This blog has been offline for the last week or so because of a technical glitch, now solved thanks to a suggestion from the blogger.com help community. Thanks!
Saturday, April 12, 2025
Thursday, March 6, 2025
Review of "Communication Theory as Liberal Education" by Austin S. Babrow (Cognella Academic Publishing, 2025)
Image source: https://titles.cognella.com/communication-theory-as-liberal-education-9798823343947
A new college textbook by Austin S. Babrow uses the traditions of communication theory in a unique way to introduce the subject of communication theory as a vital part of liberal education. In contrast to narrow technical or professional training, liberal education fosters personal growth by liberating our minds from dogmatic, unreflective, habitual ideas, cultivating both a broadminded openness to different perspectives and a capacity for critical thinking. This potential for mind expansion has long been at the heart of arguments for the value of a traditional liberal arts education, and this book offers communication theory as a key component of that education for our present era.
Communication theory is especially valuable now, says Babrow, because communication has become so central to our lives and prospects in a world that is ever more hyperconnected, diverse, contentious, and uncertain. As liberal education, the study of communication theory can free our minds from unreflective, habitual assumptions about communication and cultivate our ability to think critically from various points of view about the communication we experience and practice in our everyday lives.
The opening and closing chapters of Communication Theory as Liberal Education develop the idea of communication theory as liberal education. To introduce multiple perspectives on communication, Babrow structures the remaining chapters according to seven traditions of communication theory as defined in the Constitutive Metamodel: rhetorical, social psychological, phenomenological, cybernetic, semiotic, sociocultural, and critical, with an additional chapter that broadens the subject to include non-Western traditions. The theoretical traditions are useful for Babrow's purposes because they are based on different core conceptions of communication that "offer distinctive ideas about the self, relationships with other people, social institutions of every sort, and our relationship with nature" (p. 14). Learning to approach the world from these different perspectives on communication can expand our possibilities for living and, thus, our freedom. Because theories in each tradition are systematically elaborated and defend points of view that differ from other theories, the study of multiple traditions also fosters critical thinking.
Unlike other theory textbooks that can overwhelm students with numerous concepts and theories, this relatively short text of about 200 pages illustrates each theoretical tradition by presenting one or two representative theories in detail. Interspersed through the text are brief "reflections" that pose questions for application, critical thinking, and discussion, and each chapter concludes with a set of questions for further thought and discussion, making this an ideal text for use in small, discussion-based classes and seminars. The text is engagingly written with many relevant examples, personal anecdotes, and references to recent events and issues.
This book provides an accessible introduction to the traditions of communication theory while largely avoiding the technical complexities of the Constitutive Metamodel, the metatheoretical scheme in which the traditions were originally defined. Readers learn about the seven traditions and about the general idea of traditions based on different core concepts of communication, but without grappling with notions of communication as a practical discipline, theoretical and practical metadiscourse, matrices of topoi for argumentation across traditions, and so on. This non-technical approach to the traditions is a limitation but also a strength, in that it keeps the focus on the idea of communication in its multiple conceptions and what it all means for how we understand the world and live our lives.
And, whereas I have often complained that textbook presentations of the metamodel are a little misleading, I find that Babrow gets it right in essence and gives a vivid sense of each tradition's distinct point of view on the world. I am pleased to recommend this book for classes on communication theory as a liberal art.
Wednesday, February 12, 2025
Traditions of Communication Theory: An Introduction to the Constitutive Metamodel
Above is a slide prepared for a lecture about the traditions of communication theory. It tries to encapsulate seven complex traditions of thought in just a few words. I've been using versions of this slide for many years, but it never looks quite right to me, so I tweak it for every new presentation. This is the latest version as of this writing, but I doubt it will be the last.
The traditions of communication theory represent some basic options for framing communication problems. They first appeared in my 1999 article, "Communication Theory as a Field," as elements of the Constitutive Metamodel of communication theory. As I mentioned in an earlier post, much of my subsequent writing, including this blog, has grown out of ideas in that article. (For my current thinking on and "beyond" the seven traditions, check out this interview.)
