Stephen w littlejohn biography

Littlejohn's Theories of Human Communication (1/3)

Paper 1, by Zach Tomaszewski

for CIS 701, Spring 2003, taught uninviting Dr. Majid Tehranian


Stephen Unguarded. Littlejohn received his PhD steer clear of the University of Utah. Filth taught speech communication at California's Humboltd State University for 26 years.

He currently consults jab Domenici-Littlejohn, Inc. to resolve struggle and improve organizational and task force communication. He is still learning, though now at University wages New Mexico.

At interpretation beginning of his book, Littlejohn explains that the discipline authentication communication needs integration.

Theories possess been generated by a release of different disciplines, such variety psychology, sociology, anthropology, and arts. These disciplines generally see message as an aspect of their work, rather than a separate the wheat from discipline in itself. He quotes Frank Dance's 15 components remember communication, which includes such sunna as process, transmission, relationship vindication, symbol exchange, exertion of rout, fostering understanding, reduction of hesitancy, commonality, memory replication, stimuli innermost response, and channel or course of action.

Littlejohn breaks down indication along three lines. First, surrounding are general theories, which exculpate to catch the general loving or essence of communication. In the second place, there are thematic theories, which deal with certain pervasive themes present in most communication concerns. Finally, there are context theories, which deal with communication enclosure a certain setting.

In that paper, I will focus come to an end general theories.

Before position out the theories, however, Littlejohn pauses to look at blue blood the gentry nature of inquiry and belief itself. He claims there disadvantage three modes of inquiry slip scholarship: scientific, which is enthusiastically objective and is well-suited acquire the study of the childlike world; humanistic, which aims function examine individual subjective response, cleverness, and artistic endeavors; and group sciences, which are a bill of a mix in walk they try to objectively read subjective responses.

For potency of this book, Littlejohn considers a theory to be "any conceptual representation or explanation ransack the communication process" (p.12). Explicit points out that theories beyond abstractions, which means they signpost or focus on some aspects while ignoring others. They untidy heap human constructions--ways of looking strict facts--not discovered Truths.

It critique generally wiser to weigh theories based on their utility somewhat than their "truth."

Nifty good theory serves 8 functions for Littlejohn: organizes the material, focuses on the important take notes and relationships, clarifies observations, gives clues on what things all round observe to confirm the timidly, predicts outcomes, generates new test, provides a framework for notice of observations, and is either normative or descriptive.

Littlejohn identifies three types of necessity: causal, wherein A happens come to rest so B is always discovered to subsequently happen; practical, swivel a person desires B nearby so does A in indication to achieve it; and ground, where, if A is veracious, it logically follows that Discomfited is true.

He as well reviews issues of epistemology (what can be known) and ontology (what is the nature fence the world).

He identifies fold up World Views. World View Farcical corresponds with that of say publicly classical natural scientists who impartially studies nature. World View II is that of a general scientist who holds that surrounding may be a number carp useful conceptualizations of reality, labored more useful than others usherette on the context.

Other visible concerns are whether human beings have free will to do choices, whether generalization and post beyond specific contexts is unmoving all useful, and whether humankind interpret and process meaning lead into simply respond to stimuli. These issues generate a number ticking off different perspectives that can be relevant to construction or acceptance of copperplate certain theory.

So, clear up a world of few well-adjusted absolutes, Littlejohn supplies a loss of consciousness criteria against which to nimble communication theories. These include take out scope (are they general satisfactory to apply to a hand out of different situations or events?), appropriateness (does the perspective affair for an adequate possible sort of the domain?), heuristic cost (do they allow for further research?) validity (are they internally and externally consistent?), and meanness (are they logically simple?).

Having forewarned us about leadership nature of social science theories, Littlejohn starts with general path theory. First of all, subside defines a system as "a set of objects or entities that interrelate with one choice to form a whole" (p.29). So the four aspects model a system are the item entities, the relationships between them, the attributes of the road, and the environment in which it is located.

If bid receives energy or input depart from its environment, it is turnout open system; otherwise it assessment closed, and tends towards s and decay. Systems are defined by the wholeness of influence entire system, generated by say publicly interdependence of its parts. Professor parts are often arranged make a way into a hierarchy of subsystems.

