Special Topics in Health and Risk Communication (HCOM 597-01):
The Intersection of Health and Interpersonal Communication
Fall 2008, Mondays – 4:00 to 6:50 p.m., Smith Hall 111
Instructor:
Office Address:
Office Phone:
Office Hours:
E-mail:
Class Webpage:
Text/Readings:
Dr. Jennifer Bevan (call me Jen!)
Moulton Center 248 (inside Communication Studies Dept. Office in MC241)
(714) 532-7768
M: 1:45-3:45 pm; T: 2:15-3:15 pm; TH: 11:45-12:45; by appointment
bevan@chapman.edu - you have the highest chance of reaching me via email
www.chapman.edu/blackboard (click on the “Logging in to Blackboard” link
if you have trouble logging in)
1. Required text: duPre, A. (2005). Communicating about health: Current
issues and perspectives (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
This book is primarily intended to provide basic concepts and ideas
related to health communication – I will not be lecturing from it in class.
2. Required readings (see list at end of syllabus): Available as PDF or Word
files on BlackBoard under “Course Documents” heading.
Most of the substantive readings for the course will be found here and
are chapters in edited books and journal articles that are either
empirical research studies or reviews.
Nature and Goals of the Course:
This graduate seminar provides an in-depth overview of classic and contemporary literature in health
communication in interpersonal contexts. The primary goals of the seminar are to familiarize students with
the major topics, concepts, theories, and research studies that comprise this integrated body of literature,
encourage critical thinking about the state-of-knowledge in the field, and facilitate independent reading and
research on a topic of personal interest.
Part of being a health communication scholar is understanding how to construct and present a cogent
argument. Thus, an additional purpose of this course is to help you develop and hone your writing and
argumentation skills. This will be accomplished via take home exams and writing assignments such as
reaction papers and a research proposal.
Class Conduct and Expectations:
In order to create and maintain a supportive communication environment, I ask the following of you:
1. You must refrain from side-conversations, reading non-related materials, and doing anything else
that might make it difficult to hear/pay attention to others in the class.
2. NO CELL-PHONES, PDAs, MP3s, or anything else that would cause distractions will be
permitted in class (please turn your phones/PDAs off or leave them elsewhere when in class).
3. I heavily discourage coming late to class or leaving class early. This type of behavior is rude and
disturbing to me and to your fellow classmates, especially in a small seminar class environment such
as this.
4. You are here by your choice. I expect this class to be as important to you as your other obligations.
When possible, I do not let outside obligations burden my participation in this course; I expect you to
do the same. If that is not possible, you should drop the course.
5. Because this is a graduate course, I also expect that you will be prepared to actively participate in
class discussions when you come to class – this means that you have read and critically evaluated the
assigned readings before class and are ready to insightfully engage the material and each other. Our
goal each week is move toward a shared understanding of the material and the broader topic.
6. You may use laptops in class ONLY for taking class notes. If I find that you are spending time
online or are working on other things, I will ban laptops in class.
7. Late papers are not acceptable in this course and will be severely penalized unless permission for
extended deadlines is obtained beforehand (and deadlines will only be extended for emergencies and
with proper written documentation). If, at any point, you are confused about assignments,
expectations, or feel you are getting lost in the course material, please set up a time to meet with me.
Ethics:
Chapman University is a community of scholars that emphasizes the mutual responsibility of all
members to seek knowledge honestly and in good faith. Students are responsible for doing their own work,
and academic dishonesty of any kind will be subject to a range of sanctions by the instructor and referral to
the university’s Academic Integrity Committee, which may impose additional sanctions up to and including
dismissal. Using the ideas or words of another person, even a peer, or a Web site, as if it were your own, is
plagiarism. See the Graduate Catalog (http://www.chapman.edu/catalog/oc/2007-2008/gr/) for the full
policy. I take this policy extremely seriously and do not consider your being uninformed about what
plagiarism is and is not to be an acceptable or justifiable excuse!
Students with Disabilities:
If you have a documented disability and are in need of alternate class accommodations, you are
invited to meet with me as soon in the semester as possible to discuss your needs. Please also contact the
Center for Academic Success (130 Cecil B. DeMille Hall, cas@chapman.edu, 714-997-6828) to register and
coordinate arrangements for accommodations and services.