Readers wanting to learn in depth about the Constitutive Metamodel and the traditions can use the sources listed below under Further Reading, some of which are available on my website. Descriptions of the metamodel that you'll find in popular communication theory textbooks are helpful but often a little misleading in my opinion, and free materials that people have posted online, almost always based on those second-hand textbook accounts, are usually worse. Except for a decent Wikipedia article that currently needs editing and updating, I haven't found an introduction to the metamodel free on the Web that I can strongly recommend.
So, this post provides a free-online, accurate, and I hope fairly readable introduction to the Constitutive Metamodel and the traditions of communication theory. Borrowing some material from previous encyclopedia articles (Craig, 2009a, 2016), I'll start off by explaining the metamodel in general, then say more about the seven traditions, and I'll conclude by discussing criticisms of the metamodel and recent work that expands the traditions and suggests different applications.
The Constitutive Metamodel
A model is a representation of something from some point of view. A metamodel is a model of models. It's a framework for describing and comparing different models of something. Every theory of communication is also a model of communication insofar as it represents the communication process from some point of view. The Constitutive Metamodel is a framework for describing and comparing different models of communication from the point of view of how they are relevant to practical problems.
The metamodel is useful theoretically because it shows how diverse ideas about communication relate to each other, and it is useful practically because it gives us a wide range of perspectives on communication problems. It's called the "constitutive" metamodel because it is based on a constitutive model of communication--the idea that communication is a social process that constitutes, or produces, shared meaning. The Constitutive Metamodel is a model of communication in the field of communication theory. As such, it represents models of communication as ways of communicating about communication that constitute, or produce, alternative meanings of communication as a concept and a practice.
We need a metamodel because communication theory is a wonderfully rich field of thought but also a very fragmented one. There has never been a single, generally accepted overall theory or core set of theories of communication. In fact, there are hundreds of theories, and not only are they about different aspects of communication (such as media technologies or personal relationships), they often come from such different intellectual backgrounds that they can seem entirely unrelated to each other. How does a psychological theory of media effects relate to a critical theory of decolonizing communication, and what difference does it make for communication in practice? The metamodel gives us a way of thinking about questions like that.
From the early decades of the 20th century, theories of communication sprang up in philosophy, psychology, sociology, anthropology, linguistics, speech, and many other fields of thought. Philosophers analyzed problems of language and meaning, sociologists looked at problems of urban community, psychologists studied problems of persuasion and group dynamics, and so on. I suspect that the topic of communication attracted such widespread intellectual attention because communication was increasingly felt to be an important problem in society. Each discipline developed theories by extending its own traditional ways of thinking to address some communication problems, but until the late 1940s there was still no awareness of "communication theory" as an overarching topic that included all of those theories.
The term "communication theory" first appeared in the field of electrical engineering, where by the 1930s and '40s it referred to theories of signal coding and transmission--the origins of what I call the cybernetic tradition. As the academic discipline of communication began to be organized in the 1950s and '60s (a long story that can't be told here), the term "communication theory" was borrowed from the electrical engineers and became an umbrella term covering all theories of communication in all fields of thought. Although much has changed through the following decades, communication theorists continue to work in a variety of different intellectual traditions, so the field continues to be rich with ideas but also very fragmented. Yet, all of those disconnected theories have relevant things to say about communication problems in society, so there is common ground among them and a potential for productive dialogue about their practical differences.
The Constitutive Metamodel tries to bring the field of communication theory together in a unified conversation without diminishing its rich diversity. The trick is to see how all communication theories are relevant to practical problems. In that pragmatic capacity, not only do most theories contribute something useful, they all have something in common to discuss and debate when we treat them as alternative models for framing practical problems.
The main ideas of the Constitutive Metamodel can be summarized in a few bullet points:
- Communication is a culturally shaped concept and social practice, constituted in the ordinary metadiscourse (practical discourse about communication) that circulates in a society. In other words, how we understand and practice communication is shaped by common ways of talking about communication in our culture.
