfplagiarism. Consequently, a given paper should never be turned in to multiple
classes. Entire paragraphs, or even sentences, should not be repeated wordfor-word across course assignments. Each new writing assignment is precisely
that, a new writing assignment, requiring new composition on the student’s
part.
Solicitation for Any student who solicits any third party to write any portion of an assignment
ghost writing
for this class (whether for pay or not) violates the standards of academic
honesty. The penalty for solicitation (regardless of whether it can be
demonstrated the individual solicited wrote any sections of the assignment) is
F in the course and the student will be reported to Student Rights and
Responsibilities.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 10
Secondary
citations
Useful Aides
Secondary citation is not strictly a form of plagiarism, but in blatant forms, it
can present similar ethical challenges. A secondary citation is citing source A,
which in turn cites source B, but it is source B’s ideas or content that provide
the unique basis for the claims the student intends to make in the
assignment. For example, assume there is an article by Jones (2006) in the
student’s hands, in which there is a discussion or quotation of an article by
Smith (1998). Assume further that what Smith seems to be saying is very
important to the student’s analysis. In such a situation, the student should
always try to locate the original Smith source. In general, if an idea is
important enough to discuss in an assignment, it is important enough to
locate and cite the original source for that idea. There are several reasons for
these policies: (a) Authors sometimes commit citation errors, which might be
replicated without knowing it; (b) Authors sometimes make interpretation
errors, which might be ignorantly reinforced (c) Therefore, reliability of
scholarly activity is made more difficult to assure and enforce; (d) By relying
on only a few sources of review, the learning process is short-circuited, and
the student’s own research competencies are diminished, which are integral
to any liberal education; (e) By masking the actual sources of ideas, readers
must second guess which sources come from which citations, making the
readers’ own research more difficult; (f) By masking the origin of the
information, the actual source of ideas is misrepresented. Some suggestions
that assist with this principle:
 When the ideas Jones discusses are clearly attributed to, or unique to,
Smith, then find the Smith source and citation.
 When the ideas Jones is discussing are historically associated more with
Smith than with Jones, then find the Smith source and citation.
 In contrast, Jones is sometimes merely using Smith to back up what Jones
is saying and believes, and is independently qualified to claim, whether or
not Smith would have also said it; in such a case, citing Jones is sufficient.
 Never simply copy a series of citations at the end of a statement by Jones,
and reproduce the reference list without actually going to look up what
those references report—the only guarantee that claims are valid is for a
student to read the original sources of those claims.
A good place to learn about plagiarism is the tutorial on academic integrity at
http://plagiarism.org/plagiarism-101/overview/; and at
http://www.yorku.ca/tutorial/academic_integrity/caseintro.html
A good place to learn about APA writing and citation style is:
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/
A good place to learn about making better arguments is:
http://www.readwritethink.org/files/resources/interactives/persuasion_map/
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 11
TurnItIn.com
The papers in this course will be submitted electronically in Word (preferably
2007, .docx) on the due dates assigned, and will require verification of
submission to Turnitin.com.
“Students agree that by taking this course all required papers may be subject
to submission for textual similarity review to TurnItIn.com for the detection
of plagiarism. All submitted papers will be included as source documents in
the TurnItIn.com reference database solely for the purpose of detecting
plagiarism of such papers. You may submit your papers in such a way that no
identifying information about you is included. Another option is that you may
request, in writing, that your papers not be submitted to TurnItIn.com.
However, if you choose this option you will be required to provide
documentation to substantiate that the papers are your original work and do
not include any plagiarized material” (source: language suggested by the CSU
General Counsel and approved by the Center for Student’s Rights and
Responsibilities at SDSU).
Consequences
 Course failure: Soliciting or reproducing a whole paper, paragraph, or
of Plagiarism or
large portions of unattributed materials without proper attribution,
Cheating
whether represented by: (a) multiple sentences, images, or portions of
images; or (b) by percentage of assignment length, will result in
assignment of an “F” in the course in which the infraction occurred, and a
report to the Center for Student Rights and Responsibilities (CSRR2).
 Assignment failure: Reproducing a sentence or sentence fragment with no
quotation marks, but with source citation, or subsets of images without
source attribution, will minimally result in an “F” on the assignment, and
may result in greater penalty, including a report to the CSRR, depending
factors noted below. In this instance, an “F” may mean anything between
a zero (0) and 50%, depending on the extent of infraction.
 Exacerbating conditions—Amount: Evidence of infraction, even if
fragmentary, is increased with a greater: (a) number of infractions; (b)
distribution of infractions across an assignment; or (c) proportion of the
assignment consisting of infractions.
 Exacerbating conditions—Intent: Evidence of foreknowledge and intent
to deceive magnifies the seriousness of the offense and the grounds for
official response. Plagiarism, whether ‘by accident’ or ‘by ignorance,’ still
qualifies as plagiarism—it is all students’ responsibility to make sure their
assignments are not committing the offense.
 Assistance: Evidence that the student was not the original author of the
work, due to soliciting the assistance or composition of another person or
persons.
 Exceptions: Any exceptions to these policies will be considered on a caseby-case basis, and only under exceptional circumstances.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE NO EXCUSES ALLOWED BASED ON IGNORANCE OF
WHAT CONSTITUTES PLAGIARISM, OR OF WHAT THIS POLICY IS
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 12
Comportment
The School of Communication, as a representative of SDSU and higher education,
expects students to engage in behavior that enhances the classroom learning
environment. The Instructor is responsible not only to the individual student, but to
the collective group of students who constitute a class. This means that behavior
disruptive to the classroom instruction is not tolerated. For the sake of the other
students, the instructor may be required to intervene under various circumstances.
Among the actions that are considered disruptive to the learning environment are:
 The use of cellphones and/or computers/laptops/tablets, whether for
conversation, correspondence, emailing, texting, tweeting, or other activities
(e.g., social media/Facebook), and when not directly related to the course and
its instructional objectives, materials, or contents;
 Side conversations or discussion in a manner distracting to the instructor or
fellow students;
 Ongoing or unrestricted interruption of instructor or fellow students, or
otherwise attempting to monopolize classroom time or discussion;
 Reading, sleeping, snoring, moving about, yelling, harassing, bullying, or
otherwise engaging in activities disrespectful of the instructor or students, or
unrelated to the course, materials, or contents;
 Entering late, leaving early, or leaving often during lecture, especially when in a
disruptive manner;
 Activity that in any way could be considered grossly inappropriate, threatening
or dangerous.
Certain other activities may be acceptable, but only with permission or by direction
of the Instructor, who retains the authority to specify relevant restrictions. Such
activities include:
 Filming, taping, or otherwise recording the class;
 Accessing the Internet during class;
 Use of computers/laptops/tablets may be permitted, but only if the students
are seated in the front row(s) of the classroom.
The Instructor reserves the right to establish additional reasonable expectations
deemed necessary to maintain optimal learning conduct in the classroom. Each
faculty member is the primary arbiter of classroom comportment. The faculty
member has the authority to enforce this policy in a manner deemed suitable to the
particular class in question. For example
 a student texting in class may be requested to turn the phone in to the
instructor for the remainder of the class, or
 a student using a laptop or IPAD to access Facebook may be asked to close and
shut down the technology for the remainder of the period.
Should repeat offenses occur, with fair warning, each faculty member will
determine fair and appropriate consequences for these behaviors. Should an
emergency occur or require monitoring, or if students observe violations of this
policy, they are encouraged to inform the instructor as soon as possible.
Finally, all students are governed by the SDSU policy on cheating and plagiarism. See
their coda at: http://csrr.sdsu.edu/cheating-plagiarism.html
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 13
THIS IS
SERIOUS!
PLAGIARISM IS A CRIME OF CONDUCT, NOT OF INTENT.
THIS COURSE WILL HAVE ZERO-TOLERANCE FOR PLAGIARISM!
WHY? BECAUSE:
1. A PLAGIARISM POLICY IS PUBLISHED IN THE UNIVERSITY CATALOG;
2. THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION PLAGIARISM POLICY, COMPLETE
WITH ELABORATED EXAMPLES, DEFINITIONS, AND CONSEQUENCES
FOR TYPES OF PLAGIARISM, IS:
a. ON THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION BLACKBOARD SITE,
b. ON THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION WEBSITE, AND
c. IN THE COURSE SYLLABUS;
3. A POWERPOINT LECTURE PRESENTED IN THIS COURSE ON “THE
ESSENTIALS” FURTHER SPECIFIES THE NATURE OF PLAGIARISM;
4. YOU CAN TURN IN YOUR PAPER BEFORE IT IS DUE, SEE ITS
ORIGINALITY RATING, FIX IT, AND TURN IT IN AGAIN BY
SUBMISSION DEADLINE;
5. FINALLY, YOU SHOULD SIMPLY KNOW THAT IT IS UNETHICAL AND A
‘HIGH CRIME’ IN ACADEME TO MISREPRESENT ANYONE’S WORDS
OR IDEAS, THROUGH IMPLICATION, WHETHER INTENDED OR NOT,
a. THAT THEY ARE YOUR OWN, OR
b. THEY ARE SOMEONE ELSE’S WHEN THEY ARE NOT.
A final analogy:
If you are taking a driving test to get a license,
And you run a stop sign while the instructor is in the car,
You fail the test then and there,
and must wait for an opportunity to re-take the exam another time.
So it is with plagiarism.
THEREFORE, THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR PLAGIARISM,
AND NO EXCUSE WILL BE ACCEPTED.
YOU ARE FOREWARNED.
IF YOU PLAGIARIZE, YOU WILL FAIL THIS COURSE.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 14
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 15
Source: http://plagiarism.org/plagiarism-101/overview
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 16
ADDITIONAL READINGS:
The following readings are listed in the schedule above, and are required readings. They are
not available in the bookstore, and must be located by the student using standard research
techniques associated with a research university education.
Note: The following reading can be located through the library search engines. Learning to
use these search engines is part of the competency assumed by this course:
Parrott, R. (2004). Emphasizing 'communication' in health communication. Journal of
Communication, 54(4), 751-787. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02653.x
Powers, J. H. (1995). On the intellectual structure of the human communication discipline.
Communication Education, 44(3), 191-222. doi:10.1080/03634529509379012
Scarduzio, J. A., Giannini, G. A., & Geist-Martin, P. (2011). Crafting an architectural blueprint:
Principles of design for ethnographic research. Symbolic Interaction, 34(4), 447-470.
doi:10.1525/si.2011.34.4.447
Note: The following readings can be located through the URL provided in the schedule above,
and it is also in the library as a reference work. The following are listed in the order in
which they are required:
Agne, R. R., & Tracy, K. (2009). Conversation, dialogue, and discourse. In W. F. Eadie (Ed.), 21st
century communication: A reference handbook (pp. 177-185). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Levine, T. R. (2009). Quantitative approaches to communication research. In W. F. Eadie (Ed.),
21st century communication: A reference handbook (pp. 47-64)). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Renegar, V. R., & Malkowski, J. A. (2009). Rhetorical and textual approaches to communication.
In W. F. Eadie (Ed.), 21st century communication: A reference handbook (pp. 49-56). Los
Angeles, CA: Sage.
Note: The following reading can be located at the end of this syllabus packet:
Spitzberg, B. H. (2009). Islands of inquiry. In G. Merrigan & C. L. Huston (Eds.), Communication
research methods (2nd ed., pp. xxi-xxiv). New York: Oxford.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 17
INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE “PROP” PAPER
A Propositional Parable
D:
F:
D:
F:
D:
F:
D:
F:
D:
F:
D:
F:
D:
F:
D:
F:
D:
F:
D:
F:
Daddy, what is an instinct?
An instinct, my dear, is an explanatory principle.
But what does it explain?
Anything – almost anything at all. Anything you want it to explain.
Don't be silly. It doesn't explain gravity.
No. But that is because nobody wants "instinct" to explain gravity. If they did, it would
explain it. We could simply say that the moon has an instinct whose strength varies
inversely as the square of the distance . . .
But that's nonsense, Daddy.
Yes, surely. But it was you who mentioned "instinct," not I.
All right – but then what does explain gravity?
Nothing my dear, because gravity is an explanatory principle.
Oh. Do you mean that you cannot use one explanatory principle to explain another?
Hmm . . . hardly ever. That is what Newton meant when he said, "hypotheses non
fingo."
And what does that mean? Please.
Well, you know what "hypotheses" are. Any statement linking together two
descriptive statements is an hypothesis. If you say that there was a full moon on
February 1st and another on March 1st; and then you link these two observations
together in any way, the statement that links them is an hypothesis.
Yes – and I know what 'non' means. But what's 'fingo.'
Well, 'fingo' is a late Latin word for 'make.' It forms a verbal noun 'fictio' from which
we get the word 'fiction.'
Daddy, do you mean that Sir Issac Newton thought that all hypotheses were just made
up like stories?
Yes – precisely that.
But didn't he discover gravity? With the apple?
No, dear. He invented it.
D: Oh.
Adapted from: Heinz Von Foerster (1981).
Rigor and imagination: Essays from the legacy of Gregory Bateson.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 18
DON'T PANIC
“Hypotheses are the scaffolds which are erected in front of a building
and removed when the building is completed. They are indispensable to the worker;
but he must not mistake the scaffolding for the building.
J. W. von Goethe, Maxims and reflections, 1893 (in Kaplan: Science says)
“For every fact there is an infinity of hypotheses. The more you look, the more you see.
R. M. Pirsig, Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, 1974.
“Hypothesis, where successful, is a two-way street, extending back to explain the past and forward to
predict the future. What we try to do in framing hypotheses is to explain some otherwise unexplained
happenings by inventing a plausible story, a plausible description or history of relevant portions of the
world”
(Quine & Ullian, 1980, “Hypothesis,” p. 197)
“The purpose of models is not to fit the data but to sharpen the questions”
S. Karlin, 11th R. A. Fisher Memorial Lecture, Royal Society, April 20, 1983
(in Kaplan: Science says)
“Being able to examine our models, critically evaluate them, and even discard them is far more
scientifically literate than being able to regurgitate facts for a standardized test. … Ultimately, our
models and descriptions of reality must be subject to two overriding criteria. How useful is this
model, and how much does this model resemble our observations? Scientific literacy requires an
understanding that science is only a model. We have to be able to jettison our models when our
critical thinking leads us to that conclusion.
Saus, S. (2007). Camelot is only a model: Scientific literacy in the 21st century.
Seed, (Sept/Oct), 77-78.
“Without a sense, or without the thought,
a proposition would be an utterly dead and trivial thing.”
Wittgenstein, Blue and Brown Books, 1958, p. 4
“The meaning of exactness best founded in intellectual history
is the possibility of constructing a theoretical system of idealized models
containing abstract constructs of variables and of relations between variables,
from which most or all propositions concerning particular connections can be deduced.”
Machlup, 2004, Readings in the philosophy of social science p. 11
“All possible knowledge is only an approximation and does not reach ultimate reality. It only
reflects certain aspects of reality in more or less appropriate models.”
von Bertalanffy, 1975 Perspectives on general system theory, p. 114
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 19
Overview
The purpose of a proposition (i.e., hypothesis) paper is to develop a number of theoretical
propositions, a significant proportion of which concern communication in relationship to the
course topic (e.g., conflict, relationships, dark side of communication, communication theory,
etc.). The paper in some ways is a review of literature; it is different from typical literature
reviews in a few important ways. Most reviews just summarize research to provide a sense of
‘what is known’ in an area. In contrast, the proposition paper attempts to develop explanatory
arguments in support of a number of hypotheses.
Papers are primarily graded on four areas: (1) Writing: Good writing, composition, style,
voice, and format (APA); (2) Proposition wording: Conceptual soundness of the propositions and
their wording; (3) Scholarly research: Quality of the scholarly journal research brought to bear;
and (4) Explanatory argument: The quality of the explanatory arguments developed for each
proposition. For graduate student papers only, a fifth grading component is (5) Model value: The
quality of the visual model in summarizing or generating the hypotheses. It is very important to
emphasize that “evidence” and “argument” are separate elements of the assessment—evidence
backs an argument, but the argument itself has to explain the proposition, independent of the
evidence. Of course, papers must also be topical; that is, they must be relevant to the course
content.
Hypothesizing
A hypothesis is a verbal or symbolic statement of relationship between two or more
variables (e.g., Trust is positively related to the likelihood of using cooperative strategies during
conflicts). A variable is any construct or concept that can be observed to take on different values
(e.g., trust, anxiety, self-disclosure, assertiveness, strategy use, etc.). It takes the form of X = fY
(i.e., “The value of ‘X’ is a function of ‘Y’). A definition (e.g., self-esteem is the degree to which self
is perceived positively), in contrast, characterizes the nature of a variable, but not its relationship
to other variables. It takes the form X = Y.
All of this is just a fancy way of saying that the proposition paper attempts to develop,
through review of scholarly research and personally formulated argument, a series of hypotheses
on a given topic. Many of these hypotheses may be already in the existing research literature,
they may be derived from conceptual models, or the products of creativity and imagination.
There are two keys to this assignment: (1) Developing well-conceived and well-worded
hypotheses, and (2) developing reasonable arguments for each hypothesis. Like any argument, it
is made credible through the use of causal analysis, strong reasons, evidence, citations, and
example. The most important thing is that every hypothesis should be carefully worded (read all
these instructions to understand this warning) and arguments should answer two “why”
questions: (1) Why are the variables related this way? (2) Why is the hypothesis likely to be true?
The word “because” should figure prominently in every explanation.
To explain a hypothesis means to make sensible how and why things are related the way
they are. Hypotheses themselves explain nothing—they simply describe a relationship between
two or more things—not why the relationship exists. Theories are basically sets of interrelated
hypotheses that collectively provide an explanation for a phenomenon or process. For example, a
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 20
person may want to explain the hypothesis: “As jealousy increases, the likelihood of relational
violence increases.” Guided by an understanding of argument (e.g., see recommendations for
writing that follow later in these instructions), this hypothesis could be argued thusly: Jealousy is
a complex blend of emotions based on the perception that a person’s valued relationship is
threatened by a third party or rival. [Backing]: Retzinger (1991) has reviewed evidence
[Grounds]: that violence is likely to result from a combination of anger and shame, but neither
alone [Backing]. Because [Warrant]: anger creates an inner sense of expressive frustration and
arousal, and shame provides a target for this expression (i.e., the partner and/or the rival), the
jealous person is much more likely to engage in violence than non-jealous persons. [Claim]: This
hypothesis may not apply to contexts in which strong moral, religious, or public restraints are in
place (e.g., even jealous persons tend not to be overtly violent in public places). [Rebuttal]: The
rebuttal is not necessary, but sometimes illustrates relative objectivity and openness of the
author.
