The document discusses the differences between ordinary human inquiry and scientific inquiry, highlighting the importance of empirical data and probabilistic reasoning in understanding communication. It outlines topics studied by communication researchers, such as message production and effects, and raises issues related to the dissemination of research findings, including publication processes and access to information. Additionally, it presents various research problems and the impact of variables like conflict avoidance and self-disclosure on communication outcomes.

1. How do we know?
• Cultural Agreement
• Personal Experience or
Observation
• Ordinary Human Inquiry
vs. Scienti
fi
c Inquiry

2. Why does Popeye eat spinach?
• 1870: Publication claims spinach has ten times
more iron then other green leafy vegetables
• 1937: scientists discover that spinach has just
1/10th the level of iron previously claimed
• accidentally misplaced decimal point
• contaminated sample
How do we know spinach is a great source of iron?
Scienti
fi
c Inquiry
Cultural Agreement

3. Ordinary Human Inquiry
We try to understand & predict our communication with others
using causal & probabilistic reasoning
About Communication

4. Nonverbal
Reaction A
Nonverbal
Reaction B
Causal reasoning:
Probabilistic reasoning:
When people engage in nonverbal reaction B, good news follow.
(Condition for good news = reaction B)
Good news are more likely to follow when nonverbal reaction B
is present than when it is absent

5. Difference between
human & scienti
fi
c inquiry
Scienti
fi
c inquiry guards
against the errors of
ordinary inquiry
through careful and
deliberate efforts.
“
“

6. Scientific Inquiry
• Bases knowledge claims on empirical data
• Looks for social regularities/patterns
• without patterns, no prediction, meaning, explanation
• a general pattern need not be re
fl
ected in 100% of
observable cases (probabilistic pattern)
• Deals with aggregated (collective), not
individual behavior
• seeks insight into classes/types of people

7. What do Communication
Researchers study

8. Comm. researchers study
1. Process of message production, transmission, and
meaning making
• How are high context anti-smoking PSAs interpreted in
low-context cultures?
• How do patients construct their disease in their personal
illness narratives?
2. Content or form of messages
• What types of appeals do presidents use when trying to
persuade the general public of the necessity to go to war?
3. Functions and effects of messages
• Are high intensity fear appeals more effective in gaining
patient compliance than low intensity ones?

9. Mediated vs. non-mediated
verbal vs. non-verbal
MESSAGES

10. statements
Sample research problem
• How does con
fl
ict avoidance affect marital satisfaction?
• How do parents communicate disappointment to kids?
• What messages are most effective in encouraging people
to donate blood?
• How does self-disclosure affect attraction levels in
platonic relationships?
• How do U.S. media messages about the war in Iraq differ
from European ones?

11. Effect of conflict avoidance on
Variable 1: Con
fl
ict Avoidance
Variable 2: Marital Satisfaction
Isolate theVariables
Marital Satisfaction

12. Variable 1: Message Characteristic
Variable 2: Willingness to Donate (attitude),
Actual blood donation (behavior)
Fear Appeal, Emotional appeal, Humor...
What messages are most effective in
encouraging people to donate blood?
Isolate theVariables

13. Effect of Self-Disclosure on attraction
levels in platonic relationships
Variable 1: Self Disclosure
Variable 2: Attraction
Isolate theVariables

14. Dissemination
of Communication Research

15. Ways of Disseminating
• Conference presentations & proceedings
• Working paper
• Scholarly journals
• Proprietary research
• Book chapter in an edited volume
• Book
Scienti
fi
c Knowledge

16. Publication Process
1. Call for papers vs. independently contributed papers
2. Blind peer review
3. Editorial decision:
• Accept with revisions
• Revise and resubmit
• Reject
4. Review of revisions
5. Final Decision
6. Proofs
7. Publication

17. The process as seen from the researcher’s perspective

18. Problems
with the current dissemination model

19. Time to Publication
Relevance of the research
July 08
Begin talks
with journal
Oct. 08
Draft CFP
June 09
Papers Due
July 09
Peer Reviews
Aug 09
Decisions
Dec 09
Revisions
July 10
Publication
Outdated facts: By then
FB population had risen
from 350 to 500 million

20. Ownership & Access
Who should own the research?
• Transfer of copyright to the journal
• Restricted access to the research/
fi
ndings
• Cost of providing access