- Communication theory is a technical practice of metadiscourse that interprets, critiques, and reconstructs ordinary metadiscourse to develop useful new ways of talking about (and thereby constituting) the practice of communication. Communication theory contributes to society by creating and disseminating practically relevant forms of metadiscourse that can be used to frame problems and discuss practices of communication in everyday situations.
- Theories that are practically relevant are both plausible (consistent with some commonly held beliefs about communication) and interesting (challenge other common beliefs). For example, cybernetic theories are plausible because they build on certain commonplace ideas (e.g., that communication depends on information transfer) while also challenging other commonplace ideas (e.g., that humans are essentially different from machines). As such, cybernetic theories give us a unique perspective for framing and discussing a range of communication problems.
- A basis for debate between different theories is that they often disagree about the validity of some commonplace metadiscourse. For example, theories of genuine dialogue (in what I call the phenomenological tradition), contrary to cybernetic theories, generally challenge the idea that communication depends on information transfer while affirming that humans are essentially different from machines. This difference gives us two alternative perspectives on communication problems, one focused on information processing and the other on authentic human relationships. In this way, the diversity of communication theory can be a strength when it enables us to reflect on problems from different viewpoints.
- Theories of communication are both numerous and intellectually diverse, partly because they have developed independently in several different thought traditions, each with its own vocabulary, core assumptions, and relevance to ordinary metadiscourse. The Constitutive Metamodel argues that many ideas in communication theory are based on a smaller number of fundamentally different conceptions of communication, first presented in my 1999 article as the seven traditions of communication theory. It's important to emphasize that these traditions are not uniform or unchanging. Each tradition includes many contending theories and they all continue to evolve over time through ongoing innovation and debate. It's also important to emphasize that the metamodel is open-ended in principle and not limited to the original seven traditions. In fact several more traditions have already been recognized in the literature since 1999. Finally, theories often blend ideas from different traditions, so we can't expect every theory to fit neatly in one tradition.
Traditions of Communication Theory
- Its typical definition of communication,
- Its general way of framing communication problems,
- Some of its core vocabulary,
- Some commonplace ideas about communication that it affirms, and
- Some commonplace ideas about communication that it challenges.
Rhetorical Tradition
- Communication is the practical art of discourse.
- Problems of communication involve choices about what to say and how in particular situations, depending on such factors as audience, purpose, and the available means of persuasion (reasons, emotions, stylistic devices).
Semiotic Tradition
- Communication is the sharing of meaning through signs and symbols.
- Problems of communication involve the use of signs and symbols (words, gestures, images, etc.) to express meaning, achieve understanding, and bridge gaps between different subjective viewpoints. Problems can arise from unfamiliarity, language differences, too much abstraction, or unintended meanings that might be confusing or offensive.
Phenomenological Tradition
- Communication is the experience of self and other in dialogue.
- Problems of communication involve inauthentic ways of being and relating to others, such as one-way monologue, rejection of different views, or focus on an instrumental goal like persuading the other or projecting a certain image of oneself.
Cybernetic Tradition
- Communication is information processing in systems at all levels of complexity (machines, organisms, groups, organizations, societies).
- Problems of communication involve malfunctions in the flow of information such as too little or too much information, lack of feedback, runaway processes such as escalating conflict, or system breakdown.
Sociopsychological Tradition
- Communication is a process of social behavior, interaction and influence, the causes and effects of which are determined by psychological variables such as personality, cognition, and emotion.
- Problems of communication involve the use of psychological variables to affect behavior and interaction and to achieve desired outcomes, such as sales from advertising, public health, team motivation, or interpersonal closeness.
Sociocultural Tradition
- Communication is participation in society and culture.
- Problems of communication involve barriers to community and social cooperation, and can arise from factors such as cultural differences, social and cultural change, and community conflict.
Critical Tradition
- Communication is discursive reflection, meaning that genuine communication requires free and open questioning of the social forces that condition and often distort communication.
- Problems of communication involve hegemonic ideologies and unjust power relations that go unquestioned (with respect to social class, ethnicity, race, gender, sexuality, disability, age, etc.) and that systematically distort the communication process to privilege certain views while excluding or marginalizing other views.
