Summary Methodology (based on Treadwell & seminars)
Attempts to describe and explain situations and behavior different types of research
question.
Use different types of data to do so different types of research questions.
When should we believe an explanation?
Only if the research is reliable.
Only if the research is valid.
Always provisionally (someone might come up with a better explanation).
Chapter 1: Getting Started: Possibilities and Decisions
Basic assumptions behind communication research:
Observations capture/do not capture an underlying reality.
Theories about human behavior can/cannot be generalized.
Researchers should/should not distance themselves from their research participants.
Research should/should not be done for a specific purpose.
There is/is not one best position from which to observe human behavior.
Model of Human Communication (Shannon & Weaver, 1949)
Source: the provider or initiator of content.
Message: the content of communication.
Channel or medium: the vehicle for communication content, e.g., social media.
Receiver(s): the recipient(s) or consumer(s) of information.
Noise: extraneous information or distractions that can disrupt an interaction.
Context: the relationships between individuals, the situation in which the interaction
occurs, and the cultural norms around that interaction.
A series of unavoidable decisions:
The field of study (wide or narrow?).
The researcher (dispassionate or involved?).
The approach (objective or subjective?).
The priority (your questions or their answers?).
The sample (large or small?).
The data (quantitative or qualitative?).
The report (subjective or objective?).
Problem posing, problem solving and peer persuasion:
Problem posing: decide on research question (process).
Problem solving: how to best answer the question?
Peer persuasion: academic publication is a process of persuasion (journal and book
editors need to believe your research is worthwhile). Scholars assess your work and
let you improve it before it’s accepted for publication.
,Examples of angles from which to study media content
Rhetoric: rhetoricians are essentially interested in the appeals the advertisement
uses to persuade consumers to use the product (qualitative).
o Aristotle’s theory searchers for appeals in:
Logos: logic
Ethos: character
Pathos: emotion
o Dramatism analyzes human communication in terms of drama (Kenneth
Burke).
Describe the domestic setting, the people in it, and the minidrama.
Argue that the scene is media advertising → the parties, the drama,
the purpose.
Content analysis: quantitative method for assessing media content based on
counting. Content analysts might set up categories of content based on their
research interests. Content analysts look for what is explicit and observable.
Critical analysis: works from the basic assumption that communication maintains and
promotes power structures in society → the focus is on the relationship, explicit or
implied, between message source and recipient rather than just one component of
the communication process → critical analysts might look as much for what is implicit
or unsaid.
Term Definition
Action research Research engaging with groups or
communities specifically to solve problems.
Appeals The bases of persuasion, e.g., sex appeal,
fear appeal in advertising.
Content analysis A quantitative, systematic technique for
describing the manifest content of recorded
communications.
Critical analysis Studies that explore the way in which
communication established, reinforces and
maintains power structures in society.
Dramatism Analyzing communication as performance,
as actors acting out a drama (e.g., what act
is taking place? Who is taking this action?
How or by what means did the act take
place? Where and when did the act take
place? Why was the act done?).
Ethnomethodology The study of how people make sense of
their culture and communicate with
, understanding to others. Seeks to describe
and explain cultural understandings in
terms of the culture’s own language and
concepts.
Ethos Aristotelian concept of source character of
credibility in argumentation.
Frequency The number of times a particular score or
results occurs. Commonly reported in the
form of frequency tables.
Interpretive perspective A research approach that seeks to
understand how human interpret or make
sense of events in their lives. Interpretive
studies can be understood as attempts to
place oneself “in the other person’s shoes”.
Logos Aristotelian concept of logic in
argumentation.
Pathos Aristotelian concept of emotion in
argumentation.
Phenomenology A research approach that attempts to
understand human behavior and
consciousness from the individual,
subjective point of view.
Pilot A prototype or pretest. A small study
conducted prior to a full-scale study to
ensure that the full-scale study will work
successfully.
Q-Methodology It is respondents’ subjective views of the
world that are of interest but combine that
research focus with quantitative,
computational approaches to recording and
assessing these views.
Qualitative A research approach based on the use of
language rather than numbers to
understand and report human behavior.
Quantitative A research approach based on
measurement, counting, and, typically,
statistical analysis.
, Research question The basic research interest posed as a
question.
Rhetorician One who studies the use of language and
argumentation.
Scientific method A research approach based on developing
specific hypotheses or propositions that can
then be tested using specific observations
designed for that purpose.
Social scientists Researchers who share the assumption that
the methods of science can be applied to
researching and understanding human
behavior.
Survey A research method in which
predetermined, formatted questions are
distributed to relatively large numbers of
people. Typically, respondents respond by
phone, mail, e-mail or website.
Triangulation Researchers use multiple methods
providing multiple perspectives to ensure
that they have a good “fix” on the problem.
Chapter 2: First Decisions: From Inspiration to Implementation
Two broad worldviews:
Worldview 1 sees human behavior as predictable, objectively, measurable, and
generalizable. researchers aim to make generalizations about human
communication that will hold true across space and time. nomothetic approach.
Worldview 2 sees human behavior as individualistic, unpredictable, and subjective.
assumes that knowledge is socially structured out of interactions between people
and is subjective. idiographic approach.
There are three thought processes that link observations with theories:
Induction: reasoning from observations to a theory that might explain your
observations. moves from the specific to the general. having generated several
such theories, you could then design a study that would help you decide which
theory offers the best explanation of the phenomenon.
Deduction: moves from a theory to defining the observations you will make to test
the theory. moves from the general to the specific. design a study to capture
the observations that would test this idea.
Abduction: reasoning from an effect to possible causes. starting point is an effect
which you reason back to possible causes.