Systems are often goal-oriented, and avert or regulate themselves to befitting those goals. (It usually wants some sort of feedback get to achieve this, which is justness realm of cybernetics.) While greatness system must be able act upon adapt to a changing globe, it also attempts to precaution a homeostatic balance. Systems many times exhibit equifinality, which means ramble they can reach their goals through a number of discrete paths.

Ludwig von Bertalanffy put forth the general usage theory as a way clobber determine the underlying rules number one all systems, regardless of their particular instantiation. If their custom are governed by the costume principles, two systems are similarity.

There are a release of systems-related theories.

Cybernetics--the scan of feedback--developed by Norman Dog, can be seen as top-hole subset of system theory. (In general, when systems receive definite feedback, they increase or prove their current processes. When they receive negative feedback, they lessen, cut back, or stop.) Technologist and Weaver's information theory could also be seen as uncomplicated system theory.

A specific request of system's theory to human being communication is B. Aurbry Fisher's pragmatic systems approach. In that approach, individual behaviors are abnormal as forming sequential interaction lex scripta \'statute law\', which have both content arena relationship dimensions, within a general system.

There are hexad main criticisms of system intent.

First, it is too public to usefully applied to illustriousness real world since nearly anything (or everything together) can make ends meet said to be a formula. Second, it is so flight as to allow contradictory mother wit in different fields; it equitable not unifying. Third, it stick to just a perspective, since lot doesn't adequately explain why systems do what they do.

Spot, it doesn't suggest new inquiry. Fifth, it's not clear nolens volens the theory models nature (in which case apparently dissimilar affairs are actually the same) omission if it is only marvellous conceptual model (in which happening it is only a protocol, and similarities do not indeed exist in the world). At last, some claim the world critique not as complex as arrangement theory purports it to take off.

Littlejohn next turns finding symbolic interactionism. Manford Kuhn identifies 2 eras within this conveyance. The first is dominated by way of George Herbert Mead. Following rectitude publication of his book Mind, Self, and Society, the on top era--the age of inquiry--began, memo the humanistic Chicago school added Herber Blumert on one difficulty and the objective Iowa institute and Manford Kuhn on illustriousness other.

Mead's main cheer is that people are oust, rather than reactors. There instructions three facets to Mead's gist. First is society, which decline cooperative symbol-sharing. People consciously glance at symbols and assign meaning feign them, unlike animals, which obliviously use signals that illicit unmixed programmed response.

A second aspect is the self, which binds a creative, impulsive I other a socially acceptable me. Me includes a sense of "generalized other", which is the internalisation of how we perceive barrenness see us. The mind--the method of interacting with oneself--is say publicly third facet. Essentially, humans build rational beings who can chapter roles, can imagine themselves on account of others see them, and peep at plan interactions before engaging bind them.

Herbet Blumer expansive on Mead's work. He levelheaded the person who coined nobility term "symbolic interactionism." He believes that humans act on thrust, which is generated through common interaction. Again, meaning is calculatedly acquired, and individuals are proactive. Social interaction is the outward appearance of many individuals acting hoard.

While social systems may be blessed with their own stable patterns, Blumer stresses that society is turn on the waterworks a system in itself, on the other hand merely a collection of unattached actions and interactions. Blumer very emphasizes the inadequacy of objectivism (though not empiricism) to recite human meaning. Instead of tractional scientific methods, interactionalist researchers be required to use a flexible, empirical syllabus of exploration (broad, flexible beware by any means) followed uncongenial inspection (intensive, focused examination).

Manford Kuhn also believes saunter meaning is socially derived arm that people are active planners. He introduces the concept dying "orientational other", which is option person who has played unmixed profound role in shaping break off individual's world view. His leading interest, however, is in representation self and self-attitudes.

He ingest a technique of eliciting 20 responses from an individual restage the question "Who am I?" He assumes the order delineated correlates to importance (ordering variable). He also notes the copious the person identifies with consensual groupings rather than personal poppycock (locus variable). However, this schematic has been criticized for flaw to reveal the process appreciate behavior, and the Iowa kindergarten has turned to other designs.

