More on Theory

Importance of theory

Theories are the academic foundation of every discipline; they are important because they are the means by which we codify and organize what we know. They allow us -- scholars, teachers, and students -- to transform information into knowledge. We do not see the world as separate bits of data. Rather, we organize, categorize, and synthesize information, seeking patterns and discovering connections among the data in our worlds. A starting point, then, to understanding any field is its organized knowledge -- or theories -- developed by generations of previous scholars.

Besides organizing data, theories also focus our attention on important variables and relationships. Theories function as guidebooks that help us understand, explain, interpret, judge, and act into, in this, the communication happening around us. They help us clarify what we are observing, which helps us understand relationships among various parts and helps us better interpret and evaluate what is going on around us. This makes theories valuable observational aids, indicating not only what to observe but how to observe, as well as enabling us to make predictions about outcomes and effects in the data.

Theoretical speculation can serve a heuristic function, guiding series of studies that fill in gaps in our knowledge about some communication phenomenon. Theories help us to grow and communicate knowledge. As investigators publish their theoretical observations and speculations, the theories function to encourage discussion, debate and criticism.

Theories contribute to evaluation as well. They can address values and enable us to judge the effectiveness and propriety of certain behaviors. Theories also provide a way to challenge existing cultural life and to genera new ways of living.


Defining Theory

In its broadest term, a theory is any organized set of concepts, explanations, and principles of some aspects of human experience. All theories are abstractions. They always reduce experience to set of categories and as a result always leave something out. But theories are not just intellectual abstraction; they are ways of thinking and talking that arise from different interests, and they are useful for addressing different kinds of practical problems.

Theories are also human constructions. A theory is a way of seeing and thinking about the world. As such it is better seen as the 'lens' one uses in observation than as a 'mirror' of nature. Since theories are constructions, questioning a theory's usefulness is wiser than questioning its truthfulness. Any given truth can be represented in a variety of ways, depending on the theorist's orientation.

Theories are intimately tied to action. How we think --- our theories -- guide how we act; and how we act -- our practices -- guide how we think. In the world of scholarship, formal theories and intellectual practices are inseparable.

Basic Elements of Theory

There are four elements of theory:

1) Philosophical assumptions. The assumptions to which a theorist subscribes determine determine how a particular theory will play out. Knowing the assumptions behind a theory, then is the first step to understanding any given theory. Philosophical assumptions are often divided intor three major types: assumptions about epistemology, or questions of knowledge; assumptions about ontology or questions of existence, and assumptions about axiology or questions of value.

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that studies knowledge, or how people know what they claim they know. The following questions are among the most common questions of epistemological concern to communication scholars:

To what extent can knowledge exist before experience? Many believe that all knowledge arises from experience. We observe the world and thereby come to know about it. Yet is there something in our basic nature that provides a kind of knowledge even before we experience the world?

To what extent can knowledge be certain? Does knowledge exists in the world as an absolute, there for the taking by whoever can discover it? Or is knowledge relative and changing? The debate over this issue has persisted for hundreds of years among philosophers, and communication theorists position themselves in various places on this continuum as well.

By what process does knowledge arise? This question is at the heart of epistemology because the kind of process selected for discovering knowledge determines the kind of knowledge that can develop from that process. There are at least four positions on the issue. Rationalism suggests that knowledge arises out of sheer power of the human mind to know the truth. This position places ultimate faith in human reasoning to ascertain truth. Empiricism states that knowledge arises in perception. We experience the world and literally "see" what is going on. Constructivism holds that people create knowledge in order to function pragmatically in the world and that they project themselves into what they experience. Constructivists believe that phenomena in the world can be fruitfully understood many different ways and that knowledge is what the person has made of the world. Finally, taking constructivism one step further, social constructionism teaches that knowledge is a product of symbolic interaction within social groups. In other words, reality is socially constructed and a product of group and cultural life.

Is knowledge best conceived in parts or wholes? Those who take a gestalt approach are holistic, they believe that phenomena are highly interrelated and operate as a system. Analyst, on the other hand, believe that knowledge consists of understanding how parts operate separately.

