comm 350 exam 1 study guide

Threats to measurement

Bias & Noise Bias- constant source of error in measurement (ex. selecting only particular participants/ participants reacting to researcher's personal attributes) Noise- random errors in measurement (random individual differences, lack of instrument clarity, errors in data processing)

discovery paradigm: explanatory claims

make clear the nature of a communication phenomena by exploring it's significance; they also explain the relationships between various communication phenomena, often by identifying reasons or causes for communication (deductive process)

critical paradigm methods

marxist criticism, gender criticism, postmodern criticism, cultural criticism, semiotic criticism, critical bridges from discovery and interpretive paradigm methods

warrants: formulas

mathematical principles used in physical and applied sciences

triangulation

mixed methods -efforts to increase accuracy of measurement by confirming data from more than one source , setting, collection strategy, and researcher. -includes multiple data sources, settings, collection strategies, analytic strategies, and investigators' viewpoints

characteristic of paradigm claims: discovery

precise, systematic, and repetitive -precise: employ procedures carefully and accurately -systematic: you will follow clear, known procedures specified in sequence repetitive: make careful, systematic observations, over and over, to ensure that your findings are verifiable, that they are confirmable over many instances and observers

Longitudinal Research Designs

studies in which we collect data at several different points in time. Certain types of survey research, like TV ratings, rely on longitudinal research designs to asses changes in audience consumption over time

Operationalization

the process of specifying procedures used and instruments designed for measuring communication constructs -if you are conducting discovery paradigm research, you will need to specify both the concepts you want to study and your ways of measuring those concepts before you can collect direct observations of communicative behaviors or before you analyze the content of textual data

data collection settings: laboratory settings

the researcher selects and controls the environment for communication. The researcher includes the communication phenomena of interest to occur, controlling what behaviors occur, when, for how long, and for whom -often rooms in academic/office buildings that have been set up to resemble the setting where communication usually happens. -are somewhat artificial, no matter how cleverly set up. -the rigor (degree of control) provided by a lab setting often comes at a cost: research findings obtained in the laboratory may be less relevant to people operating in non research settings than findings obtained in field settings

Interpretive paradigm views of truth

truth is viewed as subjective, although not wholly individual; truth is subject to the interpretations of human actors who participate in and who conduct academic research; truth is grounded and attained through social agreement at particular times and places

Academic Research

typically connects existing theories with different methods for investigating communication -such researchers make their procedures and findings available to everyone, so that any interested party can benefit from their studies

Interpretive paradigm: interpretive claims

your claims will focus on exploring how communicators socially construct meanings and accomplish purposeful action within that system of shared meanings; often take the form of research questions which ask about what a practice means or how the relationship between communicators can be accomplished

independent variables

the predictors that will change or influence other communication responses when building a causal claim (denoted as X) (when X changes Y)

nonrandom selection methods: purposive samples

"intentionally focus on the target group to the exclusion of other groups" It lacks representativeness; lets you access just the right people or texts for your study when you do not have the sampling frame that would be required to use stratified random sampling

standpoint theory

"the material, social, and symbolic circumstances of a social group shape what members of that group experience, as well as how they think, act, and feel"

quantitative

-assume fixed, objective reality implies numerical measurement and is a date-focused term. Communication concepts are converted to numeric representations that can be analyzed using statistical procedures -associated with positivism and post-positivism -deductive applications

data collection methods: strategies, sources, settings

-data collection strategies- deals with how the data for a study are gathered -data sources- refer to the people or messages from whom the data are sampled -data settings- refer to the physical location in which the data are actually collected

two main problems with knowing on a priori grounds

-how do we determine what constitutes a reasonable standard of action? -what we see as reasonable we probably already know by tenacity

warrant

-provides the crucial links between a researcher's claim and the data or evidence used to support them. -are reasons for making a particular claim in view of specific evidence -they are standards for evaluating the evidence in light of a claim -can come in the form of rules of thumb, laws, principles, or formulas

ways of evaluating within the critical paradigm

Coherence, Researcher Positionality, Change in awareness & praxis 1. coherence- the degree to which your arguments are logical, consistent, and intelligible to other (critical scholars assume that what is coherent to the dominant group is not to the marginalized group) 2. Researcher Positionality- includes both the researcher's standpoint and his or her reflexivity; critical scholars place great emphasis on their own subjective positions in relation to the topics that they elect to study 3. change in awareness and praxis: help make others aware of ineffective communication and/or oppression. Praxis deals with the use of theoretical knowledge in social action