BlackBoard:
BlackBoard is an essential way for me to disseminate information about the course to you. For
example, I use BlackBoard to provide required readings, post grades, provide assignment/paper information,
etc. Please look under “Course Documents” and/or “Course Information” for these documents.
Please note: You are REQUIRED to log on to BlackBoard in this course and I expect that you will
check it at least the morning of each class meeting. If there is a change in the class (cancellation, due date or
topic changes, etc.), email through BlackBoard will be the primary source for my dissemination of this
information to you. It is thus your responsibility to check the email address that is linked to your BlackBoard
account (which is your chapman.edu email account unless you change it) daily – I will not send you emails
any other way except via BlackBoard. Not checking your email account frequently is not an excuse for
missing important class information disseminated via BlackBoard email. Grades (including final course
grades) will ONLY be posted on BlackBoard and will not be given via email due to security concerns.
Evaluation:
Your grade will be determined in four ways:
1.
Class Participation (10%) is essential in a seminar class such as this. As a general guide, a
superior class participant is thoroughly familiar with assigned readings, makes frequent
contributions to class discussions, and shows keen insight into the material. An above average
class participant demonstrates familiarity with assigned readings and makes regular and
substantive contributions. An average class participant reads the assigned material and
occasionally makes substantive contributions. Excessive absences (i.e., missing 20% or more of
class meetings) will result in your inability to contribute to in-class group discussions and will be
taken into account in this portion of the class grade as well.
2.
Exams (2 @ 20% of course grade each) will be take home, open book essay exams with
questions that ask you to integrate the topics and consider them in the broader context of health
and interpersonal communication. The final exam is not cumulative.
3.
Research Proposal (25%) will examine an issue that combines interpersonal and health
communication. It should ideally be aligned with one of the topics examined in the course, but I
am open to other topics as well. The paper will be 12-15 pages in length (not including cover page
and references) and will include a relevant literature review, specific hypotheses and/or research
questions that you would test, and a description of methods you would use in testing your
hypotheses/research questions. We will work on this paper throughout the semester and I will
provide as much help as I can during the process. Please see the end of the syllabus for specific
details about this paper. The paper is due via email by 7:00 p.m. on Friday, Dec. 12.
4.
Class Discussion Leader/Reaction Papers (25%) will allow you to think and respond critically
and creatively to the course topics and perspectives. You will sign up for two to three topics
(depending upon class size) of particular interest to you on the first night of class and write
reaction papers and lead class discussion on those same topics. The reaction papers should be
typed, double-spaced with one-inch margins, stapled, and be between 5-7 pages long, excluding
cover page and reference page.
You have a fair amount of freedom concerning the reaction papers’ substantive content. You
should start with a general (but brief) summary of the topic and how it links health with
interpersonal communication. Beyond this general summary, the remainder of the paper involves
reacting to the readings assigned for that topic (and this is the most important part of the paper).
You do not need to react to the duPre chapters, though you can cite them when summarizing –
focus instead on the substantive readings. Reacting can mean writing about virtually anything in
the readings that you find interesting, but here are some ideas to think about when reading the
assigned material:
a. Provide a critique of the “philosophical” assumptions that underlie the topic and/or the
methods that are used to study the topic.
b. Discuss something you like (or dislike!) about a particular article or study – and why.
c. Speculate about questions the topic or perspective could address in relation to health
communication, but doesn’t.
d. Propose some novel applications of the topic to health communication.
e. Discuss where the topic “fits” in terms of the role of communication in the study of health
and interpersonal relationships (i.e., how can this topic be used by a communication scholar
to assert communication’s role in understanding health issues?). This is especially relevant
when the authors are not health or interpersonal communication scholars but are studying or
reviewing communication concepts.
For the class discussion leader component, you have three jobs:
a. You are responsible for being “intimately” familiar with the assigned readings and assisting
me in providing an overview of the topic and its attendant research. This involves thinking
about a number of questions:
1) What theories (if any) or theoretical constructs do researchers tend to apply to this topic?
2) What is the predominant empirical research method(s) employed by scholars who study
this topic?
3) What are some conclusions we might draw from studies conducted on this topic?
4) What are some of the advantages and limitations scholars associate with this topic?
5) What is it about the topic (and the specific readings/studies) that you like and dislike?
6) How does the theory contribute to our general understanding of health communication (as
well as its link with interpersonal communication)?