In this explanation, other concepts (i.e., the theory of rage as proposed by Retzinger, with
its components of anger and rage) are used to make the link between jealousy and violence
sensible. More explanation could be provided for these concepts, more evidence reviewed in
favor of Retzinger’s hypothesis, and so forth, but the basic elements of explanation and argument
are there. The point is that explanation is neither mere restatement nor mere review of research
or expert opinion. Please note, there is no need for quotations. CITE OFTEN, QUOTE SPARINGLY
(AND PREFERABLY, NOT AT ALL).
Modeling
Only the graduate assignment requires a model, but undergraduates are certainly
encouraged to try their hands at modeling. Modeling is one of the zeniths of scientific
reasoning. It incorporates analytic reasoning (i.e., breaking wholes into parts), synthetic
reasoning (i.e., [re]assembling parts into wholes), abstract reasoning (i.e., recognizing similar
things across levels of abstraction and concreteness), and explanatory or causal reasoning. It is
fundamental to theoretical reasoning (i.e., explaining how and why phenomena happen the
way they do) and methodological reasoning (i.e., specifying hypotheses to be tested
qualitatively or quantitatively, the results of which inform the validity of the underlying theory).
Models serve various functions in science as in everyday life. A model is a visual
simplification of concepts that exist in both a hypothesized conceptual form and an actual or
potential observed form. For example, if you believe that as social skills decrease a person’s
ability and motivation to meet others and develop satisfying relationships decreases, and that
this in turn increases the person’s loneliness, then four conceptual components each
potentially can be arranged as a basic model that looks something like the following:
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 21
Figure 1a. Social Skills Model of Loneliness
Shyness
Loneliness
Social Skill
Deficit
Social Anxiety
Notice that this model could have been formulated differently. People might develop anxiety
and shyness through early learning experiences, which then would lead to a deficit of social
skills, which thereby make the development of social relationships more difficult, leading to
loneliness. This version of the model is represented next.
Figure 1b. Affect and Social Skills Model of Loneliness
Shyness
Social Anxiety
Loneliness
Social Skill
Deficit
Still another perspective would predict that as a person experiences loneliness over time, social
activity and self-doubts would lead to a crisis in social confidence, social anxiety, shyness, and
eventually, a lack of experience and motivation regarding social skills. In this perspective, the
chronic experience of loneliness leads to a lack of practice and social experience, which would
lead to anxiety, which would lead to shyness, which would lead to an atrophy of social
competence. This model would look something like:
Figure 1c. Social Withdrawal Model of Social Skills Atrophy
Loneliness
Social Anxiety
Shyness
Social Skill
Deficit
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 22
Each of these models represents anywhere from three to seven hypotheses, depending on the
configuration of arrows (i.e., causal paths). The point is that these represent alternative models
of reality, and any one of these models can be reasonably argued and justified. Which model is
“true” is irrelevant for the sake of formulating the model—the question is whether a good set
of arguments can be developed in support of the model presented.
Once a basic model has been developed, it is then relatively simple to start asking
additional questions, such as how biology (e.g., sex, age, etc.), culture (e.g., ethnicity, regional
identification, etc.), context (e.g., socio-economic status, intact family status, etc.), personal
background (e.g., attachment disorder, relational history, etc.), dispositions (e.g., self-esteem,
attribution style, etc.), or recent events (e.g., personal loss, relationship conflicts, etc.) influence
various model components or relationships.
Most models follow simple rules: (1) Components on the left (or top) precede, at some
point, the components to the right (or bottom) in time, moving from “antecedents” (causes) to
consequents (effects). (2) Every conceptual component should be potentially measurable or
observable. (3) Every arrow represents a direct effect of one concept on another (and a
potential hypothesis). This effect does not have to be a causal relationship, but it usually implies
such an influence. (4) Every component has an arrow headed to at least one other component,
and may have arrows to multiple other components. (5) Components can be grouped according
to larger components (i.e., multiple indicators of a single concept; e.g., social skills above might
be further indicated by coordination, expressiveness, attentiveness, and composure skills).
Form, Organization and Style
The basics are as follow:
Use normal 1-inch margins;
Use 11-point Calibri or 12-point Times Roman font;
With double spacing throughout;
With no more than 2 pages text (not including reference page);
With the top two lines of the first page of the paper with five pieces of information;
With headers programmed into the paper, indicating a brief title and page numbers;
With 2 to 3 propositions—if 3 are developed, they must be in the form of a syllogism;
otherwise, just develop 2 propositions;
(8) With a minimum of 5 scholarly journal publication references, all of which must be cited
in text, and properly listed on the third page “References” list, all in proper APA style.
There may be additional references to scholarly books or chapters in scholarly books.
(9) The assignment will be submitted to Turnitin—no hardcopy is needed. It is
recommended you submit your paper early to receive a Turnitin originality report at
least 2 days before due date.
Use A.P.A. throughout (6th ed.), except for format specifications above. Do not leave big
blank spaces between sections or hypotheses. The text should run continuously. Save your work
often during writing—there are no excuses for late work. Use the insert running head procedure
in Word—do not just type the header at the top of the page for each page. Learn to use internally
formatted hanging indents for the references and hypotheses (as opposed to hitting ‘enter’ at the
end of a line and tabbing in from the next line), and page and section breaks for new pages (as
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 23
opposed to just hitting ‘enter’ a bunch of times). There is no excuse for ignorance about Word—
learn to use its formatting resources and tools!
There is no “Title Page;” at the top of the first page insert the following:
Last name, First name (Red ID#)
Email address
Course #: Brief course title
Date:
Title of Paper
Next, some form of introduction is presented. An introduction may briefly examine the
history and importance of the concepts, discuss the relevance of these concepts to the course
subject, introduce relevant theories, and/or explain any basic terms, assumptions, or limitations
that may be important. Assume this class as the audience, which means that the writing should
be clear enough for them to comprehend fully the content, and intent, of the paper.
Next, the body of the paper consists of the propositions and the arguments for each
proposition. This section of the paper proceeds by presenting a proposition and then developing
a paragraph (or two) of explanatory argument (warrants; explanations) and support (evidence).
The propositions should be numbered and set off from the text (e.g., bolded and/or italicized).
Propositions are never prima facie; that is, they never stand on their own. Propositions always
require some degree of explanation.
Next, the conclusion section develops any of several points, such as a brief summary, a
consideration of the limitations of the analysis, a critical conjecture about the status of the theory
and/or research associated with the concepts examined, future implications of the analysis, or
the importance of the analysis.
Finally, the References section will provide the complete citations in A.P.A. style.
Please save the paper with the following nomenclature: “C495-PROP-semester-yearLastname-BriefTopicTitle. For example, if it is the Fall 2013 semester, and the paper is on sexual
coercion, and your last name is Johnson, then the file would be saved as: “C495-PROP-SP13Johnson-Sexual Coercion”
Submission
The paper will be turned in electronically, in Word 2007, through Turnitin in Blackboard. If
difficulties are experienced turning it in online, it is essential to send an email to the professor
with the paper attached, by the time the assignment is due.
Types of Hypotheses
Below is a series of hypotheses to illustrate how they can differ. These hypotheses may seem
sophisticated right now. However, research of a topic has begun, hypothetical relations will begin
to emerge either stated directly (i.e., in the form of hypotheses being tested) or indirectly (i.e.,
implied by the explanation and discussion of the concepts).
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 24
The simplest, and weakest, form of hypothesis is a "non-directional" statement of relationship.
For example:
H1:
Self-esteem is related to communication competence.
While this is a hypothesis, it provides minimal information regarding the precise nature of the
relationship. Avoid such statements in the paper. A more precise form is:
H2: Self-esteem is positively related to interpersonal communication competence. (Note: This
can be reworded as: “Persons high in self-esteem are significantly higher in communication
competence than persons low in self-esteem”).
Hypotheses can also vary by the form (or shape) of the relationship:
H3: Motivation, knowledge and skills are curvilinear to perceived communication competence.
(That is, they are positively related up to a moderately high range of competence, after which
higher values lead to lower perceived competence).
Finally, deductive construction allows the development of stronger, and more tightly controlled,
theoretical arguments. For example,
H4:
As [TV exposure] increases, [verbal skills] decrease.
[A]
[B]
H5:
As [verbal skills] decrease, use of [physical violence] in conflict increases.
[B]
[C]
H6:
As [TV exposure] increases, use of [physical violence] in conflict increases.
[A]
[C]
On the Art of Explanation
“We cannot infer the events of the future from those of the present.
Belief in the causal nexus is superstition” (Wittgenstein, Tractatus, 5.1361)
Explanation implies the identification of some “bridge” (i.e., warrant, “because...,” etc.)
that serves as an account of why one concept is related to another concept. It is an “animating
mechanism,” that gives life to a concept. For example, one popular concept is that exposure to
violence in the media causes violence in society. The natural question is why. Answering the
“why” question gets at the concept of explanation. Even though seeing or hearing the equation:
“media violence causes societal violence” seems like an explanation, it is not. It is missing the
bridge, or animating mechanism.
To illustrate, consider a few “non-explanations.” It is not an explanation to say media
violence causes societal violence because: (1) media depictions of violence are increasing; (2)
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 25
societal violence is increasing; (3) some people have engaged in crimes they saw on TV (“copy
cat crimes”); (4) people believe what they see on TV; (5) research shows media violence
increases societal violence. Each of these merely suggests correlation (rather than causation),
repeats the original assertion, or simply provides backing for an explanation that is itself
missing.
To illustrate legitimate explanations, consider the following:
Cultivation: Social learning theory claims that people learn both by direct experience
(e.g., touching a hot stove) or observation of others (e.g., observing one’s sister touch a hot
stove). Since we cannot or do not always directly experience things (e.g., robbing a bank), we
look to real and imaginative role models (e.g., media figures and narratives). Thus, the crime
and violence in the media provide models, and rewarding ones at that, for us we otherwise
would not have had.
Cognitive Availability: Our brain can be viewed as a library. If 90% of this library is filled
with science fiction, and we are asked to respond to someone’s question for information, we
are most likely to give them a fanciful piece of information, because that is what is most
represented in our mind’s library. If, in watching media, most of the acts or ways of dealing with
conflict we observe are violent in nature, it simply supplies more acts of violence to store in our
mental repertoires, and thus, when we find ourselves in a conflict, violent acts are the most
“available” to draw upon.
Disinhibition: Growing up in a culture is largely about learning what one cannot or is not
supposed to do. The very nature of culture is conformity and normative action within a given
body of beliefs and behaviors. Exposure to violence in the media may make violence appear
more normative than it is, and thus, make engaging in violence seem less deviant. In essence, it
is not making violence seem more rewarding (cultivation) or available, but merely makes the
violence within a person more acceptable.
Fantasy Fulfillment: Freud and others might argue that daily life, as well as the normal
tortures of growing up, fill us with tensions that are constantly repressed. These tensions
struggle to “get out,” managing to manifest themselves mainly in the form of fantasy. Media
violence may give form to these fantasies, making them more vivid and “real,” thereby
stimulating the enactment of fantasies in life (e.g., who has not “fantasized” about hitting
someone in the face—seeing it done may both “suggest” it, but stimulate the enactment of it).
Desensitization: One of the reasons people avoid violence is that it hurts others.
However, when violence is everywhere in the media, it can numb one’s sensibilities, and lower
one’s ability to empathize. Further, the more cartoonish the violence, the more it seems it does
not really hurt anyone. Such exposure to violence may take the “brakes” off using by making
violence seem less hurtful, and thus, less costly to use.
Excitation: Violence is a thrill. Through 5 million years of evolution, we have come to
find violence a potential threat, a potential path to victory, and therefore, arousing. Thus,
seeing violence in the media is itself, arousing, and this arousal stimulates our own arousal. Our
arousal (adrenaline, muscular tension, etc.) needs to find an outlet, and is expressed in
violence.
Peer Group Mediation: Research on sexual violence indicates that people who engage
in sexual violence are much more likely to have friends who approve of, and have engaged in,
sexual violence. The suggestion is that peer groups mediate the transfer of violence. That is, if a
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 26
peer group watches violence in the media, this peer group may then become self-reinforcing
through its interaction, thereby serving as the proximal stimulus to its members’ violence.
Spillover: Violence in the media provides models of behavior in certain contexts that are
then available for generalization to contexts experienced in everyday life, both directly
comparable to those observed in the media, as well as contexts largely unrelated. Thus, for
example, a person may “copycat” behaviors witnessed in the media, but may also extend the
function of the behaviors observed in one context (e.g., a drop kick in a professional wrestling
program) to another context (e.g., a dispute with one’s brother).
Cultural Chaos: Violence in the media may reflect the very breakdown of society, norms,
and culture. If everyone is violent to everyone in the media, then this communicates a sense of
despair, hopelessness, alienation and angst to the viewing public. This has the effects of both
(1) inciting some to exploit the lawlessness (e.g., looting during natural disasters), (2) join the
crowd (e.g., mob violence during the L.A. riots), (3) bystander apathy providing a permissive
environment for violence.
Each of these explanations offers slightly and sometimes substantively distinct sources
of causation. For example, fantasy fulfillment, excitation and disinhibition tend to assume that
we are by nature violent, and all that is needed is something in the media to take the restraints
of society away. Cultivation and availability argue media instills violence in us. Peer-group
mediation and cultural chaos tend to view media as having an effect on society at large, which
only then affects our individual behavior.
In all these examples concepts are elaborated to make sensible the link between
violence in the media and in society. Co-occurrence makes no sense without an explanation,
and it matters which explanation is offered. Do all of the explanations above seem equally
believable? Were a politician to make a speech on fantasy fulfillment would it seem as
reasonable as the cultivation explanation? Why? The “theory” cannot be evaluated until its
explanatory rationale has been specified, and the brief examples above illustrate how
significant, and distinct, such explanations can be.
Finally, use theories, use concepts discussed in class, use concepts, rather than personal
experience, anecdotes, examples, or intuitive explanations. The concepts and theories
discussed in class represent an attempt to provide explanatory frameworks specifically to
explain hypotheses. So use theories when possible to help explain the hypotheses.
As Another Example
Some explanations seem, on the surface, to make complete sense. For example, the
following argument was offered by a student:
First-born children often reach a vocabulary of 50 words at a faster rate than later
born children, with a range variation of 14 to 21 months (Pine, 1995). First-born
children develop a greater range an understanding of respective words at a
younger age, while later born children tend to develop “frozen phrases.” “Frozen
phrases” are utterances that contain two or more words that have not previously
occurred alone in the child’s vocabulary, or that contain one such word, provided
it has not occurred in the same position in a previous multi-word utterance (Pine,
1995). Since first-born children achieve a greater vocabulary earlier, they tend to
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 27
take on a mentor role with younger siblings, thus mentally stimulating themselves
(Travis & Kohli, 1995). (Source: Anonymous.)
Here the student did a good job of evidencing that first-born children develop a higher
vocabulary level, but the student offered no explanation for why they do so. In this case, the
student could have provided explanatory arguments such as the following: Given an
assumption of a relatively fixed amount of time available to the parents, first-born children
receive more parental attention and interaction, which later born children may be relatively
deprived of, as larger numbers of children shrink the available time for any one child. Further, it
is reasonable to assume that parental vocabulary resources are more valuable than sibling
resources, due to the relatively advanced nature of parental grammar, and given the “mistakes”
that might be built into a sibling’s vocabulary. Further, an older sibling will play some role in
mentoring the younger sibling’s linguistic development, and the process of reflection and ruleconformity involved in teaching another person is likely to reinforce self-learning. Finally, the
competition brought about by potential older sibling resentment of younger siblings may
interfere with the learning of the younger sibling, as conflict and emotional disturbance
distracts attention away from the more fundamental aspects of vocabulary building. These
explanations build a conceptual substrate or foundation that bridges, or warrants, the claim
that first-born children develop higher levels of vocabulary, and prevent such a claim from
being purely tautological (i.e., tautology: first born children develop higher levels of vocabulary
earlier than later born children because first born children mature faster than later born
children). So explanations are the conceptual ladder that bridges evidence and claim so as to
make their relationship sensible. They answer the question why.
Yet Another Example
A student argued in a paper: “Berger and Calabrese (1975) also believe that uncertainty
plays a significant role in the preservation and dissolution of close relationships.” My question
to the student was: WHY do they say uncertainty is important? Because uncertainty means not
being able to predict things. Not being able to predict things means not knowing what effects
behaviors have in the world. Not knowing what effects behaviors or actions have means not
knowing how to control the world, or make the world work better through self-initiated
actions. This results in the potential for bad things to happen, which creates anxiety. So, Berger
and Calabrese say that uncertainty creates anxiety, and therefore we are motivated to reduce
this uncomfortable state of anxiety by reducing our uncertainty. This is what is meant by an
explanatory argument. It answers why people seek to reduce uncertainty, and it does this
through a chain of causal predicates, each of which is linked thematically, coherently to the
next, until a logical framework exists in which the proposition—the relationship between
concepts, is sensible and satisfies the question: “but why?”
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 28
SELECTED EXAMPLES OF PUBLISHED HYPOTHESIS PAPERS
Berelson, B., & Steiner, G. A. (1973). Human behavior: An inventory of scientific findings. New
York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
Berger, C. R., & Calabrese, R. J. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond:
Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication
Research, 1, 99-112.
Burgoon, J. K., & Jones, S. B. (1976). Toward a theory of personal space expectations and their
violations. Human Communication Research, 2, 131-146.
Burr, W.R., Leigh, G. K., Day, R. D., & Constantine, J. (1979). Symbolic interaction and the family. In
W. R. Burr, R. Hill, F. I. Nye, & I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporary theories about the family (pp.
42-111). New York: Free Press.
Deutsch, M. (1949). A theory of co-operation and competition. Human Relations, 2, 129-152.
Fincham, F. D. (1992). The account episode in close relationships. In M. L. McLaughlin, M. J. Cody,
& S.J. Read (Eds.), Explaining one’s self to others: Reason-giving in social context (pp. 225244). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fisher, R. J. (1990). Chapter 5: An eclectic model of intergroup conflict. The social psychology of
intergroup and international conflict resolution (pp. 87-115). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Greene, J. (1984). A cognitive approach to human communication: An action assembly theory.
