A Sketch of the Field: Seven Traditions

Communication theories have traditionally been classified by disciplinary origin (e.g. psychology, sociology, rhetoric), level of organization (e.g. interpersonal, organizational, mass), type of explanation (e.g. trait, cognitive, system-theoretic), or underlying epistemology (e.g. empiricist, interpretive, critical).

By contrast, Craig proposed to divide the field accordingly to underlying conceptions of communicative practice. A startling effect of this shift in perspective in that communication theories no longer bypass each other in their different paradigms or on their different levels. Communication theories suddenly now have something to agree and disagree about -- and that "something" is communication, not epistemology.


The Rhetoric Tradition. This tradition theorize communication as a practical art of discourse or the basic art and practice of human communication. Originally concerned with persuasion, rhetoric was the art of constructing arguments and speechmaking. The focus has broadened to encompass all of the ways humans use symbols to affect those around them and to construct the worlds in which they live. Central to the rhetoric tradition are the five canons of rhetoric -- invention, arrangement, style, delivery and memory. With the evolution of rhetoric, these five canons have undergone a similar expansion. Invention now refers to conceptualization -- the process through which we assign meaning to data through interpretation, an acknowledgment of the fact that we do not simply discover what exist but create it through the interpretive categories we use. Arrangement is the process of organizing symbols -- arranging information in the light of the relationships among the people, symbols, and context involved. Style concerns all of the considerations involved in the presentation of those symbols, form choice of symbol system to the meanings we give those symbols, as well as all symbolic behavior from words and actions to clothing and furniture. Delivery has become the embodiment of symbols in some physical form, encompassing the range of options form nonverbals to talk to writing to mediated messages. Memory, no longer refers to simple memorization of speeches but to larger reservoirs of cultural memory as well as to processes of perception that affect how we retain and process information.


The Semiotic Tradition. Semiotics is the study of sign. This tradition includes a host of theories about how signs come to represent objects, ideas, states, situations, feelings, and conditions outside of themselves. Sign, as the basic concept that unifies this tradition, is defined as the stimulus designating something other than itself. Within semiotics, one will encounter the terms sign and symbols. Some theorists, like Peirce classifies symbol as a type of sign. Peirce defined semiosis as a relationship among a sign, an object and a meaning. Most semiotic thinking involves the basic idea of the triad of meaning, which asserts that meaning arises from relationship among three things -- the object (or referent e.g. the animal dog), the person (or interpreter) and the sign (the word). All three elements form the irreducible triad depicted in the well-known model of C.K. Ogden and I.A. Richards. Here a symbol and object (the referent) are connected through the interpretation in the mind of the person. The relationship between the symbol and the referent is arbitrary. Symbols are connected to referents only by indirect, agreed-on conventions of how to use words. Semiotics is often divided into three areas of study -- semantics, syntactics, and pragmatics. Semantics addresses how signs relate to their referents or what sign stands for. Whenever we ask the question"What does a sign represent?" we are in the realm of semantics. Dictionaries, for example are semantic reference books; they tell us what words mean, or what they represent. As a basic tenet of semiotics, representation is always mediated by the conscious interpretation of the person, and any interpretation of meaning for a sing will change from situation to situation. A more refined semantic question, then is, "What meaning does a sign bring to the mind of a person within a situation." The second area of study is syntactics, or the study of relationships among signs. Semiotics rests on the belief that signs are always understood in relation with other signs. Indeed, a dictionary is nothing more than a catalogue of the relationship fo one sign to other signs. In general, we think of syntactics as the rules by which people combine signs into complex systems of meaings. When we move from a single word (dog) to a sentence (The cute dog licked my hand), we are dealing with syntax or grammar. Pragmatics, the third major semiotic study, looks at how signs make a difference in people's lives or the practical use and effects of sings. From a semiotic perspective, we must have some kind of common understanding not just of individual words but of grammar, society and culture in order for communication to take place. People can communicate if they share meanings.