Criticisms, Applications, and Extensions
- Epistemological bias: The metamodel represents the field of communication theory from a social constructionist stance as opposed to a naturalistic, scientific stance. In other words, the metamodel sees communication as a social practice that we can constitute in different forms depending on how we talk about it (metadiscourse) as opposed to a natural phenomenon that can be described and explained scientifically. One response to this criticism is to point out that the metamodel does include scientific theories (in the social psychological, cybernetic, and other traditions), but even though some aspects of communication may be naturally determined by biological or other factors that can be discovered scientifically, the practice of communication is still culturally shaped in many ways. Scientific theories can become part of the culture that shapes our understanding and practice of communication.
- Western bias: The metamodel is entirely based on Western (chiefly European and North American) thought traditions, and therefore it may have limited relevance for communication theory and practice in Asian, African, and other non-Western cultures. In an article co-authored with Bingjuan Xiong (Craig & Xiong, 2022), we proposed to correct this bias by expanding the metamodel to include non-Western traditions of communication theory, starting with Confucian and Buddhist traditions.
- Misalignment with current research areas: Communication scholars often complain that they can't really place themselves or their theories in any of the seven traditions as defined in the metamodel, even if they nominally work in one of them. For researchers at the forefront of fields like rhetoric, semiotics, or phenomenology, the definitions of those traditions may seem too simplistic and/or old-fashioned to capture current thinking. Other scholars often feel that the metamodel excludes, or at least underemphasizes, theories in their own field of expertise, whether it be media ecology, public relations, or communication biology. One way of responding to these criticisms has been to add new traditions to the metamodel to fill gaps, so far including a Pragmatist tradition and a Spiritual tradition, in addition to the Confucian and Buddhist traditions already mentioned. (See below for more on these four traditions.) Another way of responding to the criticisms is to point out that the traditions are intended to identify different fundamental conceptions of communication, which don't necessarily correspond to current sub-fields of communication. For example, there is no public relations tradition in the metamodel because that field does not have a fundamentally distinct conception of communication, but public relations theories use ideas from several of the traditions including rhetoric, semiotics, social psychology, and others.
- Teaching communication theory: The metamodel is a useful tool for helping students to make sense of communication theory as a field and to apply communication theories to problems in everyday life, by showing how theories in the field are based on a smaller number of fundamentally different conceptions of communication (the traditions) that all have different practical implications. Most communication theory textbooks include the metamodel in some fashion, and many teachers have developed creative ways of presenting and using it in their courses. You'll find great examples of this in Practicing communication theory: Exploring, applying, and teaching the constitutive metamodel, a book edited by Marc H. Rich and Jessica S. Robles (see below under Further Reading).
- Critically reflecting on theories and subfields: Scholars have used the metamodel to finds points of comparison for analyzing particular theories or entire subfields of communication in terms of how they relate to other theories or to practical problems. Some of these analyses have looked at which traditions are being applied to a problem or topic area and have pointed out gaps that could be filled by applying different traditions. For examples of this type of application in social thought, phenomenology, interpersonal communication, and even robot communication, see Craig (2015, pp. 359-360).
Pragmatist Tradition (Craig, 2007)
- Communication is pluralistic community, the coordination of practical activities among diverse people and groups through discourse and reflective inquiry.
- Problems of communication involve a "paradox of pluralism" because to fully embrace diversity in a community means taking a standpoint that takes no particular standpoint.
Spiritual Tradition (Rich, 2014)
- Communication is mimetic of the atemporal (non-material) plane of reality.
- Problems of communication involve the ineffable nature of spiritual truth. "These problems include denial of the atemporal, discerning the mimetic of the atemporal, and failing to overcome the material nature of communication to grasp the inner atemporal purity of the message better" (Rich, 2014, p. 140).
Buddhist Tradition (Craig & Xiong, 2022)
- Communication is the individual's attunement to enlightenment.
- Problems of communication involve barriers to enlightenment such as self-centeredness and ego-attachment.
Confucian Tradition (Craig & Xiong, 2022)
- Communication is harmonious social interaction.
- Problems of communication involve conditions that threaten social harmony, such as lack of personal cultivation or failure to perform traditional rituals and rites.