Communication Monographs, 51, 289-306.
Kaplowitz, S. A. (1978). Towards a systematic theory of power attribution. Social Psychology, 41,
131-148.
Keyton, J., Ford, D. J.,& Smith, F. L. (2008). A mesolevel communicative model of collaboration.
Communication Theory, 18, 376-406.
Liden, R. C., & Mitchell, T. R. (1988). Ingratiatory behaviors in organizational settings. Academy of
Management Review, 13, 572-587.
Mack, R. W., & Snyder, R. C. (1957). The analysis of social conflict--Toward an overview and
synthesis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1, 221-248.
Millar, F. E., & Rogers, L. E. (1988). Power dynamics in marital relationships. In P. Noller & M. A.
Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Perspectives on marital interaction (pp. 98-120). Philadelphia: Multilingual
Matters Ltd.
Phillips, A. P., & Dipboye, R. L. (1989). Correlational tests of predictions from a process model of
the interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 41-52.
Rodgers, R. H. (1987). Postmarital reorganization of family relationships: A propositional theory.
In D. Perlman & S. Duck (Eds.), Intimate relationships: Development, dynamics, and
deterioration (pp. 239-268). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Schlenker, B. R., & Leary, M. R. (1982). Social anxiety and self-presentation: A conceptualization
and model. Psychological Review, 92, 641-669.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 29
Seibold, D. R., & Spitzberg, B. H. (1982). Attribution theory and research: Formalization, critique,
and implications for communication. In B. Dervin & M. J. Voight (Eds.), Progress in
communication sciences (Vol. 3, pp. 85-125). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Spitzberg, B. H. (1994). Intercultural effectiveness. In L. A. Samovar, & R. E. Porter (Eds.),
Intercultural communication: A reader (7th ed., pp. 347-359). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Stech, E. L. (1979). A grammar of conversation with a quantitative empirical test. Human
Communication Research, 5, 158-170.
Wyer, R. S., Jr. (1980). The acquisition and use of social knowledge: Basic postulates and
representative research. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 558-573.
Wyer, R. S., Jr., & Srull, T. K. (1986). Human cognition in its social context. Psychological Review,
93, 322-359.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 30
SELECTIONS FROM SPITZBERG'S "CHAMBER OF HORRORS"
Try to avoid the following pitfalls: (1) avoid statements of non-relationship (e.g., 'X is not related
to Y'); (2) avoid including explanations in the hypothesis itself (e.g., "X is positively related to Y
because of theory Z's rationale that..."); (3) avoid using prescriptive (e.g., "S's should do X when Y
occurs") or purely descriptive non-probabilistic (e.g., "X may/can be related to Y") wording; (4)
avoid introducing terms into the hypothesis that have not been adequately explained or defined
yet; and (5) avoid introducing categorical variables that distort the form of the relationship (e.g.,
"LOW X is positively related to HIGH Y's"); (6) avoid introducing set/subset redundancies in
multiple hypotheses (e.g., P1: Females disclose more than males; P2: Androgynous females
disclose more than androgynous males). Below are some of the "best of the worst" that have
crossed my tired eyes.
H1?: Knowledge also relates to mindlessness in an inverse parabolic function, in that they are
positively related to each other until the mindlessness ceases to be mindless.
H2?: Empathizing with co-workers strengths, weaknesses, and working style relates negatively
towards escalating conflict resulting in an inability to see another's view.
H3?: Equity restoring to a relationship is negatively related to low self-esteem individuals.
H4?: Reactions in adolescents relate back to anxious, neurotogenic, disparging, masochistic, and
manic depressive parents.
H5?: Individual’s interaction with a caregiver as a child affects their relationship bondage with a
potential partner as an adult.
H6?: The purpose of negotiation is to resolve a disagreement between two or more parties.
H7?: In certain negotiation circumstances nonverbal aspects of communication assume a greater
significance than does verbal language.
H8?: Levels of immediate physical and psychological trauma suffered by victims will vary.
H9?: Child abuse is determined by the factors involved.
H10?: The use of threats as an influence tactic does not exacerbate conflicts in general, but is
limited to the occasions on which they are used.
H11?: Conflicts are likely to be influenced by power.
H12?: Sex differences are loosely related to relationship goals.
H13?: Attraction is positively related and influential in choice of sexual partners.
H14?: Males are negatively related to female interviewers of equal status; whereas females are
not affected significantly to status and the sex of the interviewer.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 31
H15?: Mindlessness is negatively related to information processing in interactions.
H16?: Deception is negatively related to the truth.
H17?: Proximity increases physical closeness.
H18?: Viewing the mediatior’s role as folkloric trickster is positively related to their job title.
H19?: Guests of a television talk show depend on the reaction of the audience for support of their
heinous actions, therefore after the show is over whether or not they take the advice of the
audience and change their way, depends on the reaction they received.
H20?: Family hour will need to be changed back to true family hour.
H21?: Hip hop is a response to conditions of property and disempowerment.
H22?: Media coverage of the violent topics in Rap music helps alert people to the possible
problems.
H23?: Families no longer have a need for face-to-face communication.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 32
WHAT NOT TO DO WITH HYPOTHESES
What follows are examples of flawed hypotheses taken from previous student papers.
Each hypothesis is analyzed to illustrate common mistakes observed in the conceptualization and
verbalization of hypotheses. Students are responsible for studying these examples, and thereby
avoiding the types of mistakes indicated. If there are questions about any of the issues raised,
please raise them at the appropriate time in class or professor office hours.
Recall that a hypothesis is any statement of relationship between or among variables. A
variable is a concept that takes on different values. The entire function of science is to make the
nature of the relationships among things understandable. The more precise the statement of
relationship, the more understandable the hypothesis is. What follows is an effort to assist in
making the hypotheses more precise.
1. MOOD IS POSITIVELY RELATED TO SEXUAL INITIATION.
Overly generic variables: "Mood" may be positive or negative. Since mood is not specified, the
hypothesis, as worded, implies that any increase in mood state will correspond to an increase in
sexual initiation. Thus, as worded, an increase in depression increases sexual initiation, as would
sadness anger, and so forth. The key is to understand that the term "mood" is a concept that can
take on different values or levels (e.g., low to high, negative to neutral to positive, etc.). A
hypothesis is an attempt to specify how their values or levels correspond to the values or levels of
another concept, in this case, the occurrence of sexual initiation. The hypothesis intends to say:
"The experience of positively valenced or labeled states is positively related to the likelihood of
sexual initiation."
2. LOW SELF-ESTEEM IS POSITIVELY RELATED TO INTERPERSONAL HOSTILITY.
Mixing variable labels: This is one of the most common, yet subtle problems in writing
hypotheses. By specifying only "low" self-esteem, this hypothesis ignores "medium" and "high"
self-esteem. When two-thirds of a variable's possible values are removed, its ability to "relate" to
anything is eliminated because there is no real opportunity for the variable to vary beyond a very
narrow range of values. The above statement intends to say simply: "Self-esteem is negatively
related to interpersonal hostility" or "Low self-esteem persons are significantly more
interpersonally hostile than high self-esteem persons." Think about what the terminology means!
If something is categorized as "low" it needs to be compared to something that is "high." As an
additional note, it is unclear if self-esteem relates to the frequency with which all hostile actions
occur, the intensity of hostile actions, the duration of hostile actions, all three, some combination,
or some other aspect of hostility. Hostility is likely to take on many different features. It assists
the hypothesis to make these features clear in the hypothesis. Thus, "Self-esteem is negatively
related to the frequency and breadth of interpersonally hostile behaviors."
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 33
3. SELF-DISCLOSURE IS POSITIVELY RELATED TO INTIMACY.
Overly unidimensional concepts: On the face of it, this is sensible, right? Yet, this hypothesis is
deeply flawed. First, anyone looking into the two concepts involved here, self-disclosure and
intimacy, should soon find that they are multidimensional. This means that a valid use of the term
actually implies many distinct but related concepts. For example, self-disclosure has been found
to vary importantly in terms of breadth (number of topics), depth (intimacy of topics), reciprocity
(degree to which partner discloses in response), honesty, and valence (positive or negative).
Similarly, intimacy can be viewed in terms of domain (e.g., recreation I, sexual, social, emotional,
etc.) or type (e.g., caring, commitment, interdependence, physical, etc.). The point is not that
student papers have to agree with "the" view with which I am familiar, but that any responsible
research effort will uncover the complexity (i.e., multidimensionality) of the concepts. In this case,
the hypothesis implies that all forms of self-disclosure are equally related to all forms of intimacy.
Is this sensible? It seems unlikely that as disclosure of negative information increases that sexual
intimacy increases, yet this is exactly what the hypothesis implies until it is specified. Second, this
is a perfect candidate for a curvilinear relationship. That is, extremely low or extremely high
amounts of disclosure are likely to impede or inhibit intimacy respectively. Yet, this hypothesis
implies that even at extremely high levels of disclosiveness that intimacy will also be extremely
high. Third, would this hypothesis apply reasonably to all contexts? For example, does it apply to
task-oriented groups, or superior-subordinate, or disengaging, relationships? Unlikely.
4. MALES ARE POSITIVELY CORRELATED TO APPRECIATION OF OBSCENE HUMOR.
Concepts not variable: "People" are not variables; their characteristics are. This hypothesis
intends to compare 'maleness" to "femaleness. It makes the mistake of correlating categories.
Categories are nominal level variables, whereas correlation requires ordinal level variables (recall
COMM 350?). Gender, religion, ethnic group, etc. are categorical variables, and as such, should be
framed as "difference" hypotheses rather than correlational hypotheses. Thus: "Males appreciate
obscene humor significantly more than females."
5. FRIENDSHIPS ARE HIGHLY VALUABLE TO OLDER MALES AND FEMALES.
Overly definitional: This is overly definitional in form. First, does it imply the friendships are more
valuable to older persons than younger person? (e.g., "The value of friendships for males and
females increases as age increases"). Second, if a relationship is being identified that holds for all
members of a set (i.e., persons), there is no need to specify all categories of that set (i.e., "males
and females"). Thus, "The value of friendships increases as age increases." Third, to what is
friendship "valuable"? Valuable in psychological health, physical health, social health, etc.? Thus,
for example, "As age increases, the perceived value of friendship in preventing depression and
loneliness increases."
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 34
6. ADULTERY, ALCOHOL ABUSE, AND FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES ARE POSITIVELY RELATED TO
DIVORCE.
‘NS’ hypothesis: This qualifies in the realm of an “NS” hypothesis (“No Shit!”). Technically there
is nothing wrong with this hypothesis. However, it is about as unsurprising, and therefore,
uninformative, as a statement can be. It’s a little like saying “Oxygen is important to human
life.” Science has a healthy respect for demonstrating what is supposed to be true actually is
true. But come on! Put a little imagination into the paper and come up with a statement that
allows parents to think their children are learning something not already known without the
degree.
7. AS MISUNDERSTANDINGS INCREASE, POOR COMMUNICATION INCREASES.
Tautology: It is a little like saying that “X is true because it is X” (i.e., something is taken to be true
because of the way in which it is defined). In this hypothesis, the question arises because for most
commonsense notions, “misunderstanding” would be viewed as a form or subset of “poor
communication.” Thus, if X “includes” Y, then it tends to make little logical sense to say that with
more X, there will be more Y, since this is virtually true by definition of X.
8. A COWORKER WILL USE MORE INDIRECT COMPLIANCE-GAINING STRATEGIES WHEN
ADDRESSING A SUBORDINATE.
Lacking comparative condition: This sounds sensible. However, it is incomplete. Whenever the
words “more” or “less” are used, the question arises “less (or more) than what?” In this case, it is
not entirely clear which of the following phrases should be added to the end of the hypothesis:
“...THAN WHEN ADDRESSING A SUPERIOR,” “...THAN DIRECT STRATEGIES,” or “THAN A
COWORKER.” Complete the comparison implied by “more” or “less.”
9. SCHOLARS BELIEVE THAT ALCOHOLISM IS A DISEASE, WHILE OTHERS BELIEVE IT TO BE A BAD
HABIT.
Descriptive, not relational: This fails in three important senses. First, although it sounds like it is
saying something substantive about the nature of alcoholism, it really is only saying something
about what certain people believe about alcoholism, which was not the point of the paper.
Second, it is not about communication, and therefore is not very topical to the assignment or
major. Third, the hypothesis is definitional in content, not a hypothesis. There is no “relationship
between variables” being described here. This hypothesis is stating something about what
alcoholism is rather than what it is related to and how it is related.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 35
A NOTE ABOUT STRUCTURALLY CORRECT SYLLOGISMS THAT ARE NOT THEORETICALLY SOUND.
A student constructed the following propositions in syllogistic form:
H1: A strong relationship with in-laws is positively related to the quality of a marriage.
H2: The quality of a marriage is positively related to the similarity of the partners’
socioeconomic status.
H3: Therefore, a strong relationship with in-laws is positively related to the socioeconomic
status of the couple.
This is a structurally sound syllogism (i.e., [A]  [B]  [C]), but it makes no conceptual or
explanatory sense as a coherent whole. It makes sense that similarity in socio-economic factors
might lead to a ‘stronger’ (e.g., more satisfying) relationship, but it makes little sense to suggest
that a stronger relationship would lead to a partner who was previously uneducated, poor, or
from male to become educated, rich, and female. SES factors (sex, education, wealth, etc.) are
distal variables—variables that have long duration and tend to precede current relationship
status. So the implicit order of the syllogism could easily be made more sensible:
H1: Similarity in partners’ SES is positively related to partner relationship satisfaction.
H2: Relationship satisfaction is positively related to satisfaction with in-law relationships.
H3: Therefore, similarity in partners’ SES is positively related to satisfaction with in-law
relationships.
Or:
H1: Similarity in partners’ SES is positively related to likelihood of satisfaction with in-law
relationships.
H2: In-law relationship satisfaction is positively related to satisfaction with relational
satisfaction.
H3: Therefore, similarity in partners’ SES is positively related to relational satisfaction.
The point is to consider the validity of a syllogism both at a structural (i.e., formal logic) and
explanatory (i.e., narrative) level.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 36
MODELS AND MODELING: A FUNDAMENTAL SCIENTIFIC LITERACY
Some notes for graduate student papers:
“Understanding that our scientific knowledge is ‘only’ a model
is the key to true scientific literacy.
Knowing this tells us that our science has built-in limitations,
but that it does resemble reality in very fundamental ways.
More importantly, that understanding gives us permission
to use our models when they are useful—
and permission to discard them when they no longer meet our needs. …
Ultimately, our models and descriptions of reality
must be subject to two overriding criteria:
How useful is this model, and how much does this model resemble our observations.
Scientific literacy requires an understanding that science is only a model.”
Martin, T. W. (2007, Sept/Oct). Scientific literacy and the habit of discourse.
Seed, pp. 77-78.
Modeling is one of the zeniths of scientific reasoning. It incorporates analytic reasoning
(i.e., breaking wholes into parts), synthetic reasoning (i.e., [re]assembling parts into wholes), and
abstract reasoning (i.e., recognizing similar things across levels of abstraction and concreteness).
It also is fundamental to theoretical reasoning (i.e., explaining how and why phenomena happen
the way they do), and methodology (i.e., specifying hypotheses to be tested qualitatively or
quantitatively, the results of which inform the validity of the underlying theory).
Modeling involves developing a visual “map” of a “territory.” The territory is rarely known
entirely, and in fact, sometimes it is only vaguely understood. The territory may have been
observed in various ways, but seldom has it been observed in its entirety. Thus, a map is needed
to navigate our way through this territory, and to guide the conduct of research into that
territory, to see to what extent our map does a good job of representing that territory.
Every territory, however, has a potentially infinite number of potential maps. Consider
San Diego County. There are topographical, weather, road, tectonic activity, and photographic
maps of the territory. Every one of these maps represents San Diego, but does so from a different
point of view. A tectonic history map of San Diego is not likely to be very useful to someone
seeking how to get from a house address in Ramona to a destination in the Gaslamp. Likewise, a
road map is not likely to be very useful to a person seeking to predict where the next earthquake
will occur.
Furthermore, “the map is not the territory.” That is, the map is never the exact same thing
as the territory. A map that completely represented a territory would be the territory. Thus, maps
are abstractions. They are intended to be abstract representations. They are generally intended
to have some degree of abstract generality as well. A map that only represents an extremely
small and detailed event or place, and only represents a “snapshot” has limited value. Maps may
change as the territory changes (this is why roadmaps are updated frequently), but they are
usually intended to have some validity and value over time and space.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 37
The graduate version of this assignment involves the development of a type of map,
which is here referred to as a model. Specifically, a model will be developed and arguments in
defense of the model will be developed. The model will be developed to represent some
communication process directly relevant to the course.
Models vary by a number of various dimensions, any or all of which may be useful to
consider as you ponder what kind of model to create. A partial list of such dimensions is explained
below:
(1) Abstraction Level: Models vary by the scope or level of abstraction they seek to represent.
Marx’s theory of capitalist systems and social conflict was a very broad-based macro
model of how societies evolve when property is privately owned. Janis’s mezzo model of
groupthink attempts to explain why and how highly cohesive groups tend to reach
premature consensus. Andersen’s cognitive valence model was developed to represent at
a micro level how minute changes in intimacy behavior by one partner influences the
response behaviors of the other partner.
(2) Complexity: Some models are relatively simple, and hypothesize only a few relationships.
For example, Spitzberg, Canary and Cupach predicted that the use of conflict strategies
influences competence judgments, which then influence relationship quality. These three
concepts produce a relatively small number of specific predictions. In contrast, Turner
synthesized numerous theories and propositions to develop a model of social conflict that
involves over 20 concepts and dozens of hypotheses.
(3) Testability: Some models are relatively difficult to observe or test, and are therefore
conjectural. Freud’s theories of the id, ego, and superego are highly conjectural because
by definition, the unconscious is difficult to observe or test. In contrast, Cupach and Metts
developed a model of how face-saving strategies are used to disengage from a
relationship, which is relatively easy to test through surveys, narratives, or other
techniques. A relatively easy litmus test for this dimension is to see how other scholars
have “observed” (tested, measured, rated, scaled, coded, interviewed, etc.) the concepts
in your model, if at all. If a concept has been previously studied by other scholars, then it
can be tested or observed. If it is still a “hypothetical” concept, then it may be more
conjectural in nature.