Ways of evaluating within the interpretive paradigm

Credibility, Plausible Interpretations, Transferable findings 1. credibility: ability to capture and represent multiple realities, while you set aside your own understandings in order to privilege the participants' views. It is an essentially important standard because the researcher is the primary instrument through which interpretations are made. Credibility is determined by your training and experience, your degree of membership in the social situation under study, and your faithfulness 2. Your ability to help other people understand communication in that context by providing plausible interpretations. -adequacy of evidence-the amount of data/ evidence that a researcher has collected (cannot stop collecting until you can fully support your claims) -coherence- coherent interpretations are supported by clear, logical links between the evidence you examined and your claims -negative case analysis- is a constant search for counterexamples; if counter examples are found, you need to change your interpretations to accommodate those data, which will create a highly confident statement 3.Understand communication in other, similar contexts (transferable findings) -transferability -confirmability -relevance

characteristics of paradigm claims: interpretation

the process is creative and value-laden

characteristic of paradigm claims: critical

the process is revelatory (to reveal)

Values of the Discovery Paradigm

Precision, Power, & Parsimony Precision- detailed accuracy in defining and measuring communication variables Power- ability to test to detect defects; preference for broadly applicable definitions, data selection techniques, and research findings Parsimony- combination of precision and power; having your study accurate and in detail, covering a broad or important concept

ways of evaluating in the discovery paradigm

VALIDITY= ACCURACY; RELIABILITY=CONSISTENCY 1.measurement validity- refers to the accuracy of measurement within one study 2.external validity- accuracy of applying the results to other people, messages or settings 3. measurement reliability- if the study is replicable, then is has reliability; consistency of measurement over time, across settings, and participants

Values of the Critical Paradigm

Voice & Liberation voice- participation & existence in a democratic society liberation- free the oppressed, give voice to people who are underrepresented

Ideology

a set of ideas that structure a group's reality... a code of meanings governing how individuals and groups see the world

nonrandom selection methods: convenience sampling

are compromised of whatever data is convenient to the researcher (ex. people who volunteer to fill out a questionnaire, or behaviors that the researcher already captured for other purposes). -it is less desirable for most research (ex. if i did a convenience sampling, all my participants would be college comm majors)

theories

are descriptions and explanations for how things work, what things mean, or how things ought to work differently. -some are very detailed and use formal logic

Hypotheses

are generated by existing theory and research; are more precise than research questions; advance specific predictions about relationships between variables

critical paradigm: reformist claims

are not only evaluative; they identify negative consequences of the existing social system as a way of instigating change. Because evaluative and reformist claims require you to make explicit value judgements, they are associated with the critical paradigm only -critical researchers emphasize evaluative & reformist claims and openly act as advocates for a cause; no research can be value free and scholars have an ethical obligation to improve social conditions through their efforts -research is logical and makes positive contribution to society

axioms

are statements about the relationships among two or more concepts, relationships that have been demonstrated in previous research -specify what we already know about a communication process

data collection settings

are the places where observations, self-reports, other-reports, and communicative texts or artifacts are gathered or found -the issue of data collection setting is less relevant when an archive or textual data is used to explore a research claim. (archive= a preexisting collection of artifacts or other textual evidence ex. county clerk's office, museum, legal and policy documents)

research questions

ask how a concept chosen for study can be classified or defined, or ask what relationships exist between various communication variables

date collection sources: self reports of communicative behaviors, beliefs, and characteristics

ask people to self-report: to disclose their own behaviors, beliefs, or characteristics related to communication -when you want to know what people feel or how they think -researchers use survey questionnaires and interview key informants individually, or in groups (focus groups) -from a discovery researcher's viewpoint, self-report data is subject to some standard of biases or sources of error: humans tend to overestimate their own positive qualities and behaviors, & they may not report all of their thoughts and feelings & reported memories can be incomplete, inaccurate and so on

what makes theories logical?