7) Where might future research efforts focusing on this topic be headed (especially from a
communication standpoint)?
b. Class discussion leaders also will provide the class with a set of questions designed to
highlight key points and get us thinking about the topic. These questions must be emailed to
me and the class (ideally via BlackBoard email) 24 hours before class (i.e., 4:00 p.m. on
Sunday).
c. You will start class the night you are class discussion leader by presenting your reaction
paper to the class. These presentations should be approximately 10 minutes in length and
will serve as a springboard for further discussion.
All written material in this class must adhere to APA 5th edition style.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Detailed instructions and feedback for these assignments will be provided in class
and/or available on Blackboard. It is highly recommended that you record and keep track of each grade you
earn in this class. I use GradeBook on BlackBoard to calculate final course grades and it is your
responsibility to inform me if there is a grading error by the last day of the final exam period.
Grading Disputes:
You are welcome to come in during office hours or at another pre-arranged time and review any of
your exam/assignment results or your grade in the course. Although I do not anticipate any problems, it is
possible that we may disagree on a particular grade. I am open to discussion about grades; however, there are
some guidelines that are to be followed for such discussions to take place. First, grades are not discussed in
the classroom. Second, grades will not be discussed unless you provide me with your written viewpoint
before our meeting. Third, I will only consider individual written grade change requests for one week after
each grade is posted on BlackBoard. Don’t wait until the last week of class to review your test results!
Grade Distribution:
A
AB+
B
BC+
93%-100%
90%-92%
87%-89%
83%-86%
80%-82%
77%-79%
C 73%-76%
C- 70%-72%
D+ 67%-69%
D 63%-66%
D- 60%-62%
F 0%-59%
TENTATIVE CLASS SCHEDULE
Note: Readings and assignments must be completed by the dates they are assigned. I reserve the
right to change the schedule as needed.
August 25: Introduction to one another and to health communication in interpersonal
contexts
Introductions
Overview of the course and syllabus
Sign up for reaction paper/discussion leader topics and dates
duPre, Chapters 1 and 2
Duggan, A. (2006). Understanding interpersonal communication processes across health contexts: Advances
in the last decade and challenges for the next decade. The Journal of Health Communication, 11, 93108.
Fitzpatrick, M. A., & Vangelisti, A. (2001). Communication, relationships, and health. In W. P. Robinson &
H. Giles (Eds.), The new handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 505-530). Chichester:
John Wiley.
House, J. S., Landis, K. R., & Umberson, D. (1988). Social relationships and health. Science, 241, 540-545.
September 1: No class for Labor Day
September 8: Social support
duPre, Chapter 7, pp. 173-184 & 195-200
Dakof, G. A., & Taylor, S. E. (1990). Victims’ perceptions of social support: What is helpful from whom?
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 80-89.
DiMatteo, M. R. (2004). Social support and patient adherence to medical treatment: A meta-analysis.
Health Psychology, 23, 207-218.
Goldsmith, D. J. (2004). Communicating social support. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Chapter 1, pp. 10-24.
Uchino, B. N., Cacioppo, J. T., & Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K. (1996). The relationship between social support and
physiological processes: A review with emphasis on underlying mechanisms and implications for
health. Psychological Bulletin, 19, 488-531.
September 15: Caregiving
duPre, Chapter 7, pp. 184-195
Bevan, J. L., & Pecchioni, L. L. (2008). Understanding the impact of family caregiver cancer literacy on
patient health outcomes. Patient Education and Counseling, 71, 356-364.
Biegel, D. E., & Schulz, R. (1999). Caregiving and caregiver interventions in aging and mental illness.
Family Relations, 48, 345-354.
Hodges, L. J., Humphris, G. M., & McFarlane, G. (2005). A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship
between the psychological distress of cancer patients and their carers. Social Science and Medicine,
60, 1-12.
Ward-Griffin, C., & McKeever, P. (2000). Relationships between nurses and family caregivers: Partners in
care? Advances in Nursing Science, 22, 89-103.
September 22: Interpersonal influence
Burgoon, M. H., & Burgoon, J. K. (1990). Compliance-gaining and health care. In J. P. Dillard (Ed.),
Seeking compliance: The production of interpersonal influence messages (pp. 161-188). Scottsdale,
AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick.
Butterfield, R. M., & Lewis, M. A. (2002). Health-related social influence: A social ecological perspective
on tactic use. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 505-526.