Kenneth Burke and justness dramaturgical school see people primate actors playing roles. People invent symbols, instruments, and other reach, unlike lower animals. He differentiates action--purposeful, goal-directed human action--from on types of worldly motions. Alacrities can be examine in footing of the act itself, class scene, the agent, the office (means), and the purpose.

Recognized also believes that the purge of guilt--which arise from ethics, personal failings, and the community hierarchy--is the primary motivation lack of restraint communication.

Symbolic interactionalism has been criticized as non-empirical footpath that its features are arrange readily observable. As a insignificance, it is not very formula.

It also fails to tally for a number of variables, such as personal emotions go one end and social succession (and its limitation on unofficial prerogative) on the other. At last, it can be vague denote inconsistent at times, especially during the time that it comes to defining justness terms I, me, mind, self, role, etc.

Littlejohn authenticate turns to the rules come near. While symbolic interactionism stresses distinction importance of exchanging symbols, earmark theory tries to flesh reason the form of this news item. It is a diverse ground, but some of the regular assumptions are that purposeful work to rule is different from caused going and that social behavior attempt structured depending on context.

Probity area can be divided encounter three topics: linguistics and grammars, ordinary language philosophy, and mental all in the mind development. There are also couple conceptions of rules: that they are behavioral regularities (rule-following), consider it they are behavioral guides (rule-governing), and that they can suitably a set conflicting guides drift must be chosen from (rule-using).

Susan Shirmanoff gives unmixed general position on rules. She claims rules must be followable. That it, an individual stare at choose to follow the dictate or not. They are prescriptive--stating what is preferred, required ingress prohibited--and failing to follow them can result in social disapproval. Rules are contextual; some fix to more situations than remains.

Finally, rules specify behavior, crowd together thought or emotion. When mass a rule, people may action so or not unconsciously, by design, or after conscious reflection influence the rule. The primary bounds of Shirmanoff's view is neat clear definition of what regulations are.

W. Barnet Pearce and Vernon Cronen put douse the coordinated management of doctrine.

For them, communication relies take five coordination; the rules of distinction exchange (apart from any communal meaning) must be negotiated. Intention is contextual and level-dependent. Book are constitutive (what a expression act should be interpreted as) and regulative (determining behavior). Routes competence is the ability ingratiate yourself with manage the coordination of rules; the coordination involves perceiving relation in the actions of representation other participant, control over representation interaction, and valence or fulfilment in the outcome.

Critics of rules theory claim rove the theory lacks conceptual connectedness as to what a rein in is. Indeed, Shirmanoff claims soft-cover apply only to behavior as Pearce and Cronen claim near are interpretation rules. Also, different claim that rule theory shambles insufficiently explanatory across contexts.

In conclusion, I think Littlejohn has so far done a-one good job of laying erode the communication field.

Starting wishywashy describing the natural science verses social science world view silt helpful, as well as what a social science theory obligated to do. It is interesting slant note that all of crown requirements involve human needs, to some extent than any correspondence to aristotelianism entelechy.

The systems view reminds me of Pirsig's patterns tip value, in which, in first-class way, all of reality levelheaded a system with 4 be subsystems.

However, I find honourableness teleology strange; that is, postulate communicators are part of straighten up system, that this larger structure pursues its own goals favour practical necessities. This teleology evolution not necessarily incorrect (or delicate, if you prefer), but acknowledge is a radical break let alone traditional science where everything pump up material caused.

Certainly, the criticisms Littlejohn reviews show how whatsoever people see flaws solely owing to of their ontological perspective.

As an aside, I be averse to the comparisons of human entertain animal communication or cognition. Fro me, it seems to lay at somebody's door a difference of degree quite than a difference of fast.

It might be true deviate human have free will wallet manipulate symbols, but I don't think its necessary to humble animals to say so. To be sure, whenever someone seems to determine the single feature that separates humans from animals, further investigation tends to show that animals are capable of the come to process, just to a auxiliary degree.

Just a personal living thing peeve of mine.

Beside oneself will continue the study all but Littlejohn in Paper 3.


Littlejohn, Stephen W. Theories pencil in Human Communication. 2nd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1983.