axioms and propositions

Ways of knowing: knowing by discovery

belief in objectivity; that things or objects exist in reality separate from our perceptions and interpretations of them -world consists of physical objects and observable social interactions -reality can be "discovered" through observation/empirical research -knowledge is testable through logical and empirical methods -rigorous standards for testing lead to agreed upon system of evaluating our observations and conclusions (rigorous tests accomplished by making precise, systematic, and repetitive observations) 0observations become the basis for two processes: generalization and discrimination

date collection sources: direct observations of communicative behaviors

between people; interest in observing the verbal and nonverbal messages themselves, the communicators who construct and interpret those messages, or the channels through which interactions occur; you may choose to observe talk in interaction by collecting boardroom conversations, shop-floor humor, informants' facial expressions, or other participant observations in the settings where those interactions occur naturally... or you might observe experimental participants' behaviors in a carefully controlled research environment or in the environments where their communication usually takes place. you'll want to take detailed noted of what you see; might what to audio or video tape, or take pics of the people or key artifacts & observe physiological responses

inductive reasoning

bottom up approach -you start with a set of observations and from these derive your claims or general interpretations about the communication you have observed (used in the interpretive & critical paradigm perspective) [exploratory by nature; start with more of a research question/ small observations and work its way to a theory] ex. gather the evidence in a murder investigation to lead to/ find a culprit

simple random sampling

chief among random selection methods because each person or message in the population has an equal chance of being selected for inclusion in a study; select a subset of the population randomly from a sampling frame (list all members of the population)

data collection sources: other-reports

collected by asking people to report their perceptions of another person's behavior, beliefs, or characteristics. used in at least three ways 1. when a researcher wants to know how a certain communicative act affects those who receive it (ex. audience's reaction to a film/news story/public speech) 2. when a researcher wants to compare self-perceptions of a communicative act with other perceptions of the same act (ex. participants asked to report how they perceived someone else's communication behaviors) usually concerns the difference between how we see our own communication and how others see our communication 3. come times used for verification purposes; -almost like voting by majority rule, other-reports are used to show the truth as more than one person sees it

grounded theory

constant comparison method; reflective process that moves back and forth between data and categories so that findings are theoretically grounded within data

selecting data sources

deals with the question of how do you pick the people for research? -Random selection methods are preferred in the discovery paradigm because randomly selecting people or messages to study helps ensure that your findings will accurately represent a reality that applies to some larger group of people or messages -nonrandom selection methods are preferred in the interpretive paradigm where the general purpose of research is to understand how meaning is created among particular people or particular contexts

Interpretation paradigm methods

discourse analysis, ethnography, narrative criticism, metaphoric criticism, dramatism in rhetorical criticism, critical bridges from discovery and interpretive paradigm methods

ways of knowing: knowing by criticism

evaluate mechanisms of social value and power; reflect on dynamics of power and privilege -believe that our individual perceptions and experiences influence what we see and that there are multiple and equally legitimate ways to view the world -explore multiple realities that are culturally and historically situated -means that everything we know is shaped by our values embedded within so much of what we are, such as language, gender, ethnicity, economic status, social practices, politics, sexual orientation, religion, and individual abilities goals:make people aware of the ways in which these values shape reality & instigate social change by revealing the values and behaviors that underlie social interaction

warrants: laws

immutable, physical laws of nature (ex. gravity)

sampling

in the discovery paradigm, the issue of selection is referred to as data sampling "the process of selecting a set of subjects for study from a larger population; sampling is a social scientific term that we use whenever we select a relatively smaller number of cases to represent some larger group (population) of cases or persons

general ways of knowing: method of science

incorporates and builds upon tenacity, authority, and a priori knowledge; requires observation, experimentation, and generalization; relies on careful reasoning tested by experience

hermeneutic circle

interpretive process that moves back and forth between what a researcher is observing and their descriptions and interpretations, changing these as they attempt to uncover emerging patterns of communication (inductive)

nonrandom selection methods: quota sampling

involves dividing a population into relevant subgroups and then (conveniently or purposively) selecting the desired proportion of people or messages from each group needed to represent the whole population -it is useful whenever the target population is small, and when its characteristics are well known -it is the best alternative of nonrandom selection methods if you want your sample to represent a parent population)

