Com 422—Baldwin—School of Communication—Illinois State University
Updated 10/08/09
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 selfreport 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
ego-involvement 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 selfreport measure should be linked to ego involvement)—that is just to
illustrate Blalock’s notion of measurement theory.
Figure 1: Blalock’s Notion of Measurement Theory
Ego-Involvement
Self-report measure
Civic Engagement
Parent’s communication


Self-report measure

Peer Attitudes
Voting in last election
Reported membership in civic
school organizations
Self-reported hours in
volunteer work
Self-report measure
Figure 2: Brainstorming on a Theory of Civic Engagement
Parent’s communication
Political involvement
Peer Attitudes
Ego-Involvement
(Personal Importance of Issue)
Civic Engagement
Relevant Experiences
Free Time