ASSIGNMENT No.

01
Communication Theories (PartI) (5635) M.Sc Mass COM

Spring, 2015
Q.1

Define scientific theory and explain the need of scientific theories.

Ans: Scientific Theory:

A scientific theory is a specific type of theory used in the scientific method. The
term "theory" can mean something different, depending on whom you ask.
"The way that scientists use the word 'theory' is a little different than how it is
commonly used in the lay public," said Jaime Tanner, a professor of biology at
Marlboro College. "Most people use the word 'theory' to mean an idea or hunch that
someone has, but in science the word 'theory' refers to the way that we interpret
facts."
What Are Scientific Theories?
Outside of science, the definition of a theory is a thought that may or may not be
true. In the science community, a scientific theory is defined as a hypothesis or a
group of hypotheses about some phenomena that have been supported through
research using the scientific method.
A hypothesis is basically an educated guess. For instance, a scientist observes
something happening repeatedly over time, and a question or a group of questions
begin to be formed. One question could be: 'Why am I observing this happening?'
Another question might be: 'Could this be occurring every time, or is this just a
coincidence?'
To answer these questions, a scientist, or a group of scientists, do an experiment to
test the hypothesis. This is described as scientific research. Often, the research
studies that are conducted with hypothesis testing happen over a long period of time.
After many repeated research studies, a scientist would move to call the hypothesis a
theory.
Fact or Theory?
So we have scientific facts and we have scientific theories. What is the difference?
Scientific facts are measured and/or observed. They never change and are
unmistakable evidence. Scientific theories are the scientist's interpretation of the
facts. Scientists may have differing opinions regarding the best interpretation of the
facts. Theories can change and be rejected.

Characteristics of a Scientific Theory

Although there are many characteristics of scientific theories, there are five basic
characteristics that can help you understand how they work. A scientific theory should
be:
1. Testable: Theories can be supported through a series of scientific research
projects or experiments. Sometimes a theory is proven to be wrong through
evidence: this is called rejecting a theory. However, a theory can never be proven to
be absolutely true because it is an interpretation. There is always a possibility that a
different interpretation will someday be found to be more correct.
2. Replicable: In other words, theories must also be able to be repeated by others.
This means that enough information and data must be available in the theory so that
others can test the theory and get similar results.
3. Stable: Another characteristic of theories is that they must be stable. This means
that when others test the theory, they get the same results - so a theory is valid as
long as there is no evidence to dispute it.
4. Simple: A theory should be simple. When we say a scientific theory must be
simple, we don't mean that the concept must be basic. We mean that only useful
information should be presented in the theory.
5. Consistent: A theory should agree with other theories, meaning that no principles
in one theory should contradict another accepted theory. However, some differences
may be evident because the new theory may provide additional evidence.
The process of becoming a scientific theory
Every scientific theory starts as a hypothesis. A hypothesis is an idea that hasn't been
proven yet. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the
next step known as a theory in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a
valid explanation of a phenomenon.
Tanner further explained that a scientific theory is the framework for observations
and facts. Theories may change, or the way that they are interpreted may change,
but the facts themselves dont change. Tanner likens theories to a basket in which
scientists keep facts and observations that they find. The shape of that basket may
change as the scientists learn more and include more facts. "For example, we have
ample evidence of traits in populations becoming more or less common over time
(evolution), so evolution is a fact but the overarching theories about evolution, the
way that we think all of the facts go together might change as new observations of
evolution are made," Tanner told Live Science.
Theory basics:
The University of California, Berkley defines a theory as "a broad, natural explanation
for a wide range of phenomena. Theories are concise, coherent, systematic,
predictive, and broadly applicable, often integrating and generalizing many
hypotheses."
Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts.
Facts and theories are two different things. In the scientific method, there is a clear
distinction between facts, which can be observed and/or measured, and theories,
which are scientists explanations and interpretations of the facts.
An important part of scientific theory includes statements that have observational
consequences. A good theory, like Newtons theory of gravity, has unity, which means
it consists of a limited number of problem-solving strategies that can be applied to a
wide range of scientific circumstances. Another feature of a good theory is that it
formed from a number of hypotheses that can be tested independently.

The evolution of a scientific theory:

