 Photo by Xiaphias Em Griffin likens interpersonal communication to games. He gives three game metaphors: bowling, pingpong, and charades. In bowling, Griffin tells us, the player is the Sender, the bowling ball is the Message, the lane is the Channel, bumps on the lane make up Noise, and the set of pins is the Receiver. When I asked my students to comment on this metaphor, they added the score as Feedback. In pingpong, Griffin says the players alternate as Sender and Receiver, the ball is the Message, the table the Channel, and the net is the Noise. In charades, Griffin says the players are both Senders and Receivers, the verbal and nonverbal symbols are the Messages, the Channel is the space separating the players, and the wrong guesses make up Noise. But Griffin adds that what differentiates charades from bowling and pingpong is in the exchange. Charades is more of a transaction than the one-way or two-way interaction in bowling or pingpong. Griffin then presents three communication theories that exhibit this transactional approach to interpersonal communication. These theories include Symbolic Interactionism, Coordinated Management of Meaning, and Expectancy Violations Theory.  Dada comics art manipulation by Crummy The philosopher George Herbert Mead proposed some ideas that his students, including Herbert Blumer who coined the term "Symbolic Interactionism," published posthumously under the title Mind, Self, Society (1934). Blumer based his Symbolic Interactionism theory on three (3) core principles gleaned from Mead (as quoted from Griffin 56-58):
The self, according to Mead and echoed by Blumer, are portraits of ourselves made by “taking the role of the other” and by distinguishing the “I” from the “me” through talk/language. The "me" is also a product of the community, as the expectations of society that make up our mental image of a generalized other. Because meaning is usually a product of this dialogic minding between the individual and his/her community, Symbolic Interactionists proposed participant observation as an ethnomedological approach to research. Erving Goofman also proposed his concept of “framing” the self within the context of "social interaction as a dramaturgical performance." This "drama," according to his associate Joan Emerson, is what accounts for how doctors and nurses "frame" themselves as impersonal medical personnel attending to a gynecological examination. Because the doctors and nurses play these roles, the patient is put at ease (Griffin 62). Symbolic Interactionism also accounts for how "naming" becomes constitutive of identities, and how our individual expectations contribute to the "self-fulfilling" actions of others. However, Saul Alinsky provides a positive application of the theory in his concept of “symbol manipulation” as an emancipatory technique in community organizing. Symbolic Interactionism, according to Griffin, is often criticized for its "fluid boundaries" and "vague concepts" (for instance, the differences between the "I" and "me"), as well as for its "undisciplined approach" to analyzing communication phenomena. Also, Griffin points to the "overstatement on the human capacity for language" as rather biased against those with speech or mental impairment. However, these critiques aside, the principles of Symbolic Interactionism allowed other interpretive communication scholars to propose their own theories.  CMM whole model You might want to visit this site by Richard W. Dillman, called the Happy Fun Communication Land. It presents a very interesting explanation of W. Barnett Pearce and Vernon Cronen's Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM). Pearce and Cronen argue that “persons-in-conversation co-construct their own social realities and are simultaneously shaped by the worlds they create” (Griffin 69). They look at individuals as social constructionists creating their narratives, their realities, “strange loops,” and dialogic communication. Pearce and Cronen present the following theoretical tenets undergirding CMM (Griffin 70-71):
CMM is usually critiqued for the following characteristics:
Please watch the video above, if you haven't yet. The video illustrates several concepts contained in Judee Burgoon’s nonverbal expectancy violations model. Burgoon initially worked on her theory using the concept of “personal space,” first popularized by Edward Hall. Hall also coined the term proxemics – “study of people’s use of space as a special elaboration of culture” (Griffin 84). Hall proposed four (4) proxemic zones typical in American culture. These zones include the following (Griffin 85):
She abandoned the earlier premises based on “arousal” and “threat threshold,” and came up with three (3) core concepts of Expectancy Violations Theory (EVT) (Griffin 88-92):
She then points to communicator reward valence as “the results of [the] mental audit of likely gains and losses” in the face of expectancy violations. Griffin cites several critiques against EVT (93-94):
Theorizing 11/23/2009
 from Em Griffin's A First Look That there is a graphical rendering of communication theories throughout history. The metaphorical river comes from an earlier edition of Em Griffin's A First Look at Communication Theory book (now on it's 7th edition). But I'll let you navigate down that river yourself. You can cruise down the river with Griffin's book (or you can use Littlejohn's or West & Turner's or Wood's). Rather, we'll take a look at how these theories came to be. Communication theories really arise from our attempt to define specific communication acts. These definitions of communication are usually situated in a context. These contexts usually limit the scope or depth of applicability of our definition. These contexts include:
Along the way, we also describe communication acts. What we include in our theories usually reveals our assumptions about communication. These assumptions may be:
Our theories about communication may be evaluated by objective standards. These objective standards include:
There are several types of communication theories, namely:
Communication is 11/12/2009
 Trying out different definitions How do we define communication? Em Griffin, in an earlier edition (3rd ed., 1997) of his book A First Look at Communication Theory, first provides us Claude Shannon’s definition: “Communication is the transmission and reception of information.” Then he gives us I. A. Richards’s definition: “Communication is the generation of meaning.” According to Griffin, while not contradictory, the two definitions seem to point us to two different things. One looks at communication through scientific lenses while the other looks at the same from a humanistic viewpoint. Then he furnishes us a definition, which he favors as it doesn’t lean toward one or the other perspective, formulated by Lawrence Frey, Carl Botan, Paul Friedman, and Gary Kreps: “Communication is the management of messages for the purpose of creating meaning” (19). Stephen Littlejohn likewise points to several definitions of communication, particularly Frank Dance and Carl Larson’s 1976 listing of 126 definitions. Littlejohn concludes that coming up with a single and absolute definition of communication may be an impossible task. He, however, also mentions Dance’s attempt to narrow down these varied definitions by categorizing 15 conceptual concepts common in all. These include:
 'Hide and seek' by Jean Claire Dy Because you have to? Seriously though, as Communication Arts students, you need to know not only how to communicate but also how acts of communication work. That knowledge is what makes you an artist of communication. That knowledge will be what you'll find most invaluable when you, for example:
Theories of communication are "maps of reality," according to Em Griffin, that will help you find your way in the communication maze. And believe me, you will soon find out that all acts of communication are labyrinthine. Griffin presents a metaphor for the different theories of communication as a river flowing from the mountains to the sea. (Go to the A First Look website, then click on the "Theory Archives," scroll down the table to "Talk About Communication," and click on the PDF version [marked 1254 kb] of the file.) These theories are what you'll read more on as we cruise down the river (but not necessarily in chronological flow). Enjoy the ride. (You'll soon note that I rely on Griffin's textbook for this blog, mainly because of how he introduces communication theories to first-year or second-year students.) | COMA 101Communication Arts 101 (COMA 101) or "Introduction to Communication Theories" involves the study of principles, concepts, and theories of language and communication. It emphasizes the learning, analysis, and applications of communication models/paradigms and theories to communication acts or phenomena. Course Materials
ArchivesMarch 2010 CategoriesAll LinksLogsAlerts  COMA 101 is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Philippines License. My TwitterMy Flickr | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RSS Feed