(4) Recursiveness: Some models are strictly linear. That is, they progress from cause to effect.
Other models are more processual, such that at various steps a given result may “feed
back” into the process and influence prior processes. For example, a linear model might
propose that lonely people are more likely to seek out parasocial relationships in the
media than non-lonely people. In this case, loneliness causes media consumption
behavior in a linear manner. In contrast, a model might propose that as lonely people
consume more media, they are spending less time in social contexts, and therefore lose
their social skills and confidence in their social abilities. In this model, then, the loneliness
causes media behavior, which causes more loneliness, which causes more media
behavior, and so forth.
(5) Modeling Topoi: In general, all models have the potential for five basic types of concepts
(variables, components, factors):
a. Causes (also often referred to as antecedents, or “independent variables”): These are
factors that influence subsequent events. As causes change, subsequent events
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 38
change. Causes typically are further distinguished in two forms: distal and proximal.
Distal causes are causes that occur “deep” in the process, typically meaning “far back”
in time. Proximal causes are “closer” to the events or process being explained. So, for
example, in modeling relationship aggression, distal causes might include whether a
person grew up observing parent-to-parent aggression, and being the recipient of
parental aggression. In contrast, proximal causes might include the amount of stress a
person is experiencing in a job or school, and whether or not alcohol has been
recently consumed.
b. Context: The context is all those factors that influence how the situation is defined by
those participating in a communicative process. Spitzberg, for example, has argued
that contexts typically involve issues of culture, relationship type, physical situation,
and goal or function of the communicative process. Related types of contextual
factors might include time (e.g., slow cultures vs. fast cultures, early in a relationship
vs. later in a relationship, etc.), activity level (e.g., a party vs. a classroom), or other
such features.
c. Individual Characteristics: These are features of the individuals involved that may
influence how a process of communication unfolds. These features sometimes can be
classified as causes or context factors, but may also be treated separately. For
example, Spitzberg proposes that a person’s motivation, knowledge and skills increase
the likelihood of engaging in communication that is perceived as competent by self
and others. The motivation, knowledge, and skills themselves can be accounted for in
part by the individual’s proximal and distal experiences (e.g., a person who received
bad parenting growing up—i.e., a distal factor—may be least motivated to
communicate competently in situations involving a partner who is behaving in ways
similar to those parents—i.e., a more proximal factor). Traditionally, psychology has
distinguished these as “traits” (i.e., stable predispositions to experience and react to
the world in certain ways—e.g., low IQ) and “states” (i.e., temporary ways of
experiencing a situation—e.g., situational shyness).
d. Process: What are the communicative behaviors or processes being explained by the
model? What do the causes and context influence a person or persons to do? For
example, exposure to media violence and coming from a violent family background
may intersect contexts of personal conflict to produce violent behavior as a process.
e. Outcomes: What results from the confluence of these various components? For
example, Spitzberg’s model proposes that as motivation, knowledge, and skills of
interactants increase, they are more likely to engage in communication that is
perceived to be appropriate and effective. These perceptions of appropriateness and
effectiveness, in turn, are likely to result in greater attraction, persuasion, and
relationship satisfaction and development. Thus, there are outcomes of competent
interaction.
(6) Component Functions: The various components described above can generally play a
moderating or a mediating role. A moderating role means that the relationship between X
and Z is significantly altered by the introduction or consideration of the variable Y. In
contrast, a mediating role means that the relationship between X and Z disappears when
the variable Y is introduced or considered. For example, a person who experienced
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 39
parental violence as a child is more likely to engage in violence against a current romantic
partner. However, if that person who experienced violence as a child is also consuming
alcohol, that significantly increases the likelihood of engaging in violence against a current
partner. Thus, alcohol moderates the relationship between childhood abuse and adult
abuse. In contrast, the relationship between race and violent crime (Whites engage in
less, Blacks engage in more) tends to disappear when controlling for socioeconomic status
(SES), and thus, SES is a mediating variable.
(7) Directionality: Some models represent relationships in indeterminate form, whereas other
models specify the exact type of relationships anticipated. For example, a model might
represent a link (or line) connecting “exposure to media violence” and “viewer’s violent
behavior.” This link can be viewed as bi-directional (e.g., as a person’s exposure to
violence increases, this person’s likelihood of engaging in violence increases, but also, as a
person’s violent behavior increases, the more this person seeks out media content that
reflects such violence). This link can also be specified as a particular type of relationship
(e.g., consuming violent media increases the likelihood of behaving violently, but the
reverse is not true—once a person engages in violence, consumption of violent media
does not necessarily increase or decrease). Generally speaking, models consist of
components and connections. The components represent some variable or process, and
the connections consist of arrows or lines. A directional arrow indicates that a given
variable causes or directly influences another variable. Thus, X  Y means that X causes
or influences Y. If the arrow is reversed (i.e., X  Y), it means that Y causes or influences
X. A double-sided arrow means that the relationship is reciprocal. If a sign is provided for
an arrow (i.e., - or +), this indicates the type of relationship involved. A positive (or direct)
relationship means that as X increases, Y increases, and as X decreases, Y decreases. A
negative relationship means that as X increases, Y decreases, and as X decreases, Y
increases. There is a third type of relationship that often describes communication
processes—curvilinear. Although there are many types of curved lines that could
represent the relationship between concepts, one of the most common is that as X
increases, Y increases, to a point, beyond which, more X results in less Y. For example, as a
person talks more and more, generally speaking, we tend to find this person more
attractive and competent. However, as a person begins to talk during 80 or 90% of the
time in a conversation, the more we tend to view this person as egotistical and
narcissistic. Thus, talk time in a conversation is curvilinear to perceived competence (i.e.,
as talk time increases, perceived competence increases, to a point, beyond which,
perceptions of competence decrease).
(8) Formality: There are many potential ways of defining formality in a model, but for the
purposes of this assignment, formality is the extent to which the model can be translated
into hypotheses or specific propositions. For the most part, the more that the connectors
of a model have directional and sign-specific connectors, the more formal the model will
be. Informal models simply illustrate variables that affect one another, but do not specify
how or in what specific ways each of the components is related to the other components
of the model. Formal models specify not only which components affect which other
components (and by implication, what components are not related to one another), they
specify the exact predicted type of relationship among components of the model.
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 40
(9) Spatial Logic: Most (but not all) models follow relatively simple rules: (1) Components on
the left precede, at some point, the components to the right in real time (except when
there are feedback loops or arrows). (2) Every arrow represents a direct effect of one
concept on another. This effect does not have to be a causal relationship, but it usually
implies such an influence. (3) Every component must have an arrow headed to at least
one other component, and may have arrows to multiple other components. (4) The
spatially closer two components are to one another, the more closely they are associated
with one another than to components further away from one another. (5) Components
can be hierarchically grouped according to larger components (i.e., multiple indicators of a
single concept; e.g., social skills above might be further indicated by coordination,
expressiveness, attentiveness, and composure skills). (6) Every arrow is a potentially
testable hypothesis (or proposition).
The graduate student version of this assignment requires that a model of some communicative
process be developed, explained, and defended. The following minimum requirements apply:
(1) The model must be in some central way directly related to communication.
(2) There must be at least five components with at least one component each representing
cause, context, individual factor, process, and outcome. More components can be
provided, but there must be at least one component that fits each of these component
types.
(3) There must be at least five directional arrows. There can be far more, but at least five
must be provided.
(4) At least 10 formal propositions emerging from the model must be formally stated as
hypotheses. More propositions can be articulated, but there must be at least five.
(5) Each component must have at least one scholarly journal article that provides backing for
arguments related to that component.
(6) The complete model must be capable of being summarized in an abstract 500 words or
less.
(7) The model must be rendered in a visual form (preferably using the drawing tools in Word,
or Powerpoint, which is subsequently saved as an image and imported into Word).
(8) The paper, and the reference list, must be in A.P.A. (5th ed.) format, with 1-inch margins,
double-spaced, and either 11-point Arial (normal) or 12-point Times Roman font. The
pages of the paper should have a running head, which includes serial pagination.
(9) The entire paper cannot be more than 7 pages in length (not including appended article
‘first-page prints’), such that:
a. Title page (= 1 page; which includes student name, red id#, class #, class title,
semester/year, and of course, a title that represents the topic of the model).
b. Model visual figure (= 1 page)
c. Proposition list (= 1 page)
d. Abstract (= 1-2 pages)
e. Reference list (= 1-2 pages)
f. Appendix: The first page of every article cited must be attached, either as a photocopy
of the actual published article first page, or as a .pdf of the article first page. The first
page is NOT the journal issue’s table of contents, or the publisher’s online information
COMM 495: Capstone (Sched#-20854; LA-2203; Tue 4-6:40)—p. 41
page about the article—it is the first page upon which the title, author(s) and usually
the abstract of the article begins.
(10) The abstract provides both explanation and argument in support of the model. The idea
is to explain the overall model (i.e., “make sense” of it), and provide key arguments
along the way for as many of the key links or relationships as possible within the space
allotted. Arguments will typically consist of backing (i.e., sources, evidence, citations,
quotations, statistics), claim (i.e., the arrow or proposition), and warrant(s) (i.e., the
reason why the claim is sensible or valid).
Sample models will be displayed in class, illustrating some of the many ways in which
communication theories, processes, and concepts can be visually modeled and explained.
Students may adapt already existing models, but when doing so, must cite the existing model,
and explain how the student model differs from, or advances, the existing model.
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 42
Name: Mortimer Shnerd (Red ID: xxx-xx-xxx)
Email: wild&crazy@girlsgonewild.com
Class: COMM 495
Date: today’s date
YOUR PAPER TITLE HERE (e.g., “IT’S ALL ABOUT ME”:
NARCISSISM, ENTITLEMENT, AND SURVEILLANCE)
In mythology, Narcissus was a hunter renowned for his beauty and very self-aware of
this feature. Feeling himself so attractive, those who loved him were viewed as undeserving.
Nemesis, realizing this personal flaw, lured Narcissus to a body of water in which Narcissus was
able to gaze at his own reflection. Falling in love with the reflection, Narcissus perishes, unable
to remove himself from the gaze of self-love. In modern parlance, narcissism is a personality
trait indicating a grandiose sense of self, and it influences a variety of interpersonal behaviors.
H1:
Narcissism is positively related to relational proprietariness and entitlement.
New media have introduced the potential for anyone to construct an idealized identity
in online environments. In such a context, narcissism is both enabled and reinforced. Narcissism
is a grandiose and exaggerated sense of uniqueness, need for recognition, and entitlement
(Salzman, 1993). This need for love and recognition leads paradoxically to a defensiveness to
criticism or deprivation, resulting in reactionary aggression toward any source perceived as
threatening the face of the narcissist (Twenge & Campbell, 2003). Narcissistic defensiveness is
commonly manifest in strategies such as confrontation and derogation of others, while
reactions to a lack of positive feedback are often characterized by threats and antagonism
(Twenge & Campbell, 2003). Narcissism is likely to lead to a lack of empathy for partners, and a
belief that the partner is obliged to serve the narcissist’s needs. As such, narcissism is expected
to produce a tendency to view a partner as a type of relational object, or property. Therefore:
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 43
H2:
Relational proprietariness and entitlement are positively related to romantic cybersurveillance of relational partner(s).
Proprietariness refers to a set of beliefs and values that view a partner as a form of
property (Hannawa, Spitzberg, Wiering & Teranishi, 2006). Statements as benign as “you belong
to me,” can co-occur with more chilling statements such as “you’ll never escape from me.”
Closely related are beliefs representing rights or responsibilities that obtain to property, such as
“I have a right to know where you are all the time” and “if I can’t have you, no one can”
(Hannawa et al., 2006). The underlying beliefs and values reflect various forms of entitlement.
Entitlement is a belief that, like property, a person can legitimately control a partner’s behavior,
access and use information and social relationships. One way in which such entitlement could
find expression is cyber-surveillance, a process of frequent or obsessive monitoring of another’s
social network site(s) for the purposes of uncertainty reduction. It is distinct from cyberstalking, in which the intent is to evoke fear or communicate threat (Spitzberg & Hoobler,
2002). Instead, cyber-surveillance is primarily intended to provide the ‘lurker’ information
about a potential partner’s activities, commitment, or relational intentions. Therefore:
H3:
Narcissism is positively related to romantic cyber-surveillance of partner(s).
Cyber-surveillance is likely to increasingly become a source of conflict in people’s
relationships. Such surveillance not only potentially provides information that permits a
partner’s commitment to a relationship to be questioned, but when a partner’s surveillance is
discovered, it may communicate a lack of trust. The negotiation of self and of relationship will
likely continue to become a contested site for the emergence of relationship problems, as
people adjust to the ‘brave new world’ enabled by such media.
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 44
References
Hannawa, H. F., Spitzberg, B. H., Wiering, L., & Teranishi, C. (2006). “If I can’t have you, no one
can”: Development of a relational entitlement and proprietariness scale (REPS). Violence
and Victims, 21(5), 539-560. DOI:10.1891/vivi.21.5.539
Salzman, L. (1993). Narcissism and obsessionalism: An interpersonal psychoanalytic approach.
In J. Fiscalini & A. L. Grey (Eds.), Narcissism & the interpersonal self (pp. 241-253). New
York: Columbia University.
Spitzberg, B. H., & Hoobler, G. (2002). Cyberstalking and the technologies of interpersonal
terrorism. New Media & Society, 14, 67-88. DOI: 10.1177/14614440222226271
Stern, L. A., & Taylor, K. (2007). Social networking on Facebook. Journal of the Communication,
Speech, & Theatre Association of North Dakota, 20, 9-20.
Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2003). “Isn’t it fun to get the respect that we’re going to
deserve?” Narcissism, social rejection, and aggression. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 29(2), 261-272. DOI:10.1177/0146167202239051
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 45
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT SCALE (PAS)
WRITING/APA:
FORM:
Demonstrates
proficiency in
grammar, syntax,
semantics, academic
voice, and
application of APA
style guidelines.
Form displays…:
CLAIMS/PROPOSITI
ONS--CONTENT:
Demonstrates ability
to articulate
researchable claims
specifying the
interrelationship
among variables.
Form displays…:
CLAIMS/
ARGUMENT:
CONTENT:
Demonstrates ability
to articulate
comprehensive
arguments that
include relevant and
appropriate claims,
warrants, and
evidence. Form
displays…:
RESEARCH/ DATA:
CONTENT:
Demonstrates ability
to locate and
appropriately cite
and list recent,
relevant, and
reasonable scholarly
research, consisting
mostly of peerreviewed journal
sources. Form
displays…:
1: 0-20 (F)
multiple types &
instances within
type of writing or
grammatical errors
in expository text,
&/or displays
inconsistency in
rule application;
frequent re-editing
or rephrasing to
achieve more
professional voice
is suggested.
1: 0-20 (F)
Key claims that
are not clearly
articulated or
delineated.
Propositions fail
by level of scaling,
relationship, or
syllogistic
entailment.
“Object lessons”
or “list of horrors”
are repeated.
1: 0-20 (F)
Key claims of
source(s) not
clearly articulated
or delineated.
Specific reference
to passages in the
book(s) is not
consistently
provided, or not
provided in
sufficient detail or
accuracy to test
the claims.
1: 0-20 (F)
No more than one
or two directly or
peripherally
related external
sources brought to
bear on the validity
of the selected
source claims,
&/or those sources
applied are
distantly relevant
to source claims;
&/or sources lack
recency,
relevance, or
scholarly
imprimatur.
2: 21-40% (D)
moderately low
level of
professional voice,
composition, and
grammatical form
with moderate
number of errors,
inconsistency of
rule application, or
required editing
(intermediate to
scales 1 & 3).
3: 41-60% (C)
Few types &
instances within
type of writing or
grammatical errors
in expository text,
&/or inconsistency
in rule application;
occasional reediting or
rephrasing to
achieve more
professional voice
is suggested.
3: 41-60% (C)
Only minor or one
or two claims or
propositions need
editing for sake of
clarity.
4: 61-80% (B)
Moderately high
level of
professional voice,
composition, and
grammatical form
with moderately
few errors,
inconsistency of
rule application, or
required editing
(intermediate to
scales 3 & 5).
5: 81-100% (A)
Writing displays
consistent use of
professional voice,
composition, and
grammatical form,
and APA style and
format.
4: 61-80% (B)
Moderately high
level of
relationship
specification or
implications of
claims or
propositions, or
makes few errors
in wording
(intermediate to
scales 3 & 5).
5: 81-100% (A)
Propositions that
are both logically
sound, and
sophisticated in
their thematic
connection &/or
articulation of
complex
relationships.
2: 21-40% (D)
moderate level of
incomplete, vague,
or poorly
evidenced
arguments or
claims
(intermediate to
scales 1 & 3).
3: 41-60% (C)
Some key claims
of the source(s)
articulated or
delineated, but
there are some
inconsistencies in
the detail, gravity,
or evidential basis
provided in
explicating the
claims.
4: 61-80% (B)
Moderately high
level of consistent,
coherent, and
consistent
development of
comprehensively
formulated
arguments in
support of primary
claims
(intermediate to
scales 3 & 5).
5: 81-100% (A)
Consistent,
coherent, and
consistent
development of
comprehensively
formulated
arguments in
support of primary
claims.
2: 21-40% (D)
Form displays:
moderately low
number and
quality of location,
citation, and listing
of recent, relevant,
and reasonable
scholarly sources
(intermediate to
scales 1 & 3).
3: 41-60% (C)
At least 1 to 2
studies relevant to
each selected
proposition,
argument,
component, or
source claim are
provided, &/or
some sources
applied are
distantly relevant
to source claims;
&/or sources lack
recency,
relevance, or
scholarly
imprimatur.
4: 61-80% (B)
Form displays:
moderately high
level of
development of
sound, articulated,
and evidential
warrants for
claims, with high
status and
appropriate
sources
(intermediate to
scales 3 & 5).
5: 81-100% (A)
Each major claim
is evidenced by
sources high in
scholarly
credibility (i.e.,
relevance,
recency, peer
review, etc.)
2: 21-40% (D)
Moderately low
level of
relationship
specification or
implications of
claims or
propositions, or
makes several
errors in wording
(intermediate to
scales 1 & 3).
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 46
TOPICALITY:
Content
demonstrates
relevance to the
assignment and to
the communicationbased focus
expected of the
assignment.