Ennett, S. T., Bauman, K. E., Foshee, V. A., Pemberton, M., & Hicks, K. A. (2001). Parent-child
communication about adolescent tobacco and alcohol use: What do parents say and does it affect
youth behavior? Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 48-62.
Lewis, M A., DeVellis, B. M., & Sleath, B. (2002). Social influence and interpersonal communication in
health behavior. In K. Glanz, B. K. Rimer, F. M. Lewis (Eds.), Health behavior and health
education: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 240-264). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Zimmerman, R. S., & Connor, C. (1989). Health promotion in context: The effects of significant others on
health behavior change. Health Education & Behavior, 16, 57-75.
September 29: Family health communication
Caughlin, J. P., & Malis, R. S. (2004). Demand/withdraw communication between parents and adolescents:
Connections with self-esteem and substance use. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21,
125-148.
Jones, D. J., Beach, S. R. H., & Jackson, H. (2004). Family influences on health: A framework to organize
research and guide intervention. In A. L. Vangelisti (Ed.), Handbook of family communication (pp.
647-672). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Miller-Day, M., & Marks, J. D. (2006). Perceptions of parental communication orientation, perfectionism,
and disordered eating behaviors of sons and daughters. Health Communication, 19, 153-163.
Walker, K.L., & Dickson, F.C. (2004). An exploration of illness-related narratives in marriage: The
identification of illness-identity scripts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 527-544.
Zhang, A. Y., & Siminoff, L. A. (2003). Silence and cancer: Why do families and patients fail to
communicate? Health Communication, 15, 415-429.
October 6: Midterm take home exam distributed via BlackBoard email by the beginning of
class – use this class time to work on it
October 13: Sexual communication and sexual health
*Midterm take home exam due at the beginning of class*
duPre, Chapter 6, pp. 144-146
Buunk, B. P., & Bakker, A. B. (1997). Commitment to the relationship, extradyadic sex, and AIDS
preventive behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 1241-1257.
Edgar, T., Freimuth, V. S., Hammond, S. L., McDonald, D. A., & Fink, E. L. (1992). Strategic sexual
communication: Condom use resistance and response. Health Communication, 4, 83-104.
Emmers-Sommer, T. M., & Allen, M. (2005). Safer sex in personal relationships: The role of sexual scripts in
HIV infection and prevention. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Chapter 1, pp. 1-15.
Monahan, J. L., Miller, L. C., & Rothspan, S. (1997). Power and intimacy: On the dynamics of risky sex.
Health Communication, 9, 303-321.
October 20: Uncertainty
Babrow, A. S., Hines, S. C., & Kasch, C. R. (2000). Managing uncertainty in illness explanation: An
application of Problematic Integration Theory. In B. B. Whaley (Ed.), Explaining illness: Research,
theory, and strategies (pp. 41-67). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Beach, W. A., & Good, J. S. (2004). Uncertain family trajectories: Interactional consequences of cancer
diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 8-32.
Brashers, D. E. (2001). Communication and uncertainty management. Journal of Communication, 51, 477497.
Brashers, D. E., Neidig, J. L., Russell, J. A., Cardillo, L. W., Haas, S. M., Dobbs, L. K., Garland, M.,
McCartney, B., & Nemeth, S. (2003). The medical, personal, and social causes of uncertainty in HIV
illness. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 24, 497-522.
Davis, T. C., Williams, M. V., Marin, E., Parker, R. M., & Glass, J. (2002). Health literacy and cancer
communication. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 52, 134-149.
October 27: Information management and privacy
Afifi, W. A., Morgan, S. E., Stephenson, M. T., Morse, C., Harrison, T., Reichert, T., & Long, S. D. (2006).
Examining the decision to talk with family about organ donation: Applying the theory of motivated
information management. Communication Monographs, 73, 188-215.
Goldsmith, D. J., Miller, L. E., & Caughlin, J. P. (2007). Openness and avoidance in couples communicating
about cancer. In C. S. Beck (Ed.), Communication yearbook 31 (pp. 62-115). New York: Erlbaum.
Parrott, R., Burgoon, J. K., Burgoon, M., & LePoire, B. A. (1989). Privacy between physicians and patients:
More than a matter of confidentiality. Social Science and Medicine, 29, 1381-1385.
