Com 422—Baldwin—School of Communication—Illinois State University
Updated 10/05/09
Position Paper 3: Build-Your-Own Theory: Theory Title
Grading Sheet
Comments Position Paper 3 (Theory) ISU# Last 5: _________
Evaluation:
ANALYSIS
Balance of theory (breadth/depth)
1
2
Clarity of concept defs, propositions
1
2
Measurement
1
2
Evaluation
1
2
Any extras (clear consideration of boundary
conditions or system states?)
WRITING
Intro/Conc., rationale for theory, etc.
1
2
OVERALL (Subjective) Grade
5
10
Comments:
Intro/Rationale: xyz
Concepts (number, clarity): xyz
Propositions/rationale: xyz
Method: xyz
Evaluation (thought, use of terms): xyz
Overall: xyz
Score __ /25
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
3
15
4
20
5
25
Dubin’s Approach to Theory
(R. Dubin, 1969)
“A theoretical model starts with:

things or variables, or (1) units whose interactions constitute the matter of attention.

The model then specifies the manner in which these units interact with each other, or (2) the laws of
interaction among the units of the model.

Since theoretical models are generally of limited portions of the world, the limits or (3) boundaries
must be set forth within which the theory is expected to hold.

Most theoretical models are presumed to represent a complex portion of the real world, part of
whose complexity is revealed by the fact that there are various (4) system states in each of which the
units interact differently with each other.

Once these four basic features of a theoretical model are set forth, the theorist is in a position to
derive conclusions that represent logical and true deductions about the model in operation, or the (5)
propositions of the model.
“So far, we see only the theoretical side of the theory-research cycle.

Should there be any desire to determine wither the model does, in fact, represent the real world, then
each term in each proposition whose test is sought needs to be converted into (6) an empirical
indicator of the term.

The next operation is to substitute the appropriate empirical indicators in the prepositional
statement to generate a testable (7) hypothesis. The research operation consists of measuring the
values on the empirical indicators of the hypothesis to determine whether the theoretically predicted
values are achieved or approximated in the research test.
The first part of the quotation is about theory building—the last two points are about conducting
research.
That is…a theory is made up of concepts (units) and propositions. When we turn it to a study
and determine a way to measure (that is, operationalize) concepts, we use “empirical indicators.”
Variables (such as “dependent” and “independent’ variables) occur in the study, once the
concepts have been measured. The hypothesis occurs in the study, and is a statement about the
relationship between the variables.
Often, in communication research, we use “shorthand” language in our studies. For the
conceptual relationship: Previous cross-cultural experience (decreases) ethnocentrism, we
write:
H: Previous cross-cultural experience will be negatively related to ethnocentrism.
But this hides an important level of theorization, and that is the “theory” that they way I am
measuring my items really is an indication of those concepts. Blalock says that there is a
different level of theorization—the theory of measurement—behind any study. A carefully
worded hypothesis (in a study) reflects this:
H1: As one’s reported cross-cultural experience (in numbers of months abroad and reports of
closeness in intercultural relationship) increases, self-reported ethnocentrism scores will
decrease.
In Position Paper 3, you do not need “hypotheses” in this sense. What you do need are the
following:
 An overview paragraph of what the theory is about. (This paragraph might state which, if
any, boundary conditions apply—for example, is your theory about conflict only about
relational conflict? Are you assuming that the people your theory is explaining already
have some level of emotional closeness? If you are writing about social acceptability of
men crying, are you assuming that this is crying that is social (that is, in the presence of
others)? Etc.
 A list of key concepts with definitions. These are called “conceptual definitions.” (these
need not all occur in the propositions, if they are merely definitional.
o For example, my theory might be about civic engagement in pedagogical
situations. While I am only predicting civic engagement (and pedagogical
situations is a “boundary condition”), I may want to define what a pedagogical
situation is.
o There is no magical number, but there should be at least 3 concepts, but probably
more like 5 or 7. But if you have much more than 7, then it will be difficult to
address within the page limit without being shallow.
o A key to good concept creation is coming up (a) with concepts that actually can
vary: Saying “positivity of communication” (or communication valence) is a
better concept than saying simply “positive communication.” Why? Positive
communication is always positive! It cannot vary as you go to measure it. But
“positivity” can be either high or low (in Dubin terms, these are the “system
states” on which positivity can exist). And (b) concepts should have an
appropriate label at a fairly high level of abstraction: So “going to the mall
together” is not a good variable, but “time together” is better. Sometimes, good
labels help. Thus, “television exposure” may be better (at least in wording) than
“how television children watch.”

A list of propositions.
o Very important: Your theory cannot be about only two concepts. Every year I get
a paper about something like “channel choice” and “relational satisfaction”—
where the whole paper is about two concepts.
o Think more about it! A theory is a set of concepts and their relationships to each
other. Since we are building social scientific (post-positivist) theories here, there
should be either causal, correlational, or temporal propositions (Metts, 2004).
Either the intro paragraph or statements after each proposition should explain
why these should be in effect.
o Because you have multiple propositions, you will not have a “theory about x and
y” (for example, The Theory of Similarity and Perception of Humor)—as this


only reflects one of the propositions. More likely your theory will either have the
name of the main predicted variables (The Perception of Humor Theory), or a
name based on underlying notions about the theory and boundary contexts: A
Theory of Public Humor.
o A key to the assignment is coming up with a good balance of complexity and
simplicity for your theory.
A paragraph (or bullets) regarding measurement. This can be in paragraph form, with
summary description of how you will measure the variables, or in a list form. The
syllabus says you should provide “operational definitions,” but is not clear on this.
Merely giving a questionnaire to men and women does not operationally define a
variable. But you could say, “Sex will be determined by self-report on a demographic
question,” “Television exposure will be measured through a self-report measure.” If you
wanted to be really fancy, you could say not only how it was measured, but provide an
“operational” definition (where appropriate): “Television exposure will be measured
through a self-report measure of hours viewed per week” (and…even better…) “with
‘heavy viewers’ being those in the top 25% of hours viewed, and ‘light viewers’ being
those in the lowest 25%. Or: “Self-esteem will be measured with a Likert-type scale [if
you know what this is], with a lower score indicating lower self-esteem.” In the Dubin
approach, here we are working towards “empirical indicators.” But since this class is
about theory and not measurement, we will stop here. I do not want hypotheses (in the
Dubin sense).
A paragraph discussing possible limitations of your theory. Consider Miller’s standards
here!
Finally as you think about your theory, remember that part of the grade is on the
thought and creativity of the theory. This can occur in different ways.
1) You might consider if any of the relationships are reciprocal (that is, both
ways): For example, perceived similarity may lead us to like another person,
but could liking another person also lead us to perceive more similarities?
2) You might consider if there are any important relationships between the
predictor variables. In the model below, for example, not only do egoinvolvement and parent and peer attitudes influence one’s civic engagement,
but the latter two might influence the first as well.
3) Consider the organization of the variables. In some cases, it may be that X
and Y lead to A, which in turn leads to C. See Figure 2 below.
4) You do not need to talk about the “shadow boxes” below (how self-report
measure should be linked to ego involvement)—that is just to illustrate
Blalock’s notion of measurement theory.