CONTENT & SKILLS:
Demonstrates
knowledge and skills
of a competent
‘citizen’
communicator
germane to course in
applying learning
objectives to courserelevant topical or
audience domain.
PRESENTATION
PERFORMANCE:
Demonstrates the
ability to orally
express ideas,
thoughts, claims,
propositions,
arguments, and
evidence in a
competent verbal
and nonverbal
communication
MODEL: Model
provides theoretical
clarity, synthesis,
heurism, and
potentially
researchable
hypotheses and/or
questions.
1: 0-20 (F)
There is no
discernible direct
or indirect link to
the process of
human
communication,
and/or no direct or
indirect fulfillment
of the specified
assignment.
1: 0-20 (F)
Demonstrates no
representation of
lecture, text, or
syllabus-based
content or learning
objectives of
course in the
content of the
paper. Paper lacks
topicality or
internalization of
principles or
claims established
in course.
2: 21-40% (D)
There is a minor or
indirect discernible
link to the process
of human
communication,
and/or to the
specified
assignment.
3: 41-60% (C)
There is a partial
direct discernible
link to the process
of human
communication,
and/or fulfillment
of the specified
assignment.
4: 61-80% (B)
There is a
substantial direct
discernible link to
the process of
human
communication,
and/or fulfillment
of the specified
assignment.
5: 81-100% (A)
The entire project
displays a direct
discernible link to
the process of
human
communication,
and/or fulfillment
of the specified
assignment.
2: 21-40% (D)
Form displays:
intermediary (to
scales 1 & 3)
mastery of course
content, claims &
established
principles and
practices, and
learning
objectives.
4: 61-80% (B)
Form displays:
intermediary (to
scales 3 & 5)
mastery of course
content, claims &
established
principles and
practices, and
learning
objectives.
1: 0-20 (F)
Demonstrates
neither awareness
of nor ability to
integrate
competent verbal
and nonverbal
communication
into an oral
presentation of
express ideas,
thoughts, claims,
propositions,
arguments, and
evidence.
1: 0-20 (F)
Model paths &/or
components are
vaguely
conceptualized,
&/or
interrelationships
are organized in
confusing or
unfalsifiable ways,
&/or model
excludes
important relevant
areas of research.
2: 21-40% (D)
Demonstrates little
awareness of and
ability to use
competent verbal
and nonverbal
communication to
orally express
ideas, thoughts,
claims,
propositions,
arguments, and
evidence.
3: 41-60% (C)
Demonstrates
moderate
representation of
lecture, text, or
syllabus-based
content or learning
objectives of
course in the
content of the
paper. Paper
demonstrates only
moderate
topicality or
internalization of
principles or
claims established
in course.
3: 41-60% (C)
Demonstrates an
awareness and
ability to use
competent verbal
and nonverbal
communication to
orally express
ideas, thoughts,
claims,
propositions,
arguments, and
evidence with a
minimal confusion
and lack of clarity.
3: 41-60% (C)
Model components
&/or paths
synthesize more
than one major
areas of work,
articulate a
number of
researchable
hypotheses, and
demonstrates
potential
theoretical
potential.
5: 81-100% (A)
Demonstrates
excellent
representation of
lecture, text, or
syllabus-based
content or learning
objectives of
course in the
content of the
paper. Paper
demonstrates
direct and central
topicality or
internalization of
principles or
claims established
in course.
5: 81-100% (A)
Demonstrates a
mastery of
competent verbal
and nonverbal
communication to
orally express
ideas, thoughts,
claims,
propositions,
arguments, and
evidence.
2: 21-40% (D)
Model components
&/or paths show
some places in
which existing
concepts &/or
relationships have
been synthesized,
but most of the
model is derivative
or lacks clear
innovative
analysis, or
excludes some
important relevant
areas of research.
4: 61-80% (B)
Demonstrates an
intermediate
awareness of and
ability to employ
competent verbal
and nonverbal
communication to
orally express
ideas, thoughts,
claims,
propositions,
arguments, and
evidence.
4: 61-80% (B)
Model components
&/or paths
synthesize several
areas of work,
specifies an openended number of
hypotheses, and
suggests the
seeds of a formal
theoretical system.
5: 81-100% (A)
Model constitutes
a self-contained &
hierarchical
theoretical system
with formally
articulated &
falsifiable
propositions, &
significant
heuristic potential
for theoretical
expansion.
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 47
Note: Ethical practice is presumptive; evidence of plagiarism counts against all evaluative standards and jeopardizes all credit.
PAPER GRADING FEEDBACK BOILERPLATE
Argument:
 Needs evidence/citation: This is a very specific empirical claim and needs evidence/backing (i.e.,
a citation).
 Comparative clause: If you have a “more than” or a “less than” formulation, you must specify
the comparison group; otherwise it the question arises: “more than what?” or “less than
what?”.
 Tautological: This is argument by definition—which makes the argument rather tautological—
entity X is more Y because X’s engage in more Y. It’s a little bit like saying “Democracies are
governments that engage in participative representation, so democracies are positively related
to greater participation.” This doesn’t tell us anything other than what a democracy is. We need
to know something about the nature of what factors lead to more democratic societies or
governments for us to understand what democracy is.
 Thin conclusion: A little thin as a conclusion. Future directions? Research limitations?
Theoretical implications?
Grammar/Style:
 Nonparallel pronouns: “They” and “them” and “their” are PLURAL pronouns. If they are used to
refer to “him,” “her,” “individual,” “you,” “me,” “I,” “one,” “person,” or other such singular
pronoun, then it is nonparallel, and grammatically incorrect.
 Personalized “pronouns”: Just me? Gee. Avoid the generic “you” (and other self-referential
pronouns, such as “we” and “our”). Of course it “personalizes” writing style [please note, the
former sentence could have been written “Of course, you may think it personalizes your writing
style.”]. But “you” also implies that whatever is being claimed [whatever you claiming] is specific
just to the reader, and not more generally. Removing the “you” transforms the [your] claims
into more universal and more assertive rhetorical forms. Rhetorically it is tempting to identify
with the reader/audience, but scholars are attempting to establish general principles, and their
writings are intended for not only a universal audience, but for all time. “We,” and “our,” “you,”
“us,” and “I”, etc., refer to particular people reading the text—not anyone else, which seems
exclusionary and temporary.
 Generic pronoun “one”: For the most part, it is best to avoid use or reliance on the generic
pronoun “one” (as in: “One should not use generic pronouns,” or “Pronouns are often misused
by someone”). The term is passive in construction, and creates complications because the word
has multiple potential referents or meanings.
 That/Which: The word “which” is intended for interrogatives (i.e., questions; e.g., “Which of the
following is not a style of conflict management?”) and for unrestricted clauses (e.g., “The word
‘which’ is intended for unrestricted clauses, which are set off by a comma.”). So, if the word
“that” fits the sentence, use it instead.
 Effect/Affect: OK, so I know that each term has two distinct meanings, but they are distinct both
within and between them. It really ought not be too difficult to learn the four meanings, and
when they are appropriate. Effect (verb): rarely used because it is awkward, it means “to cause”
(e.g., “The use of disclosure can effect positive change in relationships”). Effect (noun): an
outcome or result of some cause (e.g., “Disclosure has the effect of producing greater
satisfaction in relationships”). Affect (verb): to influence (not to cause, which is specific, but to
influence, have some unspecified ‘effect’ upon) or change something (e.g., “Disclosure affects
satisfaction in a variety of ways”). Affect (noun): a fairly technical term used in social sciences as
a synonym for “emotion” (e.g., “Jealousy is an affect blend of insecurity and fear”).
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 48

Media/Medium: The term “media” refers to the plural—i.e., multiple means through which
communication occurs. The singular form is “medium.” It is common for laypersons to make this
mistake, but it would be nice if a major in communication might recognize the difference.
 Apostrophe: The apostrophe is your friend! No contractions are permitted in APA, but
possessives require the apostrophe.
 Contractions: APA does not allow contractions, except in quotations or deliberately informal
speech (e.g., in titles).
 Single ‘space’ after punctuation: APA calls for a single space after words and punctuation—not
two spaces.
 Page breaks: Learn to create page breaks rather than slop a bunch of empty spaces into the
formatting!
 Header: Learn to insert legitimately ‘embedded’ headers rather than just typing them at the
tops of page breaks.
 Often times: Given that “often” means something happening many “times,” isn’t this a
redundant phrase?
 It: Try not to begin paragraphs with the indefinite pronoun “It,” as “it” has no immediate
referent for the reader.
Quotation Practices:
 Voice: Part of developing your argumentative competence is promoting your own ‘voice’ in
formulating your writing. One of the ways of doing this is to subordinate authors whenever
reasonable to do so. This means putting them in a parenthetical position at the end of the
sentence, rather than drawing attention to the fact that you are relying on someone else to do
your thinking and writing for you. There are obvious reasons for noting authors explicitly, such
as when citing specific findings of specific studies, but otherwise, they can usually be
subordinated.
 Quotation bracketing: Quotation marks surround the quote—not the authors of the quote. The
authors are not part of the quotation itself.
 Page #!: Direct quotations require page numbers. Otherwise, you are expecting any reader to
have to read an entire article or even book in order to verify your quotation!
 Minimize quotations: Apparently you didn’t see the comment in the instructions: “please note,
there is no quotation, and no need for quotation. Quotations should be used extremely
sparingly—instructors want to see the students’ writing, not someone else’s.”
 Page #: You only use page numbers for direct quotations, but if there is a direct quotation, there
must be a page number (web-based html sources are not allowed as sources, so you should
have .pdf or hardcopy with pages).
 Scholarly sources: The paper instructions state: “Evidence claims with scholarly journal
sources… There must be a minimum of three A.P.A. style (6th ed.) citations* of scholarly journal
references you used to support your explanations of the propositions (there may be additional
citations and the additional sources do not need to be from journals).”
 Textbook cites: Undergraduate textbooks are not considered scholarly because they are written
for a relatively “lay” audience, rather than for scholars.
 URL: For any source available as a .pdf through the library search engines, there is no need to
provide a URL address. A .pdf is a digital scan of the original hard copy of the published work,
and therefore, it is the same as having the original source. The function of a URL is primarily to
assist reader review when the original is not available.
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 49
Citation/Reference Formatting Practices:
 Ruler Tabs!: Learn to use the ruler/tabs or [Ctl-T] to create ‘hanging indents’ for your
references—do NOT use hard returns and tab indents, because if there are any changes to font
or format, it screws up the formatting.
 Page #: Direct quotations require a specified page number.
 Volume #: The Volume # is italicized too in APA; the issue number is not part of APA references
(except when the journal is paginated from page 1 for every issue such as with popular
magazines; something that rarely occurs among scholarly journals).
 et al.: The first time you cite the source, cite all the authors (unless there are 6 or more authors).
 Secondary citations: There should be no secondary citations. If Jones cites Smith, and you only
have Jones informing you about what Smith says, but you want to cite Smith, then go find Smith.
If it is important enough to include as part of your argument, it is important enough to go find so
you can (a) verify its content and claims, and (b) learn more about the claim you are arguing.
 Retrieval: If you can download the .pdf of a document, this is a legitimate version of the
“hardcopy,” and therefore you do not need to include the online retrieval information. Citing
the online retrieval information is only necessary for “html” based documents.
 APA reference format: It is so extremely discouraging to see this. I lecture over it. I provide
elaborate instructions, and elaborate example. I even test over it. And yet, it appears that no
real attention is paid to the APA format requirements, thereby requiring extensive correction on
my part, taking my valuable time and effort away from providing more substantive commentary
on your ideas. Formatting matters!
Why is it important to do “deep” research on topics?
Self-Esteem: You may want to see: Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003).
Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier
lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4, 1-44.
Why is it important to do “deep” research on topics?
Self-disclosure: Research decades ago by Wheeless and others demonstrated that self-disclosure occurs
along a number of different dimensions, including: (1) depth, (2) breadth, (3) positive valence/content,
(4) negative valence/content, (5) honesty/dishonesty, (6) reciprocity, and (7) frequency. So, when it is
claimed that “self-disclosure” is positively or negatively related to X, the writer is implicitly claiming that
each and every one of these forms of disclosure are similarly related to X. It is highly unlikely, however,
that both disclosure of positive things and disclosure of negative things about self are similarly related to
much of anything, just as an example.
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 50
Why is it important to do “deep” research on topics?
Media & Body Image: You may want to see: Levine, M. P., & Murnen, S. K. (2009). “Everybody knows
that mass media are/are not [pick one] a cause of eating disorders”: A critical review of evidence for a
causal link between media, negative body image, and disordered eating in females. Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 28, 9-42.
It’s about communication: Despite being a communication major, many students continue to commit
the fallacy that relationships do not work because they “lack” communication. It is rarely a matter of
lacking communication, but lacking competent communication. Remember, abusive relationships have
plenty of communication—it’s just bad communication. Avoiding communication is itself sending a
message—“I don’t want to talk to you.” Please, please, please, use the concepts we teach in the way in
which you understand and appreciate the communication process. Related, research and theory have
increasingly been identifying the specific adaptive role that bias and inaccuracy play in the success of
certain relationships (see., e.g., [a] Boyes, A. D., & Fletcher, G. J. O. (2007). Metaperceptions of bias in
intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 286-306. [b] Spitzberg, B. H.
(1993). The dialectics of (in)competence. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 137-158. [c]
Spitzberg, B. H. (1994a). The dark side of (in)competence. In W. R. Cupach & B. H. Spitzberg (Eds.), The
dark side of interpersonal communication (pp. 25-49). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.).
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 51
DIFFERENTIATING SCHOLARLY JOURNALS FROM POPULAR PERIODICALS
FEATURES
Authorship
SCHOLARLY JOURNALS
POPULAR PERIODICALS
Author(s) typically experts or
specialists in field, from recognized
academic institution, with ‘terminal
academic degrees’
Articles usually reviewed and critically
evaluated by a board of experts in the
field (i.e., refereed, or “peer
reviewed”); statement of article
submission procedures provided. The
“gold standard”: blind peer review
A reference list (works cited) and/or
footnotes are always provided to
ground the article in the existing
research literature
Written in the technical or theoretical
jargon of the field for scholarly
readers (e.g., professors, researchers,
students, etc.)
Articles typically more structured, may
include ‘boilerplate’ sections (e.g.,
abstract, literature review, method,
results, conclusion, references or
bibliography)
Longer articles, providing in-depth
analysis
Author typically a staff writer or
journalist; credentials often not
provided
Special
Features
Illustrations that support the text such
as tables of statistics, graphs, maps, or
photographs, labeled numerically as
Table 1, Table 2, etc.
Illustrations with glossy or color
photographs; typically include
advertisements between articles
Serialization
Typically, “Vol.” and “Issue” numbers
are identified, and pagination of the
articles is continuous from one issue
to the next within a volume or year.
Each new issue begins with page 1, and
individual issues most likely referred to
by “month” and/or day/date rather than
volume(issue) numbers
Vs. Textbook
Textbooks, particularly undergraduate
textbooks, are written for students—
not for scholars. They are NOT
acceptable for citation in proposition
paper assignments.
Scholarly books and scholarly edited
books, are written for other scholars and
tend to be heavily referenced
throughout.
Editors
Credits/
Citations
Language/
Audience
Format/
Structure
Length
Articles are not evaluated by experts in
the field, but by the staff editors
A reference list is typically not provided,
although names of reports or references
may be listed for “suggested reading”
Written in non-technical language for
anyone to understand; written for broad
appeal
Articles often do not follow a specific
format or structure
Shorter articles, providing broader
overviews of topics
Adapted from SDSU Library handout
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 52
A SAMPLING OF POSSIBLE CONCEPTUAL ENTRIES
INTO AN ENCYCLOPEDIA OF COMMUNICATION
TOPIC/ENTRY (N > 700)
Acculturation processes & communication
Accuracy
Action Assembly Theory
Activist Media
Addiction and Exposure
Advertising, History of
Aesthetics
Affective Disposition Theories
Affects and Media Exposure
Agenda Building
Agenda Setting Effects
Aging and Cognitive Processing
Aging & Message Production & Processing
Americanization of media
Anxiety-Uncertainty-Management Theory
Apologies, Remedial Episodes
Appraisal Theory
Argumentative Discourse
Aristotle (Murray?)