Action research

is a boundary fuzziness between explanatory research and evaluative-reformist research; it challenges traditional notions of discovery paradigm; it is research done to find a practical solution to a problem, rather than to develop a theory or increase "pure knowledge" -is targeted more toward specific contexts rather than broad social change -is specifically designed to find solutions in the short term, but it can also impact theory development

stratified sampling (random selection method)

is more refined and complex than either simple sampling or systematic sampling. It organizes a population into subsets of similar elements; we can then select elements from each subset using systematic or simple random sampling (ex. stratifying the sampling frame into males and females and then randomly selecting a sample from each using approximate proportions) -no matter which random selection method you use, you must be concerned about sample representativeness; if your sample adequately represents its parent population (external validity) then your results will be generalizable to all other members of that population

knowing by tenacity

it is the weakest method of knowing since it relies purely on belief without considering any other evidence; it cannot be questioned or challenged or verified -once a view of the world is accepted as the usual or ordinary pattern, it is accepted _________

warrants: principles

legal rules and statutes (ex. seat belts are required while driving a car)

qualitative

multiple, subjective realities; understanding through observation and description -multiple methods, multiple perspectives; often involves fieldwork, with communication practices studied in their natural environment; other studies analyze communication as "texts".. some are interested in power inequities and are invested in social reform

critical paradigm views of truth

no one thing is true for all people, at all times, in all places. Truths are subjective and political, or power related. Truth and subjectivity privilege some participants, while oppressing others

hegemony

occurs when events or texts are interpreted in a way that promotes the interests of one group over those of another; dominant ideology

sampling methods: Nonrandom Selection Methods

occurs when we select people or texts in ways that do not ensure that the resulting data sample represents some theoretic population. three reasons for choosing nonrandom selection: 1. the constraints of your data setting or research question may make random selection methods untenable or unethical, even when your purpose is to explain and predict communication in a larger population 2. you may want to represent a population but be unable to use one of the random selection methods because you lack the required time or money 3. (& best reason) is that you are relying on interpretive or critical paradigm assumptions and not on the discovery paradigm assumption of generalizability (aka your research claims are based on representing communicative phenomena within a specific context)

nature of reality: discovery

one knowable reality which can be discovered

associative claims

predict relationships between two or more concepts or variables by asserting that they are related to each other or that changes in one variable are accompanied by changes in the other (called the principle of covariation). -lacks some components of causal claims -positive correlation: when changes increase or decrease together -negative correlation: when one variable decreases while the other increases & vise versa -curvillinear: occurs when variables increase together but then level off or decrease

propositions

predict what relationships are likely between two or more concepts given what we already know (the axiom of the theory)

sampling methods: random selection method

procedures for selecting samples that are most likely to represent a population within the limits of chance or random error (used when conducting survey, experimental, or content analytic research) -introduces some element of chance as to the people or texts included in a study, which will help you eliminate bias, specific sources of error in selecting data -three random selection methods: simple random sampling, systematic sampling with a random start, and stratified sampling

reflexivity

process by which researchers recognize that they are inseparable from settings, contexts, and cultures they are attempting to evaluate/change; critical scholars use reflexivity to question their own interpretations and representations of social situations

Conceptualization

process where discovery researchers begin by assuming that the concepts and theories used to explain communication phenomena must be defined for precision linking definitions to systematic observation. By conducting and reporting on their studies, researchers work on clarifying their meanings often using other related concepts. -process where we use theories and concepts to define other concepts and link these indirectly to our observations

assumptions of reality and role of the knower: discovery

reality can be known by any knower

assumptions of reality and role of the knower: interpretation

reality is interpreted from the standpoint of the knower

assumptions of reality and role of the knower: criticism

reality is shaped by the knower's social political, economic, ethnic, gender, and ability values

proprietary research

refers to research that is conducted in industry, where the procedures and findings are owned by the organization that paid to conduct the study. -the methods and findings of such studies may be kept secret in order to preserve the company's advantage over its competitors -is guided by best practices (the accumulated current wisdom of an industry about how to achieve results) & benchmarking (the process of measuring and validating strategic performance in a business or industry, and organizations use benchmarks as criteria against which to measure their own success)

General ways of knowing: knowing by tenacity

relies on customary knowledge. We know something is true because it is commonly held to be true. (ex. many people believe moon phases affect human moods and behavior) -even when we are shown quite strong evidence contradicting some of our basic assumption, we are still unwilling to change our beliefs.

warrants: rules

rules of thumb (ex. students must pay fees to be officially enrolled in a class)

systematic sampling with a random start

select the first element by chance, and select the remaining elements systematically from the total sampling frame (it is well established that simple random sampling & systematic camping yield virtually identical samples) problem with systematic sampling: periodicity- a recurring pattern or arrangement that exists naturally in the sampling frame

nonrandom selection methods: network sampling

sometimes called snowball sampling; each participants solicits additional people to participate in the study (ex. study on married couples, a couple recommends their friends who are married to participate) -it is a great selection method to use when studying an underrepresented population who may only be accessible through one another's recommendations