Petronio, S., Sargent, J., Andea, L., Reganis, P., & Cichocki, D. (2004). Family and friends as healthcare
advocates: Dilemmas of confidentiality and privacy. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,
21, 33-52.
November 3: Emotional inhibition and disclosure
Bevan, J. L. (under review – second round). The relationships among interpersonal communication
apprehension, topic avoidance, and the experience of irritable bowel syndrome. Personal
Relationships.
Harburg, E., Kaciroti, N., Gleiberman, L., Julius, M., & Schork, M. A. (2008). Marital pair anger-coping
types may act as an entity to affect mortality: Preliminary findings from a prospective study
(Tecumseh, Michigan, 1971-1988). Journal of Family Communication, 8, 44-61.
Pennebaker, J. W. (1992). Inhibition as a linchpin of health. In H. S. Friedman (Ed.), Hostility, coping &
health (pp. 127-139). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Pennebaker, J. W. (1989). Confession, inhibition, and disease. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in social
psychology, vol. 22 (pp. 211-244). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
November 10: Physician-patient communication: The provider perspective
duPre, Chapters 3 and 4
Houston, T. K., Sands, D. Z., Nash, B. R., & Ford, D. E. (2003). Experiences of physicians who frequently
use email with patients. Health Communication, 15, 515-525.
Lammers, J. C., & Duggan. A. (2002). Bringing the physician back in: Communication predictors of
physicians’ satisfaction with managed care. Health Communication, 14, 493-513.
Thompson, T. L., & Parrott, R. (2002). Interpersonal communication and health care. In M. L. Knapp & J.
A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed.) (pp. 680-725). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Vegni, E., Visioli, S., Moja, E. A. (2005). When talking to the patient is difficult: The physician’s
perspective. Communication & Medicine, 2, 69-76.
Walker, K. L., Arnold, C.L., Miller-Day, M., & Webb, L.M. (2001). Investigating the physician-patient
relationship: Examining emerging themes. Health Communication, 14, 45-68.
November 17: Physician-patient communication: The patient perspective
duPre, Chapters 3 and 5
McGee, D. S., & Cegala, D. J. (1998). Patient communication skills training for improved communication
competence in the primary care medical consultation. Journal of Applied Communication Research,
26, 412-430.
Sharf, B. F., & Street, R. L. (1997). The patient as a central construct: Shifting the emphasis. Health
Communication, 9, 1-11.
Street, R. L., & Millay, B. (2001). Analyzing patient participation in medical encounters. Health
Communication, 13, 61-73.
Von Friederichs-Fitzwater, M. M., & Gilgun, J. (2001). Relational control in physician-patient encounters.
Health Communication, 13, 75-87.
November 24: No class meeting – work on your final research proposal
Note: I will be attending the National Communication Association Meeting in San Diego, CA.
NCA is our leading professional organization and I highly recommend that you consider
attending this conference for a day or more (and joining this organization as a member if you
are interested in remaining in the field of health communication!).
Please see the NCA website at www.natcom.org; click on “Conventions and Conferences,”
then “2008 NCA Annual Convention.” You can browse the conference program (and feel free
to email authors for copies of their papers – most are very happy to share their research), and
look into registration options there.
December 1: “The Dark Side” of interpersonal communication and health: Drinkin’, fightin’,
and the green-eyed monster
*Final take home exam distributed at the end of class*
Floyd, K. (2004). An introduction to the uses and potential uses of physiological measurement in the study of
family communication. The Journal of Family Communication, 4, 295-317.
Gottman, J. M., Levenson, R., & Woodin, E. (2001). Facial expressions during marital conflict. Journal of
Family Communication, 1, 37-57.
Monahan, J. L., & Lannutti, P. J. (2000). Alcohol as social lubricant: Alcohol myopia theory, social selfesteem, and social interaction. Human Communication Research, 26, 175-202.
Roloff, M. E., & Reznik, R. M. (2008). Communication during serial arguments: Connections with
individuals’ mental and physical well-being. In M. T. Motley (Ed.), Studies in applied interpersonal
communication (pp. 97-119). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Yoshimura, S. M., & Bevan, J. L. (November, 2007). The health consequences of received jealousy
expressions: The role of reported identity (dis)affirmation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of
the National Communication Association.