The Phenomenological Tradition. This tradition concentrates on the conscious experience of the person. Theorists in this tradition assume that people actively interpret their experience and come to understand the world by personal experience with it. The term phenomenon refers to the appearance of an object, event or condition in your perception. Stanley Deetz summarizes three basic principles of phenomenology. First, knowledge is conscious. Knowledge is not inferred from experience but is found directly in conscious experience. Second, the meaning of a thing consists of the potential of that things in one's life. In other words, how you relate to an object determines its meaning for you. For example, you will take your communication theory course seriously as an educational experience when you experience it as something that will have positive impact on your life. The third assumption is that language is the vehicle of meaning. We experience the world through the language used to define and express that world. We know keys because of their associated labels: "lock", "open", "metal", "weight", and so forth. The process of interpretation is central to most phenomenological thought. Sometimes known by the German term Verstehen (understanding), interpretation is the active process of assigning meaning to an experience. In the semiotic tradition, interpretation is considered to be separate from reality, but in phenomenology, interpretation literally forms what is real for the person. You cannot separate reality form interpretation. Interpretation is an active process of the mind, a creative act of clarifying personal experience.

The Cybernetics Tradition. Cybernetics is the tradition of complex systems in which many interacting elements influence one another. Communication is understood as a system of parts, or variables, that influence one another, shape and control the character of the overall system, and like any organism, achieve balance as well as change. The idea of a system form the core of cybernetic thinking. Systems are set of interacting components that together form something more than the sum of its parts. Any part of the system is always constrained by its dependence on other parts, and this pattern of interdependence organizes the system itself. In addition to interdependence, systems are also characterized by self-regulation and control. In other words, systems monitor, regulate and control their outputs in order to remain stable and achieve goals. Systems are embedded within one another such that one system is part of a larger system, forming a series of levels of increasing complexity. Although theories of the cybernetic tradition are excellent for understanding relationships, they are less effective in helping us understand individual differences among the parts of the system.

The Sociopsychological tradition. The study of the individual as a social being is the thrust of the sociopsychological tradition. The theories of this tradition focus on individual social behavior, psychological variables, individual effects, personalities and traits, perception and cognition. Most of the current work in this tradition in communication focuses on message processing, with an emphasis on how individuals plan message strategies, how receivers process message information, and the effects of message on individuals. Given these three interests, it is no mystery that persuasion and attitude theory have dominated this tradition for many years. A still-populart part of the sociopsychological approach is trait theory, which identifies personality variables and communicator tendendcies that affect how individuals act and interact. This tradition can be divided into three large branches. First is the behavioral wherein we see theories that concentrate on how people actually behave in communication situations. Such theories look at the relationships between communication behavior -- what you sa and what you do --in relation to such variables as personal traits, situational differences, and learning. Second, is the cognitive which centers on patterns of thought. This branch concentrates on how individual acquire, store, and process information in a way that leads to behavioral outputs. In other words, what you actually do in a communication situation depends not just on stimulus-response patterns, but also on the mental operations used to manage information. The third general variation is biological. Researchers under this branch are interested in the effects of brain functions and structure, neurochemistry, and genetic factors in explaining human behavior.

The Sociocultural Tradition. This tradition focuses on patterns of interaction between people rather than on individual characteristics or mental models. Although individuals do process information cognitively, this tradition is much less interested in the individual level of communication. Instead, researchers in this tradition want t understand ways in which people together create the realities of their social groups, organizations and cultures. These theories then to be interested in how meaning is created in social interaction. Many sociocultural theories also focus on how identities are established through interaction in social groups and cultures. Sociocultural scholars thus focus on how identity is negotiated from one situation to another. Symbols, already important in interaction, assume different meanings as communicators move from situation to situation.

The Critical Tradition. Although there are several varieties of critical social science, all share there essential features. First, the critical tradition seeks to understand the taken-for-granted systems, power structures, and beliefs -- or ideologies -- that dominate society, with a particular eye to whose interests are served by those power structures. Questions such as who does and does not get to speak, what does and does not get said, and who stands to benefit from a particular system are typical of those asked by critical theorists. Second, critical theorists are particularly interested in uncovering oppressive social conditions and power arrangements in order to promote emancipation, or a freer and more fulfilling society. Understanding opresion is the first step to dispelling the illusions of ideology and to taking action to overcome oppressive forces. Third, critical social science makes a conscious attempt to fuse theory and action. Such theories are clearly normative and act to accomplish change in the conditions that affect society or as Della Pollock and J. Robert Cox put it... "to read the world with an eye towards shaping it." Critical theories therefore frequently ally themselves with interests of the marginalized groups. In the field of communication, critical scholars are particularly interested in how messages reinforce oppression in society.

Pragmatism.