Values of Interpretive Paradigm

subjectivity & rich description subjectivity- refers to our human ability to know using our minds based on our thoughts and feelings. The idea that perceptions of reality are every bit as important as any reality that exists independent of human perception rich description- address every aspect of a social situation or text such as the setting, the participants, and their actions, relationships, and roles

discovery paradigm methods

survey research and network analysis, experimental research, content analysis, neoclassical rhetorical criticism, classical genre criticism, conversational analysis

claim

the central assertion/ declarative statement that an argument is based on. It can be a specific statement about the relationship between two communication phenomena, or can be phrased as questions, or can represent the general purposes or goals of the research more broadly.

dependent variables

the communication phenomenon/variable presumed to be affected by the predictors (denoted as Y) (when Y is changed by X)

data

the evidence of grounds for a claim. It can be numerical ratings, extensive field notes, or rhetorical texts

research design

the logical sequence that connects a researcher's claim, data or evidence, and warrants

Cross-Sectional Research Designs

the most simple and common form of design used in communication research; in cross-sectional studies, a sample of data collected at one point in time is used to draw inferences about the research question -gives the researcher a snapshot, one perspective on the phenomenon of interest

praxis

the use of theoretical knowledge in social action

ways of knowing: knowing by interpretation

there are multiple realities reflected in the interpretations that individuals construct about their experiences -you as the knower/researcher are inseparable from the people, events, and messages you observe because your interpretations and values affect what you see

Nature of reality: interpretation

there are multiple realities socially constructed

nature of reality: critical

there are multiple realities socially constructed

purpose of research: discovery

to accurately represent reality accomplished by classifying objects

purpose of research: criticism

to liberate individuals who have become alienated through oppression in modern society by increasing their social awareness of the ideological structures of power and domination; to reveal hidden structures and instigate social change

purpose of research: interpretation

to understand how individuals or groups of individuals interpret or understand the meaning of communication in various social contexts

deductive reasoning

top down approach -an approach that begins with constructing testable claims, describing precise procedures for measurement, and reporting the results of testing your predictions (used by discovery paradigm researchers) [start with a general claim and work to a particular conclusion based on evidence] -ex. murder investigation detective thinks he knows who did it & he works to find evidence that proves that person did

discovery paradigm views of truth

truth is objectively verifiable; it is achieved by accurate, consistent measurement of variables and appropriate, ethical attempts to generalize findings; can be confirmed as true given the proper empirical methods

discovery paradigm: predictive claims

when past research provides sufficient theory, explanations can be advanced as predictive claims

causal claim

when the claim you construct predicts that a change in the dependent variable is preceded and influenced by a change in the independent variable -three conditions or criteria for making causal claims: +time order- presumed cause must directly and logically precede the effects (X then Y) +Association- both cause and effect must be related to each other +Ability to rule out competing claims- control of extraneous variables -interpretive paradigm researchers cannot make causal claims

General ways of knowing: knowing by authority

when we accept the truth or value of an idea because someone we regard as an expert says it is true. ex. we might listen to Dr. Oz and believe his advice on the latest diet or nutrition fad because we value his medical license -it is trustworthy as long as the experts are correct

General ways of knowing: knowing on a priori grounds

when we know something intuitively before we have experienced it; it tests claims against standards of reasonableness -we might establish criteria based on moral grounds for determining justifiable actions such as "Is it honest?" "Is it beautiful?"

data collection setting: field settings

where most interpretive communication research takes place/ where communication occurs in its usual and customary fashion -do not have as much rigor (control) as lab settings; is more relevant to people b/c it is in natural settings; however, when you claim to interpret or evaluate participants' behaviors or messages, the value of your analysis will be reduced if the participants changed their behaviors or edited their messages because you were present

types of data collection sources: texts

written or spoken words, or symbolic, performed, and purely visual or pictorial texts -all researchers use textual evidence since all researchers construct literature reviews of the primary published sources available on their topics -empirical research: if your research begins with a literature review and then proceeds to include other texts collected from an archive or a field setting, and/or observations of communication behavior, self-reports, or other-reports of communicative attitudes or behaviors

critical paradigm: evaluative claims

you engage in the process of valuing the worth or importance of a social practice or communication behavior you have selected for study. ex. you would frequently argue that a behavior, such as an eating disorder, should be evaluated in terms of their extremely negative consequences for young women, or the conditions that permit such disorders to flourish in a society