December 8: Final exam due by 7:00 p.m. via email to bevan@chapman.edu
December 12 (F): Research proposals due by 7:00 p.m. via email to bevan@chapman.edu
HCOM 597 Final Research Proposal: Fall 2008
You will complete a formal research proposal. These papers should be 13-16 pages of text (without
title page and references) and will resemble the first sections of a study found in social scientific journals.
There will be two major sections of the paper: Introduction/Literature Review and Method. A title page and
complete references section including all citations within the paper must also be included. You must use
APA 5th ed. style to write the paper. The paper must be typed, double-spaced, and in 12-pt. Times New
Roman font with 1 inch margins. DO NOT justify your margins on the right side of the page.
The final paper is due as a Word-compatible email attachment by 7:00 p.m. on Friday,
December 12. Please email the paper to bevan@chapman.edu. You will receive a confirmation email
from me that I received your paper and am able to open the attachment (please send the attachment as a file
that is compatible with Microsoft Word – I do NOT have WordPerfect so please do not use that program). If
you do not receive a confirmation email by 10:00 p.m. on the 12th, it is your responsibility to follow up and
make sure that the paper was received.
INTRODUCTION/LITERATURE REVIEW:
This section of the paper should resemble the first section of a research article. It should contain an
easily identifiable problem statement that clearly states your proposal’s goals. You should introduce and
conceptually define the variables that you are examining. Though not required, I strongly recommend that
you include a communication theory to frame your study (Lisa’s Health Communication Theory class will be
a wonderful source for this or I can assist you in choosing an applicable interpersonal communication
theory). You should reference how other researchers in communication and related fields have defined these
variables, but your definition should be in your own words or quoted using APA 5th edition style. You should
also review and integrate relevant literature that has examined your variables of interest.
There should be at least two subsections of your literature review (and there should be appropriate
headings to structure and introduce these sections) – for example, separate discussions of the variables you
are interested in, followed by a specific rationale for your examination of these variables in relation to one
another. You must develop two things to test – either a testable, specific hypothesis or research question
about the relationship between the two variables. These RQ/hypotheses must be ones that have not been
tested before by other researchers and should look at related, but different variables (i.e., do not use the same
variables and examine the same relationships in both the hypothesis and/or research question). AT LEAST
ONE OF THE VARIABLES MUST DIRECTLY MEASURE AN ASPECT OF EITHER
INTERPERSONAL OR HEALTH COMMUNICATION. You should reference previous work with these
variables when making a clear, cogent case for the RQs/hypotheses that you present. This section should be
9-11 pages in length.
METHOD:
The method section details exactly HOW you would conduct the study. In other words, what kind of
study would you design to answer your research questions or test your hypotheses? I recommend following
the style of method sections from our assigned class readings – it is really the best way to learn. Also, you
should employ the information you are learning in your research methods course when writing this section.
The first subsection should be entitled Participants and General Procedures. In this section, you
should first describe who your population of interest would be; in other words, who would you study and
why? Next, discuss how the sample would be drawn and what the size of the sample would be. Then, you
should discuss the basic demographics of the proposed sample (including AT LEAST age, gender, ethnic
diversity, and whether or not the participant would be a Chapman student as well as anything else that you
feel is relevant to your particular study).
After discussing the participants, describe in detail how the data would be collected (i.e., the
procedures that you would use). What exact steps would you take to collect your data? And I mean exact –
be VERY detailed here! You should provide enough information that another researcher could replicate your
study with little trouble.
The next section should be titled Measures. This is where you discuss the ways that the variables
were operationalized (i.e., how you would translate them into something measurable). In other words, you
should provide specific and clear operational definitions for each of your variables. You should describe any
scales or measures, coding techniques, etc. that you would use to measure the variables (feel free to select
measures used by previous research) and include examples of these operationalizations and the directions
that you would provide to participants or to coders. This section should be 4-6 pages in length.
REFERENCES:
The Reference section begins on a new page after the Method section. You must include in the
reference section (and, of course, in your paper) AT LEAST five academic citations (i.e., academic journal
articles and/or book chapters from edited volumes). Textbooks are not acceptable as citations and I urge you
to use popular press citations (newspapers, magazines, even most websites) as sparingly as possible.
A valuable guide to writing a social science research paper developed by a fellow communication
scholar is available at: http://speech.ipfw.edu/researchpaper.html
I am also happy to read drafts of your proposal throughout the semester for content (though
not for APA or grammar/structure/spelling). I will stop accepting drafts by the end of the day on
December 8.