« Eggnog Puzzle | Home | Heart-Breaking Eyewitness Story From Sri Lanka »
Cues Filtered Out, Cues Filtered In
Last week I came across Handbook of Interpersonal Communication, edited by Mark L Knapp and John A. Daly. First I was attracted to it cos I like handbooks per se and also because it appears intriguing for someone from communication studies. But when I took a closer look, I immediately realised I need to read at least half of it. It starts with some methodological perspectives on how to research the interaction processes, contexts, meanings, social cognition within interpersonal communication. It provides a detailed description on hypothesis testing and structural equation modelling. But … in the conclusion of methodology section they emphasise the importance of overcoming the “greatly overestimated gap between qualitative and quantitative approaches” (Poole at al in Knapp and Daly 2002, 62). I must admit I felt relieved after reading this as I was expecting it to be just another QUAN praising. But authors recognise the benefits of interpretative research – going below surface phenomena to uncover the underlying meanings and focusing on the meanings of the phenomena rather then objectifying them. So the next section delivers comprehensive overview of narrative inquiry as a paradigm for the study of interpersonal communication. And I really love how the author of this section, Arthur P. Boncher, describe the paradigm war:
“To quarrel over method is to have a goal in common but to disagree about how best to achieve the goal. But empiricists and interpertivists do not agree on the goal. Empiricists usually want to predict and control human behaviour whereas interpretivists want to understand human beings and help them decide what to do.”
It is important to acknowledge that there is more than one legitimate goal to which inquiry (on interpersonal communication) can be addressed and with doing so, we free ourselves from the chains of monolithic model of research practices. I think this could be considered one of the best arguments to undermine the incompatibility thesis.
But to move on from methodology, (which btw includes also a section on discourse analysis – quite impressing) the next few sections draw on conceptual perspectives and themes for interpersonal communication (e.g. culture and meaning). Then, slightly towards the end of a handbook, I discovered the “Cues Filtered Out, Cues Filtered In”, a contribution on computer mediated communication and relationships. An amazing piece of writing, written by Walther and Parks. I did read some stuff on Walther’s work before and I was astonished at his Social Information Processing theory (SIP), which greatly departs from all other theories (social presence theory, media richness theory, theory of electronic propinquity, SIDE theory), dealing with CMC and CMR. SIP theory explicitly rejects the view that the absence of nonverbal cues restricts communicator’s capability to exchange individuating information. Walther suggests that uncertainty reduction and social penetration can ultimately be as effective in CMC as in FtF interaction. An interesting point, with which I couldn’t agree more.
Oh yeah,this Walther and Parks section definitely worth reading, if you are even slightly interested in CMC.
By Nana | December 29, 2004 | Topics: Academic books, PhD, Research |