Arrangement and Rhetoric
Art as Communication
Artifacts
Attending to Mass Media
Attention to Media Content by Life-Span
Attention
Attitude – Behavior Consistency
Attitude Accessibility
Attitudes and Values, Media Effects on
Attitudes
Attribution Processes
Audience Segmentation
Bad News, Communicating
Political Communication
Bi- and multilingualism
Bias in the News
Black Feminist Media Studies
Body Images in the Media
Branding
Bureaucracy and Communication
Business Discourse
DISCIPLINARY CATEGORY
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Media Production and Content
Information Processing and Cognitions
Development Communication
Exposure to Communication Content
Media History
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Exposure to Communication Content
Exposure to Communication Content
Political Communication
Media Effects
Information Processing and Cognitions
Information Processing and Cognitions
International Communication
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Media Effects
Language and Social Interaction
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Visual Communication
Popular Communication
Information Processing and Cognitions
Developmental Communication
Information Processing and Cognitions
Information Processing and Cognitions
Information Processing and Cognitions
Media Effects
Information Processing and Cognitions
Information Processing and Cognitions
Exposure to Communication Content
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Media Production and Content
Feminist and Gender Studies
Reality Perception through the Media
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Organizational Communication
Language and Social Interaction
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 53
Candidate Image
Cartoons
Catharsis Theory
Celebrity Culture
Celebrity Stalking
Censorship
Change Management and Communication
Child Protection, Media Regulations
Classroom Instructional Technology
Classroom Management Techniques
Classroom Power
Classroom Questioning
Classroom Student-Teacher Interaction
Cognition
Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Science
Collective Action and Communication
Collective Opinion and the Media
Comforting Communication
Comm Apprehension and Social Anxiety
Comm Apprehension in the Classroom
Comm App., Intervention Techniques
Comm Professions and Academic Research
Communication Satisfaction
Commodification of the Media
Commodity Feminism
Communibiology
Communication Accommodation Theory
Communication Apprehension
Communication as a Field and Discipline
Communication Education, Goals of
Communication Evaluation Research
Communication Inequality
Communication Management
Communication Networks
Communication Research and Politics
Communication Skills Across The Life Span
Comm. Strategies For Empowerment
Comm. Technology and Development
Communication Technology
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Communication, Relationship Rules
Communicative Aggression
Communicator Style
Political Communication
Visual Communication
Media Effects
Popular Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Communication and Media Law and Policy
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Developmental Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Information Processing and Cognitions
Exposure to Communication Content
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Reality Perception through the Media
Interpersonal Communication
Information Processing and Cognitions
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Communication as a Field and Discipline
Interpersonal Communication
Media Economy
Feminist and Gender Studies
Information Processing and Cognitions
Language and Social Interaction
Interpersonal Communication
Communication as a Field and Discipline
Instructional/Educational Communication
Development Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Organizational Communication
Communication as a Field and Discipline
Developmental Communication
Development Communication
Development Communication
Communication and Technology
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Communication
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 54
Communities of Practice
Community Integration
Community Structure Model
Competence/Performance Distinction
Compliance Gaining
Comprehension
Computers-User Interaction
Conflict and Cooperation Across Life-Span
Conflict as Media Content
Conflict Resolution
Consistency Theories
Construction of Reality through the News
Constructivism in Information Processing
Constructivism
Contingency Model of Conflict
Control and Authority in Organizations
Conversation Analysis
Credibility Effects
Crisis Communication
Critical Rationalism
Cultivation Effects
Cultivation Theory
Cultural Imperialism Theories
Cultural Patterns and Communication
Cultural Studies
Cultural Studies, Feminist Popular Culture
Culture & Comm, Ethnography
Culture and Health Communication
Culture Industries
Culture, Definition and Concepts
Cumulative Media Effects
Cyberfeminism
Cybernetics
Dating Relationships
Death, Dying and Communication
Deception Detection Accuracy
Deception in Discourse
Deceptive Message Production
Decision Making processes in organizations
Deduction vs Induction vs Abduction
Deep Structure
Deliberativeness: Political Communication
Delivery and Rhetoric
Dependency Theories
Language and Social Interaction
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Language and Social Interaction
Information Processing and Cognitions
Information Processing and Cognitions
Exposure to Communication Content
Developmental Communication
Media Production and Content
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Exposure to Communication Content
Media Production and Content
Information Processing and Cognitions
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Strategic Communication
Organizational Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Media Effects
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Reality Perception through the Media
Communication Theory and Philosophy
International Communication
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Feminist and Gender Studies
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Popular Communication
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Media Effects
Feminist and Gender Studies
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Interpersonal Communication
Developmental Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Interpersonal Communication
Organizational Communication
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Language and Social Interaction
Political Communication
Rhetorical Studies
Development Communication
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 55
Desensitization
Design Theory
Development and Gender
Development Communication Campaigns
Development Communication
Development Discourse
Development, Resistance to
Developmental Communication
Dialogic perspectives
Diffusion of Information and Innovation
Digital Divide
Digitization and Media Convergence
Direct and Indirect Effects
Directives and Requests
Disability and Communication
Disasters and Communication
Disclosure and Communication
Disclosure in Interpersonal Communication
Discourse Comprehension
Discourse Markers
Discourse
Discourse, Cognitive Approaches
Discursive Psychology
Dissent in organizations
Distance Education
Diversity in the Workplace
Doctor-Patient Talk
Double-Bind Communication
Drama in Media Content
Dual Coding Theory
E-Democracy
Educational Communication
Educational Media Content
Educational Television: Children
Election Campaign Communication
Electronic Mail
Emic vs Etic Research
Emotion & Communication in organizations
Emotion and Discourse
Emotion
Emotional Arousal Theory
Emotions, Media Effects on
Empathy Theory
English Only Movements
Media Effects
Language and Social Interaction
Development Communication
Development Communication
Development Communication
Development Communication
Development Communication
Developmental Communication
Organizational Communication
Media Effects
Communication and Technology
Communication and Technology
Media Effects
Language and Social Interaction
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Interpersonal Communication
Information Processing and Cognitions
Language and Social Interaction
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Language and Social Interaction
Language and Social Interaction
Organizational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Interpersonal Communication
Popular Communication
Information Processing and Cognitions
Political Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Developmental Communication
Political Communication
Media History
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Organizational Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Information Processing and Cognitions
Media Effects
Media Effects
Exposure to Communication Content
Language and Social Interaction
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 56
Enjoyment/Entertainment Seeking
Exposure to Communication Content
Entertainment Education
Exposure to Communication Content
Entertainment, Effects of
Media Effects
Environment and Social Interaction
Interpersonal Communication
Environmental Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Escapism
Exposure to Communication Content
Ethnic Media and their Influence
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Ethnicity and Exposure to Communication Exposure to Communication Content
Ethnography of Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Ethnolinguistic Vitality and Communication Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Ethnomethodology
Language and Social Interaction
Ethos and Rhetoric
Rhetorical Studies
Evolutionary Theory
Exposure to Communication Content
Excitation & Arousal
Exposure to Communication Content
Excitation Transfer Theory
Media Effects
Exemplification and Exemplars, Effects of Media Effects
Exemplification in Health Communication Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Expectancy Violation
Interpersonal Communication
Expectancy-Value Models
Exposure to Communication Content
Extended Parallel Process Model
Information Processing and Cognitions
Eye Behavior
Interpersonal Communication
Facial Expressions
Interpersonal Communication
Family Communication Patterns
Developmental Communication
Family Decision Making
Developmental Communication
Fandom
Popular Communication
Fantasy-Reality Distinction
Developmental Communication
Fear Induction on Children Through Media Content Developmental Communication
Fear Induction through Media Content
Media Effects
Feedback Processes in Organizations
Organizational Communication
Feminine Mystique
Feminist and Gender Studies
Femininity and Feminine Values
Feminist and Gender Studies
Feminist Communication Ethics
Feminist and Gender Studies
Feminization of Media Content
Feminist and Gender Studies
Fetishiziation
Popular Communication
Freedom of Communication
Media History
Friendship and Communication
Developmental Communication
Friendship and Peer Interaction
Interpersonal Communication
Frustration Aggression Theory
Media Effects
Functional Analysis
Communication Theory and Philosophy
GLBT Media Studies
Feminist and Gender Studies
Gaze in Interaction
Language and Social Interaction
Gender and Discourse
Language and Social Interaction
Gender and Journalism
Journalism
Gender and Media Organizations
Feminist and Gender Studies
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 57
Gender, Representation in the Media
Genre
Gestures and Kinesics
Gestures in Discourse
Girl Culture
Globalization of the Media
Goals & Social Interaction
Goals
Gossip and Small Talk
Groupthink
Habituation
Hacktivism
Hate Speech and Ethnophaulisms
Health Behavior Change
Health Belief Model
Health Campaigns For Development
Health Campaigns, Communication in
Health Communication and Internet
Health Communication
Health Communication, Ethics in
Health Disparities, Communication in
Health Literacy
Hermeneutics
Hostile Media Phenomenon
Human-Computer Interaction
Hybridity Theories
Identification
Identities and Discourse
Identity Development and Communication
Identity Politics
Idiographic vs Nomothetic Science
Image Management
Image Restoration Theory
Imagined Interactions
Immediacy
Impersonal Effects
Implicit Personality Theories
Impression Management
Individual Differences & Info. Processing
Information Technology, Development
Information Technology, Economics Of
Information Literacy
Information Overload
Information Processing
Feminist and Gender Studies
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Interpersonal Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Popular Communication
Media Economy
Interpersonal Communication
Information Processing and Cognitions
Language and Social Interaction
Small Group/Decision-Making
Exposure to Communication Content
Communication and Technology
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Development Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Reality Perception through the Media
Communication and Technology
International Communication
Exposure to Communication Content
Language and Social Interaction
Developmental Communication
Feminist and Gender Studies
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Organizational Communication
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Interpersonal Communication
Nonverbal Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Information Processing and Cognitions
Interpersonal Communication
Information Processing and Cognitions
Communication and Technology
Communication and Technology
Communication and Technology
Communication and Technology
Information Processing and Cognitions
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 58
Information Processing, Self-Concept
Information Processing and Cognitions
Information Processing, Stereotypes
Information Processing and Cognitions
Information Science
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Information Seeking
Exposure to Communication Content
Information Society
Communication and Technology
Information
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Infotainment
Media Production and Content
Ingratiation and Affinity Seeking
Interpersonal Communication
Initial Interaction
Interpersonal Communication
Interaction Adaptation Theory
Interpersonal Communication
Interaction
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Interactional Sociolinguistics
Language and Social Interaction
Interactivity, Concept of
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Intercultural & Intergroup Communication Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Intercultural Communication in Health-Care Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Intercultural Communication Training
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Intercultural Conflict Styles and Facework Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Intercultural Norms
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Interethnic Relationship in Families
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Intergenerational Communication
Developmental Communication
Intergroup Accommodative Processes
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Intergroup Comm. & Discursive Psychology Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Intergroup Contact and Communication
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Intergroup dimensions of organizational life Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Intermediality
Communication Theory and Philosophy
International Comm. Association (ICA)
Communication as a Field and Discipline
International Communication
International Communication
International Political Communication
Political Communication
Internet and Popular Culture
Popular Communication
Internet Use Across Life-Span
Developmental Communication
Internet, Technology of
Communication and Technology
Interorganizational Networks
Organizational Communication
Interpersonal Attraction
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Competence & Social Skills Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Comm., Sex & Gender
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Conflict
Interpersonal Communication
Intimacy, Communication Characteristics of Interpersonal Communication
Intimate Talk with Family and Friends
Language and Social Interaction
Intimate Violence
Interpersonal Communication
Intrinsic Motivation and Volition
Exposure to Communication Content
Invention and Rhetoric
Rhetorical Studies
Issue Management in Politics
Political Communication
Issue Voting
Political Communication
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 59
Jealousy
Job Satisfaction, Communication Predictors
Knowledge Gap Effects
Knowledge Interests
Knowledge Management
Language Acquisition in Childhood
Language and Social Interaction
Language and the Internet
Language Attitudes in Intergroup Contexts
Language Varieties
Latitude of Acceptance
Leadership in Organizations
Learning and Communication
Learning Organizations
Libel and Slander
Limited Capacity Model
Linear and Nonlinear Models
Linguistic Pragmatics
Linguistics
Listening
Logos and Rhetoric
Long-Distance Relationships
Marginality, Stigma and Communication
Marital Communication
Marital Typologies
Masculinity and Media
Meaning
Media and Group Representations
Media and Perceptions of Reality
Media as Political Actors
Media Content and Social Networks
Media Content in Interpersonal Comm.
Media Dependency Theory
Media Events and Pseudo Events
Media Literacy
Media Messages & Family Communication
Media Use Across Life-Span
Media Use and Child Development
Media Use by Children
Media's Role in Society
Mediated Social Interaction
Mediated Terrorism
Mediating Factors
Mediation Discourse
Interpersonal Communication
Organizational Communication
Media Effects
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Organizational Communication
Developmental Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Communication and Technology
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Media Effects
Organizational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Organizational Communication
Communication and Media Law and Policy
Information Processing and Cognitions
Media Effects
Language and Social Interaction
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Information Processing and Cognitions
Rhetorical Studies
Interpersonal Communication
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Feminist and Gender Studies
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Reality Perception through the Media
Political Communication
Reality Perception through the Media
Reality Perception through the Media
Media Effects
Political Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Reality Perception through the Media
Developmental Communication
Developmental Communication
Developmental Communication
Media Systems in the World
Interpersonal Communication
Political Communication
Media Effects
Language and Social Interaction
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 60
Mediatization of Organizations Theory
Mediatization of Politics
Mediatization of Society
Medium Theory
Meeting Technologies
Memory and Rhetoric
Memory, Message Memory
Memory, Person Memory
Mentoring
Message Design Logics
Message Discrimination
Message Effects, Structure of
Message Production
Metaphor
Meta-Pragmatics
Metonymy
Microethnography
Mindlessness and Automaticity
Models of Communication
Modernity
Multitasking
Navigation
Negative Campaigning
Negativity
Negotiation and Bargaining
Network Organizations & Technology
News as discourse
Nonverbal Communication and Culture
Nonverbal Signals, Effects of
Objectivity in Science
Obsessive Relational Intrusion
On-Line Relationships
Opinion Leader
Order of Presentation
Organizational Assimilation
Organizational Change Processes
Organizational Comm., Critical Approaches
Organizational Conflict
Organizational Crises, Communication In
Organizational Culture
Organizational Discourse
Organizational Ethics
Organizational Identification
Organizational Image
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Political Communication
Media Effects
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Organizational Communication
Rhetorical Studies
Information Processing and Cognitions
Information Processing and Cognitions
Instructional/Educational Communication
Information Processing and Cognitions
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Media Effects
Information Processing and Cognitions
Visual Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Visual Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Information Processing and Cognitions
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Development Communication
Exposure to Communication Content
Exposure to Communication Content
Political Communication
Media Production and Content
Interpersonal Communication
Communication and Technology
Political Communication
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Media Effects
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Media Effects
Media Effects
Organizational Communication
Organizational Communication
Organizational Communication
Organizational Communication
Organizational Communication
Organizational Communication
Organizational Communication
Organizational Communication
Organizational Communication
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 61
Organizational Metaphors
Organizational Communication
Organizational Structure
Organizational Communication
Organizational Symbolism
Organizational Communication
Organization-Public Relationships
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Organizations, Cultural Diversity In
Organizational Communication
Paradigm
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Paralanguage
Interpersonal Communication
Para-Social Interactions and Relationships Exposure to Communication Content
Parental Mediation Strategies
Developmental Communication
Participative Processes in Organizations
Organizational Communication
Participatory Action Research
Development Communication
Participatory Communication
Development Communication
Party Political Communication
Political Communication
Pathos and Rhetoric
Rhetorical Studies
Patient-Provider Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Pedagogy, Communication in
Instructional/Educational Communication
Perceived Reality as Comm. Process
Reality Perception through the Media
Perceived Reality as a Social Process
Reality Perception through the Media
Perception
Exposure to Communication Content
Personal Communication by CMC
Communication and Technology
Personality & Exposure to Communication Exposure to Communication Content
Personality Development & Communication Developmental Communication
Personalization of Campaigning
Political Communication
Persuasion and Resistance
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Persuasion
Media Effects
Phatic Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Physical Effects of Media Content
Media Effects
Planned Behavior, Theory of
Information Processing and Cognitions
Planned Social Change & Communication Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Playing
Exposure to Communication Content
Pluralistic Ignorance and Ideological Biases Reality Perception through the Media
Pluralistic Ignorance
Reality Perception through the Media
Politainment
Political Communication
Politeness Theory
Interpersonal Communication
Political Advertising
Political Communication
Political Cognitions
Political Communication
Political Communication Culture
Political Communication
Political Communication Systems
Political Communication
Political Communication
Political Communication
Political Consultant
Political Communication
Political Cynicism
Political Communication
Political Discourse
Political Communication
Political Economy of the Media
Media Economy
Political Efficacy
Political Communication
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 62
Political Knowledge
Political Language
Political Media Content, Quality Criteria
Political Media Use
Political Personality in Media Democracy
Political Persuasion
Political Socialization Through The Media
Political Symbols
Politics in Popular Communication
Popular Communication and Social Class
Popular Communication
Popular Culture and News Media
Popular Culture
Populism and Responsiveness
Pornography, feminist debates on
Positioning Theory
Postcolonial Theory
Postdevelopment
Postfeminism
Postmodernism and Communication
Power and Discourse
Power in Intergroup Settings
Power, Dominance & Social Interaction
Pragmatism
Prejudiced & Discriminatory Comm.
Presence
Press Conference
Prevention and Communication
Priming Theory
Propaganda in World War II
Propaganda
Propaganda, Visual Communication of
Proxemics
Public Opinion, Media Effects on
Public Sphere
Public Sphere, Fragmentation Of
Publics, Situational Theory
Questions and Questioning
Realism
Reality and Media Reality
Reciprocal Effects
Reciprocity & Compensation in Interaction
Reification
Relational Control
Political Communication
Political Communication
Political Communication
Political Communication
Political Communication
Political Communication
Political Communication
Political Communication
Popular Communication
Popular Communication
Popular Communication
Popular Communication
Popular Communication
Political Communication
Feminist and Gender Studies
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Development Communication
Feminist and Gender Studies
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Language and Social Interaction
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Exposure to Communication Content
Journalism
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Media Effects
Media History
Political Communication
Visual Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Media Effects
Political Communication
Political Communication
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Language and Social Interaction
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Media Production and Content
Media Effects
Interpersonal Communication
Popular Communication
Interpersonal Communication
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 63
Relational Dialectics
Relational Maintenance
Relational Schemata
Relational Termination
Relational Uncertainty
Relationship Development
Religion and Popular Communication
Remediation
Rhetoric and Dialectic
Rhetoric and Epistemology
Rhetoric and Ethics
Rhetoric and Ethnography
Rhetoric and Gender
Rhetoric and Language
Rhetoric and Logic
Rhetoric and Media Studies
Rhetoric and Narrativity
Rhetoric and Orality-Literacy Theorems
Rhetoric and Philosophy
Rhetoric and Politics
Rhetoric and Psychology
Rhetoric and Religion
Rhetoric and Semiotics
Rhetoric and Social Protest
Rhetoric and Social Thought
Rhetoric and Technology
Rhetoric and Visuality
Rhetoric of Science
Rhetoric, Argument and Persuasion
Rhetoric, Epideictic
Rhetoric, Nonverbal
Rhetoric, Postmodern
Rhetorical Criticism
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorics, New Rhetorics
Right to Know
Risk Communication
Risk Perceptions
Rituals in Popular Communication
Schema and Media Effects
Schemas
Schemata, Knowledge Structures
Scripts
Secular Social Change
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Popular Communication
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Rhetorical Studies
Communication and Media Law and Policy
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Popular Communication
Media Effects
Information Processing and Cognitions
Interpersonal Communication
Information Processing and Cognitions
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 64
Selective Attention
Information Processing and Cognitions
Selective Exposure
Exposure to Communication Content
Selective Perception & Selective Retention Exposure to Communication Content
Self Presentation
Interpersonal Communication
Semiotics
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Sensation Seeking
Exposure to Communication Content
Sense-making
Organizational Communication
Sex/Pornography as Media Content, Effects Media Effects
Sex and Pornography Online
Communication and Technology
Sex Role Stereotypes in the Media
Feminist and Gender Studies
Sexual Compliance-Gaining & Safe Sex Talk Interpersonal Communication
Sexism in the Media
Feminist and Gender Studies
Sexual Violence in Media
Feminist and Gender Studies
Sexualization in Media
Feminist and Gender Studies
Sibling Interaction
Interpersonal Communication
Sign Systems
Visual Communication
Sign
Visual Communication
Sleeper Effect
Media Effects
Soap Operas
Media Production and Content
Social Behavior, Media Effects on
Media Effects
Social Capital and Communication in Health Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Social Capital, Media Effects on
Media Effects
Social Cognitive Theory
Exposure to Communication Content
Social Comparison Theory
Exposure to Communication Content
Social Conflict and Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Social Exchange
Interpersonal Communication
Social Identity Theory
Exposure to Communication Content
Social Interaction Structure
Interpersonal Communication
Social Judgment Theory
Media Effects
Social Marketing
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Social Mobilization
Development Communication
Social Movements and Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Social Networks
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Social Norms
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Social Perception
Reality Perception through the Media
Social Stereotyping and Communication
Intercultural and Intergroup Communication
Social support in Health Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Social Support & Interpersonal Comm.