To what extent is knowledge explicit? Many philosophers and scholars believe that you cannot know something unless you can state it. Within this view, knowledge is that which explicitly be articulated. Others claim that much of knowledge is hidden or tacit.

Ontology is the branch of philosophy that deals with the nature of being. Epistemology and ontology, then go hand in hand because our ideas about knowledge depend in large part on our ideas about being the one known about. In communication, ontology centers on the nature of human social interaction because being is intricately intertwined with issues of communication.

Four issues are important in ontology. First, to what extent do humans make real choices? On the one side of the issue are the determinists who state that behavior is caused by a multitude of prior conditions that largely determine human behavior. Humans, according to this view, are basically reactive and passive. On the other side of the debate are the pragmatists, who claim that people plan their behavior to meet future goals. This group sees people as active, decision-making beings who affect their own destinies. Middle positions also exist, suggesting either that people make choices within a restricted range or that some behaviros are determined whereas others are a matter of free will.

A second ontological issue is whether human behavior is best understood in terms of states or traits. The question deals with whether there are fairl stable dimensions -- traits -- or more temporarily conditions affecting people, called states. The state view argues that humans are dynamic and go through numerous states in the course of a day, year, and lifetime. The trait view believes that poeple are mostly predictable because they displya more or less consistent characteristics across time. Traits, then, do not change easisly, and in this view, humans are seen as basically static. There is of course, an in-between position, and many theoriests believe that both traits and staets characterize human behavior.

Is human experience primarily individual or social? Those scholars who attend to the individual focus on particular behaviors. The unit of analysis is the individual psyche. Many other social scientists however, focus on social life as the primary unit of analysis. These scholars believe that humans cannot be understood apart form their relationship with others in groups and cultures.

To what extent is communication contextual? Some philosophers believe that human life and action are best understood by looking at universal factors; others believe that behavior is richly contextual and cannot be generalized beyond the immediate situation. In communication, the middle ground is a strong stance, with scholars believing that behavior is affected by both general and situational factors.

Axiology. Branch of philosophy concerned with studying values. For the communication scholar, there axiological issues are especially important/

Can theory be value free? For classical science, theories and research are value free, that scholarship is neutral, and that what the scholar attempts to do is to uncover the facts as they are. Another position is that science is not value free because the researcher's work is always guided by preferences about what to study, how to conduct inquiry, and the like.

A related value issue, To what extent does the process of inquiry itself affect what is being seen? Traditional scientific viewpoint is that scientists must observe carefully without interference so that accuracy can be achieved. On the other side, critics maintain that theory and knowledge themselves affect the course of human life.

Should scholarship be designed to achieve change or to reveal knowledge without intervention? To what extent should scholarship attempt to achieve social change? Should scholars remain objective, or should they make conscious efforts to help society change in a positive ways? Many believe that the proper role of the scholar is just to produce knowledge. Other scholars believe that responsible scholarship involves an obligation to promote positive change.

Overall then, two general positions reside in these axiological issues. On the one hand, some scholars seek objectivity and knowledge that they believe is largely value free. On the other side is value-conscious scholarship in whihc researchers recognize the importance of values to reserach and theory, are careful to acknowledge their particular standpoint, and make a concerted effort to direct those values in positiv ways.

2) The second element of a theory is its concepts or categories. Things are grouped into conceptual categories according to observed qualities. In our everyday world, some things are considered to be trees, some houses, some cars. Humans are by nature conceptual beings.

Concepts -- tersm and definitions -- tell us what the theorist is looking at and what is considered important. To determine concepts, the communication theorist observes many variables in human interaction and classifies and lables them according to perceived patters. The result -- and a goal of theory -- is to formulate and articulate a set of labeled concepts. Those theories that stop at the conceptual level -- theories in which the goal is to provide a list of categories for something without explaining how they relate to one another -- are known as taxonomies.

3) Explanations. Element of theory that identifies regularities or patterns in the relationships among variables. Answers the question why?

4) Principles. A principle is a guidelines that enables you to to iterpret an event, make judgements about what is happening, and then decide how to act in the situation.