Com Theory Ch2

Front 1

causal

Back 1

law based explanation: causal law states that x causes y or happens because of y. i.e. uncertainty causes communication.

Front 2

correlational

Back 2

laws-based explanation: only that two tings go together but does not assert that one causes the other, i.e. uncertainty and increases in com go together. If two things go together but cause is unclear, its correlational

Front 3

description

Back 3

one goal of theory; the use of symbols to represent something and to identify its parts.

Front 4

explanation

Back 4

one goal of theorizing; an effort to account for why and/or how something works.

Front 5

predicting and control

Back 5

projecting what will happen to a phenomenon under specified conditions or exposure to particular stimuli.

Front 6

understanding

Back 6

one goal of theorizing; gaining insight into a process, situation, or phenomenon, not necessarily with the goal of predicting or controlling it.

Front 7

reform

Back 7

one goal of theorizing; the use of theory to instigate change in pragmatic life. Also called "producing positive social change."

Front 8

heurism

Back 8

a criterion for evaluating theories; the capacity of a theory to provoke new insights, thoughts, and understandings.

Front 9

laws-based explanation

Back 9

a theoretical explanation of the form, "Anytime x happens, y will invariably or probably follow," or "x and y always or almost always go together."

Front 10

rules-based explanation

Back 10

a form of theoretical explanation that articulates regularities, or patterns, in human behavior that are routinely followed in particular types of communication situations and relationships.

Front 11

parsimony

Back 11

one criterion for evaluating theories; the appropriate simplicity of a theory.

Front 12

scope

Back 12

one criterion for evaluating theories; the range of phenomena a theory describes and explains.

Front 13

testability

Back 13

the extent to which a theory's claims can be appraised. Testability is one criterion for evaluating a theory.

Front 14

theory

Back 14

offers an account of what something is, how it works, what it produces or causes to happen, and what can change how it operates. Human constructions-symbolic ways represent phenomena. Neither objective descriptions of reality, nor necessarily true. represent points of view.

Front 15

utility

Back 15

a criterion for evaluating theories; practical merit or applied value of a theory.

Front 16

Shannon-Weaver model of communication and criticisms of that model

Back 16

describes what happens when ppl com. com as flow of info from one persons mind (a source) to the mind of another person (a destination).

Front 17

theories reflect points of view

Back 17

way of making sense of experiences, situations, events, or other phenomena. dont and cant offer absolute truth. based on what, goals, who theorists choose

Front 18

different theories are not necessarily incompatible

Back 18

some theories reflect opposed views. when the foundations of 2 or more theories are inconsistent, they are incompatible. Some do work together, common assump & same kind of com

Front 19

theories have limited focus and scope

Back 19

asks particular ?'s, scope is the specific aspects of com it seeks to describe. considered on how well it does what it sets out to do. judged only on if increase knowledge about specific domain of com that is the focus

Front 20

criticism of Shannon-weaver model2

Back 20

com theory that focuses only on ifno overlooks important dimensions of human com. doesnt describe: feelings, motives, needs, history, etc

Front 21

criticisms of Shannon-weaver model

Back 21

misrepresents com by portraying it as a one way process in which info flows in a linear sequence from source to receiver. also labels each as either or (sender or receiver), but they are both