Interpersonal Communication
Socialization by Media
Reality Perception through the Media
Sound Bites
Media Production and Content
Spectator Gaze
Visual Communication
Speech Acts
Language and Social Interaction
Speech Anxiety
Instructional/Educational Communication
Speech Codes Theory
Language and Social Interaction
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 65
Speech Fluency and Speech Errors
Spin and Double Speak
Spin Doctor
Spiral of Silence
Spirituality and Development
Sports and the Media, History of
Sports as Popular Communication
Stages of Change Model
Stakeholder Theory
Stereotypes
Stereotyping and the Media
Stimulus-Response Model
Storytelling and Narration
Strategic Communication
Strategic Framing
Structuralism
Structuration Theory
Student Communication Competence
Style and Rhetoric
Supervisor-Subordinate Relationships
Support Talk
Suspension of Disbelief
Sustainable Development
Symbol Systems
Symbolic Annihilation
Symbolic Interaction
Symbolic Politics
Symbolism
Systems Theory
Tabloidization
Taste Culture
Teacher Affinity-Seeking
Teacher Assertiveness
Teacher Clarity
Teacher Comforting and Social Support
Teacher Communication Style
Teacher Confirmation
Teacher Feedback
Teacher Immediacy
Teacher Influence and Persuasion
Teacher Self-Disclosure
Teacher Socio-Communicative Style
Teacher Use of Humor
Technologically-Mediated Discourse
Information Processing and Cognitions
Strategic Communication
Political Communication
Reality Perception through the Media
Development Communication
Media History
Popular Communication
Exposure to Communication Content
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Media Production and Content
Reality Perception through the Media
Media Effects
Language and Social Interaction
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Strategic Communication, PR, Advertisement
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Organizational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Rhetorical Studies
Organizational Communication
Language and Social Interaction
Exposure to Communication Content
Development Communication
Popular Communication
Popular Communication
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Political Communication
Visual Communication
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Media Production and Content
Visual Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Instructional/Educational Communication
Language and Social Interaction
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 66
Technology, Social Construction Of
Communication and Technology
Telephone Talk
Language and Social Interaction
Televised Debates
Political Communication
Television as Popular Culture
Popular Communication
Television for Development
Development Communication
Terrorism and Communication TechnologiesCommunication and Technology
Text and Intertextuality
Communication Theory and Philosophy
Theory of Reasoned Action
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Third Person Effects
Reality Perception through the Media
Transcribing and Transcription
Language and Social Interaction
Two-Step-Flow of Communication
Media Effects
Uncertainty and Communication
Communication and Social/Behavioral Change
Uncertainty Management
Interpersonal Communication
Uncertainty Reduction Theory
Interpersonal Communication
Uses-and-Gratifications
Exposure to Communication Content
Verbal Aggressiveness
Interpersonal Communication
Victimization
Media Effects
Video Games
Popular Communication
Videomalaise
Reality Perception through the Media
Violence as Media Content, Effects of
Media Effects
Virtual Communities
Communication and Technology
Virtual Reality
Media History
Visuals, Cognitive Processing Of
Information Processing and Cognitions
Voice, Prosody, and Laughter
Language and Social Interaction
Voyeurism
Visual Communication
War Propaganda
International Communication
Women in the Media, Images of
Feminist and Gender Studies
Women’s Movement and Media
Media History
Women's Communication and Language
Feminist and Gender Studies
Zapping and Switching
Exposure to Communication Content
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 67
Abortion
Asian-American Families
Cognitive Behavioral Couple Therapy
Abuse and Violence in Relationships
Assessment of Couples
Cognitive Processes in Relationships
Abused Women Remaining in
Relationships
Assessment of Families
Cohabitation
Assortative Mating
Cohesiveness in Groups
Attachment Theory
Collectivism, Effects on Relationships
Attachment Typologies, Childhood
Commercial Channels for Mate Seeking
Attraction, Sexual
Commitment, Predictors and Outcomes
Attribution Processes in Relationships
Commitment, Theories and Typologies
Aunts and Uncles, Relationships With
Communal Relationships
Balance Theory
Communication Accommodation Theory
Adult Attachment, Individual
Differences
Bank Account Model
Communication Processes, Verbal
Adulthood, Sibling Relationships in
Barrier Forces to Relationship
Dissolution
Communication Skills
Advice, Self-Help and Media Advice
about Relationships
Batterers
Affection
Behavioral Couple Therapy
Communication, Instant Messaging and
other New Media
Affiliation
Behavioral Parent Training
Communication, Nonverbal
Affiliation in Non-human Species
Beliefs about Relationships
Communication, Norms and Rules
Affinity Seeking
Beliefs, Destiny vs. Growth
Community Involvement
Affirmation
Belonging, Need for
Comparison Levels
African-American Families
Bereavement
Compassionate Love
Age at First Marriage
Betrayal
Compatibility
Aggressive Communication
Biological Systems for Courtship,
Mating, Reproduction, and Parenting
Complementarity
Accommodation
Accounts
Accuracy in Communication
Acquaintance Process
Adolescence, Romantic Relationships in
Adoption
Aging Processes and Relationships
Agreeableness
AIDS, Effects on Relationships
Alcohol and Sexual Assault
Alcoholism, Effects on Relationships
Birth Control, Relational Aspects
Blended Families
Body Image, Relationship Implications
Bogus Stranger Paradigm
Communication, Gender Differences in
Computer-Mediated Communication
Conflict Measurement and Assessment
Conflict Patterns
Conflict Prevalence and Sources
Conflict Resolution
Alienation and Anomie
Borderline Psychopathology, in
Relationships
Conflict, Family
Alternative Relationship Life-Styles
Boredom in Relationships
Conflict, Marital
Altruistic Love
Boston Couples Study
Connectedness, Tension with Autonomy
Alzheimers, and Relationships
Bullying
Conscientiousness, Effects on
Relationships
Ambivalence
Capitalization
American Couples Study
Caregiver Role
Anger in Relationships
Care-giving across the Life Span
Apologies
Casual Sex
Approach and Avoidance Orientations
Celibacy, in Long-term Relationships
Arguing
Change in Relationships over Time
Aristotle and Plato on Relationships
Child Abuse and Neglect
Arousal and Attraction
Children's Peer Groups
Arranged Marriages
Closeness
Contextual Influences on Relationships
Cooperation and Competition
Coping, Developmental Influences
Couple Identity
Couple Therapy
Couple Therapy for Substance Abuse
Couples in Later Life
Couples in Middle Age
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 68
Coupling Policies
Divorce, Co-parenting after
Expectations about Relationships
Courtship and Dating, Cross-Cultural
Differences in
Divorce, Effects on Adults
Experimental Designs for Relationship
Research
Courtship, History of
Courtship, Models and Processes of
Covenant Marriage
Criticism in Relationships
Culture and Relationships
Dark Side of Relationships
Dating and Courtship in Adolescence
and Young Adulthood
Divorce, Prevalence and Trends
Double Standard in Relationships
Dual-Earner Couples
Dyadic Data Analysis
Dyssemia
Early Years of Marriage Project
Economic Pressures, Effects on
Relationships
Expressed Emotion
Extended Families
Extradyadic Sex
Extraversion and Introversion
Facework
Facial Expressions
Fairness in Relationships
Egalitarian Relationships
Falling in Love
Dating and Courtship in Mid- and Later
Life
Elder Abuse and Neglect
Familiarity Principle of Attraction
Dating Services
Embarrassment
Families, Coping with Cancer
Dating, First Date
Emotion in Relationships
Families, Definitions and Typologies
Deception and Lying
Emotion Regulation in Relationships
Families, Demographic Trends
Decision-Making in Relationships
Emotion Regulation, Developmental
Influences
Families, Intergenerational
Relationships in
Emotional Communication
Families, Public Policy Issues and
Emotional Contagion
Family Communication
Emotional Intelligence
Family Data, Analysis of
Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy
Family Functioning
Dependence
Dependency Paradox
Depression and Relationships
Deteriorating Relationships
Developing Relationships
Empathic Accuracy and Inaccuracy
Family Life Cycle
Developmental Designs (Longitudinal,
Cross-Sectional, Retrospective)
Empathy
Family Relationships in Adolescence
Deviance, Relationship Effects
Employment Effects on Relationships
Family Relationships in Childhood
Dialectical Processes
Empty Nest, Effects on Marriage
Family Relationships in Late Adulthood
Disabilities, Chronic Illness, and
Relationship Functioning
End-of-life, Relationship Issues During
Family Relationships in Middle
Adulthood
Discipline in Families
Engagement, as a Relationship Stage
Family Relationships in Young
Adulthood
Discourse Analysis
Envy
Family Routines and Rituals
Disillusionment, in Long-Term
Relationships
Equity Theory
Family Therapy
Equivocation
Ethical Issues in Relationship Research
Family Therapy for ADHD in Children
and Adolescents
Evolutionary Perspectives on Women's
Romantic Attraction
Family Therapy for Adult
Psychopathology
Evolutionary Perspectives, Applications
to Relationships
Family Therapy for Noncompliance in
Children and Adolescents
Exchange Orientation
Family Therapy for Substance Abuse in
Adolescents
Display Rules
Dissolution of Relationships, Breakup
Strategies
Dissolution of Relationships, Causes
Dissolution of Relationships, Coping and
Aftermath
Dissolution of Relationships, Processes
Diversity in Relationships
Division of Labor in Households
Divorce and Preventive Interventions
for Children and Parents
Divorce, Children and
Enemies
Exchange Processes
Excitation Transfer Theory
Ex-Partner and Ex-Spouse Relationships
Expectation States Theory, Applied to
Relationships
Fatal Attractions
Father-Child Relationships
Fear of Death, Relational Implications
Feminist Perspectives on Relationships
Fertility and Family Planning
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 69
Fictive Kinship
Homelessness and Relationships
Intimacy
Field of Availables and Eligibles
Honeymoons
First Impressions
Hooking Up, Hookups
Intimacy, Individual Differences Related
to
Flirting
Hormones Related to Relationships
Food and Relationships
Hostility
Forgiveness
Hurt Feelings
Foster Care, Relationships in
Idealization
Friends with Benefits
Ideals about Relationships
Friendship Formation and Development
Illness, Effects on Relationships
Friendship, Conflict and Dissolution
Imaginary Companions
Friendships in Adolescence
Incest
Friendships in Childhood
Individuation
Friendships in Late Adulthood
Infant-Caregiver Communication
Friendships in Middle Adulthood
Infatuation
Friendships in Young Adulthood
Information Seeking
Friendships, Cross-Sex
Ingratiation
Friendships, Sex Differences and
Similarities
Initiation of Relationships
Fun in Relationships
Gain-Loss Theory of Attraction
In-laws, Relationships with
Insight-Oriented Couple Therapy
Investment Model
Iowa Youth and Families Project
Isolation, Health Effects
Jealousy
Job Stress, Relationship Effects
Justice Norms Applied to Relationships
Kin Relationships
Kin Selection
Kinkeeping
Kissing
Language Usage in Relationships
Leadership
Leisure Activity
Lesser Interest, Principle of
Lies in Close and Casual Relationships
Life Review, Role of Relationships
Integrative Behavioral Couple Therapy
Life-Span Development and
Relationships
Interaction Analysis
Liking
Interdependence Theory
Listening
Intergenerational Family Relations
Loneliness
Intergenerational Transmission of Abuse
Loneliness, Children
Goals in Relationships
Intergenerational Transmission of
Divorce
Loneliness, Interventions
God, Relationships with
Internet and Social Connectedness
Gossip
Internet Dating
Longitudinal Studies of Marital
Satisfaction and Dissolution
Grandparent-Grandchild Relationship
Internet, Attraction on
Loss
Gratitude
Interpersonal Attraction
Love, Companionate and Passionate
Group Dynamics
Interpersonal Dependency
Love, Prototype Approach
Guilt and Shame
Interpersonal Influence
Love, Typologies
Happiness and Relationships
Interpersonal Process Model of Intimacy
Love, Unreciprocated
Hard-to-Get Phenomenon
Interpersonal Psychotherapy
Lust
Health and Relationships
Interpersonal Sensitivity
Maintenance Behaviors in Relationships
Health Behaviors, Relationships and
Interpersonal Spread of
Interracial and Interethnic Relationships
Marital Satisfaction and Quality
Interracial Friendships, in Adolescence
Health, Relationships as a Factor in
Treatment
Marital Satisfaction, Assessment of
Interruptions, Conversational
Marital Stability, Prediction of
Helping Behaviors in Relationships
Intervention Programs, Domestic
Violence
Marital Typologies
Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Relationships
Gender Roles in Relationships
Gender Stereotypes
Gender-Role Attitudes
Goal Pursuit, Relationship Influences
Hispanic/Latino Families
Holidays and Relationships
Intervention Programs, Satisfaction and
Stability
Long-Distance Relationships
Marketplace Approaches to Courtship,
Love and Sex
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 70
Marriage and Health
Nonverbal Involvement
Marriage and Sex
Norms about Relationships
Marriage Markets
Nostalgia
Marriage, Benefits of
Obsessive Love
Marriage, Expectations about
Obsessive Relational Intrusion
Marriage, Historical and Cross-Cultural
Trends
Opening Lines
Predicting Success or Failure of
Relationships
Pregnancy and Relationships
Prejudice
PREP (Premarital Relationship
Enhancement Program)
Openness and Honesty
Prevention and Enrichment Programs
for Couples
Optimism, Effects on Relationships
Privacy
Ostracism
Proximity and Attraction
Mate Preferences
PAIR (Process of Adaptation in Intimate
Relationships) Project
Psychodynamic Theories of
Relationships
Mate Selection
Parent-Adolescent Communication
Psychopathology, Genetic Transmission
of
Materialism and Relationships
Parental Investment Theory
Media Depictions of Relationships
Parent-Child Communication about Sex
Psychopathology, Influence on Family
Members
Media Influences on Relationships
Parent-Child Relationships
Psychotherapists, Relationships with
Mediation, Marriage Dissolution
Parenthood, Transition to
Public Policy and Relationships
Memories and Relationships
Parenting
Rape
Mental Health and Relationships
Personal Idioms
Rapport
Mentoring Programs
Personal Relationships Journals
Reassurance-Seeking
Mentoring Relationships
Personal Relationships, Defining
Characteristics
Reciprocity of Liking
Marriage, Transition to
Matching Hypothesis
Mate Guarding and Poaching
Metacommunication
Military and Relationships
Personal Space
Reciprocity, Norm of
Rejection
Minding the Relationship
Personality Traits, Effects on
Relationships
Rejection Sensitivity
Misattribution
Perspective-Taking
Relational Aggression
Money and Relationships
Persuasion
Relationship Distress and Depression
Mood and Relationships
Pet-Human Relationships
Relationship Messages
Morality and Relationships
Physical Attractiveness Stereotype
Mother-Child Relationships
Relationship Science, Disciplines
Contributing to
Physical Attractiveness, Defining
Characteristics
Relationship Types and Taxonomies
Motivation and Relationships
Physical Attractiveness, Role in
Relationships
Religion, Spirituality, and Relationships
Narcissism, Effects on Relationships
Physical Environment, Effects on
Relationships
Repairing Relationships
Need Fulfillment in Relationships
Physicians, Relationships With
Negative Affect Reciprocity
Play Fighting
Negative Interactions During Late Life
Polygamy
Negotiation
Popularity
Neighbor Relations
Pornography, Effects on Relationships
Neuroticism, Effects on Relationships
Positive Affectivity
Newlyweds
Post-Divorce Relationships
Nonverbal Communication, Status
Differences
Power Distribution in Relationships
Multi-Generational Households
Mutual Cyclical Growth
Power, Predictors of
Remarriage
Resilience
Resource Theory
Respect
Responsiveness
Retirement, Effects on Relationships
Revenge
Rewards and Costs in Relationships
Risk, in Relationships
Rochester Interaction Record
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 71
Role Theory and Relationships
Shyness
Stalking
Romanticism
Sibling Relationships
Story-telling
Rules of Relationships
Similarity in Ongoing Relationships
Stress and Relationships
Safe Sex
Similarity Principle of Attraction
Satisfaction in Relationships
Singlehood
Substance Use and Abuse in
Relationships
Secret Relationships
Single-Parent Families
Secret Tests of Relationship Status
Social Allergies
Secrets
Social Anxiety
Security in Relationships
Social Capital
Self-Concept and Relationships
Social Comparison, Effects on
Relationships
Self-Disclosure
Suicide and Relationships
Symbolic Interaction Theories
Systems Theories
Taboo Topics
Teacher-Student Relationships
Technology and Relationships
Social Convoy Theory
Temperament
Social Exchange Theory
Touch
Social Identity Theory
Transference
Social Inequalities and Relationships
Transformation of Motivation
Social Isolation
Transgressions
Social Learning Theory
Trust
Self-Verification
Social Networks, Changes in
Relationships
Turning Points in Relationships
Sex and Love
Social Networks, Dyad Effects on
Sex Differences in Relationships
Sex in Established Relationships
Social Networks, Effects on Developed
Relationships
Understanding
Sex Ratio
Social Neuroscience
Unmitigated Communion
Sex-Role Orientation
Social Penetration Theory
Validation in Relationships
Sexual Aggression
Social Relations Model
Values and Relationships
Sexual Communication between Adults
Social Skills in Childhood
Vengeance
Sexual Dysfunctions
Social Skills, Adults
Virginity
Sexual Harassment
Social Support and Health
Vulnerability-Stress-Adaptation Model
Sexual Intent, Perceptions of
Social Support, Intervention Groups
Waist-to-Hip Ratio and Attraction
Sexual Intercourse, First Experience of
Social Support, Nature of
Warmth, Interpersonal
Sexual Motives
Socialization
Weak Ties
Sexual Prejudice
Socialization, Role of Peers
Weddings
Sexual Standards
Socioeconomic Status
Work-Family Conflict
Sexuality
Socioemotional Selectivity Theory
Work-Family Spillover
Sexuality and Attachment
Sociometer Hypothesis
Workplace Relationships
Sexuality in Adolescent Relationships
Sociosexual Orientation
Sexually Transmitted Diseases and
Relationships
Speed-Dating
Self-Esteem, Effects on Relationships
Self-Evaluation Maintenance Model
Self-Expansion Theory
Self-Monitoring and Relationships
Self-Presentation
Self-Regulation in Relationships
Shared Activities
Stage Theories of Relationship
Development
Uncertainty Reduction Theory
Unconditional Positive Regard
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 72
Islands of Inquiry
Foreword:
Spitzberg, B. H. (in press). Islands of inquiry. Foreword for: G. Merrigan & C. L. Huston.
Communication research methods (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
By Brian H. Spitzberg
School of Communication
San Diego State University
Imagine an island archipelago in the vast, uncharted sea of science. Long ago intrepid
explorers from a nation state far, far away settled the islands of this archipelago. Once the
various islands were settled, the peoples found themselves separated by shark-infested waters,
treacherous reefs and inaccessible ports. Consequently, little commerce today occurs between
natives of these separate islands. Over time, the peoples developed alternative customs,
rituals, religions, values, dialects, and modes of exchange.
Because each island produces slightly different desirable natural resources, the various
peoples of these islands face a fundamental choice: do they compete to take the territories
across the waters by force, or do they find sufficient commonality to negotiate normative and
mutually compatible relations for continued commerce? Conflict is costly, but may be seen as a
means to possess the entire archipelago, the entire territory with all the resources and power
entailed by the success of such a conflict. In contrast, a negotiated cooperative arrangement
may reduce the total resources available to each individual island, but enable greater benefits
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 73
by avoiding the costs of waging war and arranging complementary exchanges of the best each
culture has to offer. Conflict can make a group stronger by steeling the motives to pull together
against the external enemies, yet it can also reveal the weaknesses and fractures of a given
group, and potentially, the entire overthrow of one’s own cherished culture.
The methodological “cultures” of social scientists are a lot like these separate island
cultures. They each have their rules, customs, beliefs and values. Each knows the others exist,
but they engage in relatively little commerce and often view each other with suspicion and
incredulity. Conflict, or at least indifference, occurs more often than cooperation.
Social science began in the ancient, perhaps primal, desire to understand the world
around us. Long ago, Eastern and Western traditions evolved across and into various eras,
cultures and locales of enlightenment. As it was increasingly realized that scientific methods for
understanding the world could be cumulative and increasingly valid, the approaches to
understanding the physical world were increasingly extended to investigating the social world.
These scholars eventually evolved into “tribes” of methodological and theoretical
disciplines and associations. These tribes settled distinct islands of academe, often only dimly
aware of the practices and beliefs of the tribes occupying the academic programs across
continents, universities, colleges, departments, and even hallways and faculty room tables. The
methods by which these tribes became acculturated and accustomed became claims to their
natural resources of the “truth(s)” of the world, and the academic prestige implied by
successful claims to this domain. Over time, these different methods have more often
fomented indifference, alienation, and occasional struggles for respect, rather than negotiated
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 74
cooperation. Scholars peer derisively at the alien practices of the heathen tribe across these
methodological divides, and chant the righteousness of their own personal beliefs and customs.
The domain of truth is often viewed as a limited resource, and any successful claims by
other tribes result in territory no longer available to conquer except through renewed conflict.
These territorial skirmishes often strengthen the spirits of believers and sometimes eliminate
more destructive or flawed cultural customs of certain tribes; but often the ongoing battles
serve no higher purpose than to fuel the conflict itself. The tribes intuitively understand that
identifying a foil, or a common enemy, helps reinforce the resolve of the group. The
destructiveness of the conflicts is typically exacerbated by the tendency of the different
cultures to employ distinct symbols, vocabularies and dialects. Misunderstandings become
common, even when negotiation efforts are pursued in the interest of cooperation.
Social scientists have developed different methodological idioms of scholarly inquiry.
These methodological practices represent distinct cultures, sometimes cooperating, but more
often competing, to claim the larger territory of social science. Even when representatives of
these distinct cultures claim publicly the importance of “getting along,” in private conversations
with those of their own tribes, the rhetoric generally becomes incendiary and resentful of the
others’ intrusions into territories more “rightly” reserved for one’s own endeavors.
Competition for the sake of competition may have reached the limits of its evolutionary
value. Two millennia have helped hone a verdant array of methodological islands. Productive
progress in the future may well require more than a mere truce. Instead, the academic
archipelago of social sciences may need a common bill of rights, a common sense of collective
purpose and a common recognition of each other’s contributions. Unfortunately, such a
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 75
revolution is not in the immediate offing. Before such a revolution can occur, however, bridges
must be forged between and among the academic islands. This textbook lays the preliminary
pontoons, in two important ways: First, by locating the nature of methods in the nature of
argument, and second, by representing the broader scope of methods currently employed by
the communication discipline.
By locating the central underlying architecture of all methods in the structure of
arguments, this text helps decode the Rosetta Stone of methodological languages, the symbolic
intersection through which negotiations for collective commerce in the pursuit of knowledge
must progress. No matter what else a method attempts to accomplish, it must rely upon, and
establish the validity of, its practices through argument. Every method guides the production,
collection and analysis of data, which consist of artifact(s), observation(s), case(s), example(s),
or counts of something. But data alone prove nothing. Data only become meaningful in the
crucible of argument, which connects the data through warrants to claims. Warrants are the
reasons, rationale, or answer to the question “why” should I believe the claim being made by
this research. The claim is the conclusion, or the particular proposition (e.g., hypothesis, value
judgment, belief statement, etc.), which contextualizes the reasonableness of the data in
connection with a claim. The claim, once established, may then become the warrant for
subsequent arguments. Warrants are the bridges between data and claim, and claims so
established serve as bridges to further arguments.
This textbook examines ways of knowing as arguments. When a scholar has reached a
conclusion, it stands as a privileged claim—a claim that this scholar’s method has provided
specialized insight. Scholars apply a specialized method that they have apprenticed in their
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 76
education to master, and this method serves as a way of privileging their voice compared to any
given layperson’s view of the world. This does not invalidate the layperson’s views—it only
suggests that methods provide a more reasoned or systematic approach to knowing than the
average person will have had the opportunity or expertise to apply to making claims about
some particular topic of investigation.
There are many ways of scholarly knowing, but four illustrative paradigms in the
communication discipline consist of discovery, conversation/textual analysis, interpretation,
and critical approaches. These will be defined and detailed more extensively throughout the
text, but for now, they can be illustrated in general ways. The discovery method assumes a
singular objective reality, and although no method can reveal this objective truth in the social
world, the discovery method uses various methods of objectification, including experiments,
control, and quantification in an attempt to inch ever closer to that reality. The
conversation/textual method assumes that because communicators accomplish everyday life
based only on the behaviors they display through their communication (as opposed to reading
each other’s minds), researchers can understand such behavior best by observing and precisely
analyzing such naturally occurring activities. The interpretive method assumes that reality is
socially constructed; that there are as many realities as there are people perceiving and
influencing such perceptions through their communication. The critical method assumes that
reality is always influenced by underlying systems of often hidden influence and power, and
such structures must be evaluated through an evaluative perspective that reveals these hidden
forces, thereby presenting opportunities for pursuing more noble or practical ends. If these
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 77
paradigms are analyzed through the lens of the rationales they rely upon, they might look
something like the following arguments:
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 78
Figure 1. Diagramming the underlying arguments of different ways of knowing.
DATA: All methodological
paradigms engage in systematic
selection, collection, observation,
and interpretation of empirical
communication-relevant data.
WARRANT: Given these data, the
methodological rationale provides
justification for rendering the
following claim(s)…
CLAIM: Given these data and
warrant(s), each of the following
paradigms claims that…:
 From the interpretive
paradigm perspective, this
is a new frame for
understanding these texts
and their implications.
 From the discovery
paradigm perspective,
these data reveal new
information about the
generalizable nature of
reality.
 From the critical paradigm
perspective, these data
enlighten the role of
constraints, power, and
exploitation, and point to
possibilities for improving
communication, society,
and the human condition.
Each paradigm or method can be further elaborated into its own particular rationale.
The discovery paradigm presupposes that in any given process, there is a set of causes and
effects, and that methods properly designed to manage or control for subjectivity of the
researcher(s), and translating observations into quantifiable measurements, can reveal
something about how causes associate with such effects. This approach to knowing implies an
argument such as the following.
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 79
Figure 2. Diagramming the underlying argument for the discovery paradigm.
DATA: Communication is a cause,
and is caused by, complex but
specifiable underlying processes.
CLAIM: Therefore, probability,
measurement, design, theoryand hypothesis-testing render
generalizable conclusions about
cause-effect relations.
WARRANT: Given statistical or
experimental control of
extraneous, mediating and
moderating variables, causal
influences can be identified to a
reasonable level of probability
(by excluding null and competing
hypotheses).
As another example, let’s say that in meticulously observing everyday conversation, you
recognize a highly complex process through which people achieve social life. That is, apologies,
compliments, requests, and the “events” of everyday life are accomplished through a subtle
choreography of move and countermove of behavior. In such a dance, thoughts, values and
beliefs are actually irrelevant to uncovering the structure of such accomplishments. An
interactant cannot peer into your mind during a conversation; he or she recognizes an apology
through the structure of the behavior observed, and therefore, such behavior is also observable
by a researcher. The data of everyday accomplishments exists in behavior. If this is accurate, then
it seems reasonable that all inferences about what conversationalists are attempting to achieve
through interaction is exclusively “available” to others through their behavior. Several arguments
could be derived from this rationale, but consider for the moment the following:
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 80
Figure 3. Diagramming the underlying argument for the conversation/textual analysis paradigm.
DATA: Everyday conversation is
accomplished exclusively through
mutually observable behavior.
CLAIM: Subjective thoughts of
interactants are irrelevant to
understanding how interaction is
accomplished.
WARRANT: Interactants have no
access to others’ subjective
thoughts, yet accomplish
everyday tasks through
interaction.
In contrast, interactants often make judgments about what others are doing through
their behavior. In so doing, sometimes making one attribution rather than another may be an
important determinant of how a person behaves in response to others’ behavior. For example,
if you think you deserve an apology from someone, and this person provides what seems a
cursory or inappropriate apology, you are likely to devalue this person’s apology. If you think
this person provided an insincere apology because he or she thought you didn’t deserve an
apology, you might begin disliking this person. Further, you might respond by seeking further
apology, or avoid interacting with this person in the future. In short, your attributions or
subjective thoughts about this person’s behavior directly influence your interaction with this
person. Consequently, an argument can be derived as follows:
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 81
Figure 4. Diagramming the underlying argument for the interpretive paradigm.
DATA: Subjective thoughts affect
motives and means of interaction.
CLAIM: Subjective thoughts are
essential to understanding how
interaction is accomplished.
WARRANT: Interactants seek to
understand others’ behavior by
making subjective attributions
about why the others
behaved/said what they did.
Finally, the world may reveal disparities and distortions that imply underlying forces at
work, which sustain themselves through power, deception, manipulation, and bias. Such hidden
forces require critics to expose them, and to provide an evaluative standard against which such
exploitative practices might be revealed and the victims of such distortions thereby liberated to
empower their own interests. The rationale underlying this paradigm might look like the
following.
These various arguments lead to very different claims (i.e., methods) of understanding
social interaction. For example, to the conversation analyst, only people’s naturally-occurring
behaviors count as data, whereas in ethnographic or interpretive methods, both thoughts and
behaviors count as data. Discovery researchers will experiment with people, whereas
interpretive and conversation analytic researchers take people’s behavior for what it is, or was,
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 82
and do not seek to introduce new stimuli to the investigation context. It follows that what
counts as a theory can differ substantially across these paradigms. In one, behavior explains
behavior, whereas in another, perceptions and feelings explain behavior. Conversation analytic
researchers don’t see the relevance of the findings of survey (discovery) researchers, and
survey researchers have difficulty seeing how to generalize the conclusions of conversation
analysts without a cognitive theoretical context.
Figure 5. Diagramming the underlying argument for the critical paradigm.
DATA: There are forms of
exploitation, deprivation,
corruption, and distortion in life.
CLAIM: Critical inquiry and
evaluations need to reveal these
forms of exploitation, thereby
pointing the way to better ways of
pursuing life.
WARRANT: Such disparities and
distortions could only be
sustained to the extent that they
are hidden or masked by
powerful interests, groups, and
individuals.
So it is with all methodological arguments—they are the ways we know, and the ways
we choose to know often seem to preclude other ways of knowing. The collective practices and
vocabularies of scholars represent what Thomas Kuhn (1970) referred to as paradigms, and he
believed them to be incommensurable. That is, a paradigm answers all the questions it needs
to, in much the same way a religion is meant to do, and consequently, there is no need to
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 83
borrow from another paradigm, just as most people find no need to borrow religious beliefs
from another religion.
So the islands upon which these researchers dwell are isolated by the arguments they
make. But maybe, just maybe, if they recognize this fact, they can begin to understand why
they reside on different islands in the first place, and how their respective tribes differ. Maybe
they can begin to see how their arguments relate to each other, and begin a dialogue through
which cooperation, rather than conflict, can be begun (Craig, 1999). Perhaps they can learn to
“talk each other’s language” (Kuhn, 1970), and thereby better understand their differences.
This textbook, by excavating the underlying basis of these differences, lays the initial bridges
(and warrants) for this dialogue to begin.
This dialogue is facilitated to the extent the various tribes and their customs are known.
Arguments are most competent when adapted to their audiences, including those with whom
we argue (i.e., other practitioners), as well as other interested parties (e.g., granting agencies,
foundations, the media, etc.). Another strength of this text is a fair representation of the
domain of the discipline. Few survey textbooks, for example, do justice to conversation
analysis, or only give shallow consideration of critical and rhetorical methods. In contrast, this
textbook recognizes the legitimacy of these methods as equivalent because their endeavors are
predicated on the same discourse of argument. As Walter Fisher (1978) claimed, all arguments
are ultimately erected on the foundations of underlying values, and “no analytically grounded
hierarchy of values will ever claim universal adherence” (p. 377). Nevertheless, having an
understanding of the multiple cultures of values with which one may seek congress, the better
the dialogue can become in the service of that engagement.
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 84
Nowhere is this dialogue more important than in the initial enculturation of students,
beginning your own intrepid voyages into the often turbulent waters of the communication
discipline. Just as it is easier developmentally to learn multiple languages early in the process of
language learning, so it is easier to accept multiple methodologies before any single
methodological argument has fortified its armaments and defenses against the other scholarly
cultures with which it competes. Distinct cultural groups need not engage in similar practices to
reap the benefits of mutual understanding and cooperation.
The potential distance and competition among islands of inquiry is an old concern.
Scholars have previously suggested that the key differences are in the questions that each
culture seeks to answer. The types of questions asked can be important frames for
arguments—such as determining what kind of argument represents a sensible response. People
have suggested, for example, that there need be no competition between religion and science
(Gould, 1999) or science and humanities (Gould, 2003; Miller, 1975), because these magisteria
ask different types of questions, and thereby avoid encroachment upon one another’s
territories. Others, however, have suggested that the differences between religion and science,
for example, go far deeper than just the questions asked—they go to issues such as their
orientation to skepticism, openness to new knowledge and discovery, and the degree to which
faith is placed in preserving the past versus accumulating, revising, and correcting, and
accumulating the past (Fuchs, 2001). In the case of the arguments posed for the methods
encountered in this text, for the most part, the big questions addressed are the same—why do
people communicate the ways they do, and how does such communication affect the human
condition? Instead, the major differences in the paradigms of inquiry examined in this text have
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 85
to do with ways of answering any such questions, and this “how” question is addressed by
different methods, representing different kinds of arguments for pursuing understanding.
The journey is not an easy one. Forging relations with strange cultures and territories
seldom is. There are many barriers that even the most motivated and capable among us face in
building bridges across the waves and shoals of these methodological divides (Bryman, 2007).
On the other hand, there are usually great benefits to developing an acquaintance and ongoing
relationship with these cultures. Eventually, with enough trade, commerce, and experience in
multiple cultures of research, scholars may become truly multi-lingual and multi-cultural,
appreciating their indigenous culture and yet fully appreciating and engaging other cultures as
well. There are many fruits of knowledge to taste and experiences to pursue that can only
derive from encounters with those beyond the borders of our own comfortable domains.
Therefore, go forth, and may you find the value of the voyage worthwhile. And for the
few of you who will ever get the privilege of applying such arguments in the service of
knowledge, may you get some glimpse of the excitement that derives from knowing something
no one else knows, of discovering something no one else has discovered, or of seeing further
than anyone else has previously seen. The risks of being wrong are great, but the potential of
charting new routes or discovering new islands, or even building new bridges, holds its own
rewards for those willing to venture forth with a spirit of scholarly adventure. This text will help
you greatly along your way, providing as it does the charts and compass needed for the voyage
ahead.
Brian H. Spitzberg
School of Communication
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 86
San Diego State University
30 December 2002
References
Bryman, A. (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of
Mixed Methods Research, 1, 8-22.
Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9, 119-161.
Fisher, W. R. (1978). Toward a logic of good reasons. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 64, 376-384.
Fuchs, S. (2001). What makes sciences “scientific”? In J. H. Turner (Ed.), Handbook of
sociological theory (pp. 21-35). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
Gould, S. J. (1999). Rocks of ages: Science and religion in the fullness of life. New York:
Ballantine.
Gould, S. J. (2003). The hedgehog, the fox, and the magister’s pox: Mending the gap between
science and the humanities. New York, NY: Harmony Books.
Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of
Chicago.
Miller, G. R. (1975). Humanistic and scientific approaches to speech communication inquiry:
Rivalry, redundancy, or rapprochement. Western Speech Communication, 39, 230-239.
COMM 495: Capstone—p. 87