A scientific theory is not the end result of the scientific method; theories can be
proven or rejected, just like hypotheses. Theories can be improved or modified as
more information is gathered so that the accuracy of the prediction becomes greater
over time.
Theories are foundations for furthering scientific knowledge and for putting the
information gathered to practical use. Scientists use theories to develop inventions or
find a cure for a disease.
Some believe that theories become laws, but theories and laws have separate
and distinct roles in the scientific method. A law is a description of an
observed phenomenon that hold true every time it is tested. It doesn't explain why
something is true; it just states that it is true. A theory, on the other hand, explains
observations that are gathered during the scientific process. So, while law and theory
are part of the scientific process, they are two very different aspects, according to
the National Science Teachers Association.
Theories are crucial to science because they provide a coherent framework for making
sense out of scientific observations.
An example of such a theory is the theory of evolution. Without the theoretical
framework of evolution, biologists would be limited to observing living things and
noting the similarities and differences between them.
The following story illustrates the importance of theories in science.
One notable difference between organisms is seen in the chromosome numbers of the
members of the family Hominidae, including humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, and
orangutans.
Here is a detailed, yet incomplete, history of scientific discoveries concerning human
and great ape chromosome numbers:
1958: Researchers definitively confirmed that humans have 46 chromosomes.
1960: Researchers determined that the chimpanzee chromosome number is 48.
1961: Researchers determined that the gorilla chromosome number is 48.
1961: Researchers determined that the orangutan chromosome is 48.
1975: Researchers used various techniques to compare orangutan chromosomes with
the chromosomes of humans, chimpanzees, and gorillas. Their analysis confirmed the
hypothesis that the four species derived from a common ancestor.
1980: Researchers noted the striking resemblance of the chromosomes of humans
and chimpanzees.
1982: Researchers reported that the striking chromosomal similarities extend to
orangutans and gorillas as well. They also noted that a specific pattern in the middle
of human chromosome 2 bore a resemblance to the ends (telomeres) of two separate
chromosomes in the great apes. Using evolutionary theory, the researchers
hypothesized that human chromosome 2 resulted from the fusion of two separate
chromosomes that would have been present in the common ancestor of humans and

the other great apes.

1991: Researchers tested the chromosome fusion hypothesis by sequencing the
previously discovered telomere region in the middle of human chromosome 2. What
they found were stretches of DNA that are normally found in telomeres. This
discovery confirmed the fusion hypothesis.
1992: Researchers detected evidence of a deactivated centromere sequence in
human chromosome 2. Centromeres are regions normally found in the middle of
chromosomes. The second centromere sequence was located right where it was
expected to be found, based on the already identified corresponding chromosome in
chimpanzees. This discovery also confirmed the fusion hypothesis.
2002: Researchers mapped the precise fusion point on human chromosome 2 and
described its structure in detail.
2005: Researchers mapped the precise location of the deactivated centromere on
human chromosome 2 and described its structure in detail.
2005: Researchers published the initial sequence of the chimpanzee genome,
showing a break in alignment continuity at precisely the locations predicted by the
fusion hypothesis.
As can be seen in the list above, it literally took decades to uncover the explanation
for the difference in human and great ape chromosome numbers.
It is important to note that, since they had a theoretical framework to work from, the
scientists responsible for these discoveries were not limited to simply noting the
similarities and differences in the chromosomes. They could actually discover the
causes of those similarities and differences.
It is also important to note that scientists did not just run across this evidence and
then later claim that it supported the common ancestry of humans and great apes.
Instead, they used evolutionary theory to propose a testable hypothesis, to form
predictions based on that hypothesis, to test those predictions by examining the
chromosomes, and to ultimately confirm their hypothesis.
Scientific theories are pretty powerful:
There is no question about the theories being constantly challenged, sometimes by
real science, and sometimes by charlatans who just pull pseudoscience out of the thin
air. Most theories are challenged, but those theories were rejected in favor of other
theories. Germ theory and evolution have not only withstood the test of time, they
have withstood the test of newer and better evidence.
As scientists learned more about how biology worksin other words, as they gathered
more data and evidenceour current theories, like germ theory and evolution (and
frankly many more, like the Big Bang, cell theory, and a biogenesis) became more
solid, more predictive of future events. The science of vaccines is supported by germ
theory (and evolution and cell theory), the most basic principles of the science of
diseases and immunology. I guess one could reject vaccines for any number of silly
reasons, but the principles underlying vaccines is nearly unassailable.

Again, if you want to overturn germ theory, cell theory, evolution or whatever, you
just cant say that its wrong, and expect any intelligent person to accept it without
criticism. To refute these basic observed facts and underlying theories, you need
mountains of evidence. I think there are over 1 million published articles supporting
evolution. There may be 10X that amount for germ theory.
Why have scientific theories:
Because we need explanations, or we cant further our research. We can
observe, over and over again, that an apple falls down from a tree on this planet. The
theory of gravity explains why. We find fossils in the ground that seem to show a link
between humans and apes. But the theory of evolution describes how apes and
humans evolved.
The theory of vaccination, yes its a scientific theory of immense power, is supported
by germ theory, cell theory, and evolution. Good luck in refuting that science event
though it may be possible (you see real science is open minded to all possibilities,
including the possibility that were wrong, but only when evidence is presented), it
is not probable.
Some random website is going to proclaim that Louis Pasteur was full of crap
and germ theory is a lie (probably pushed by Big Pharma and Monsanto), thats not
evidence. Thats just a level of denialism that borders on the delusional.
Im sure if we could take the Tardis back in time (maybe with a pet rabbit that
escapes), we would probably use a different word than theory to describe these
scientific principles. Like the fact of evolution that is supported by boatloads of
evidence and if you dont like it because it offends your beliefs, then just go hide
under a rock.
Q.2 What are those communication theories which are dealing with
concerns of media users and media practitioners?
(15)
Ans:
Mass communication is part skill, part art, and part science. It is a skill in the
sense that it involves certain fundamental learnable techniques such as focusing a
television camera, operating a tape recorder, and taking notes during an interview. It
is an art in the sense that it involves creative challenges such as writing a script for a
television documentary, developing a pleasing and eye-catching layout for a
magazine advertisement, and coming up with a catchy, hard-hitting lead for a news
story. It is a science in the sense that certain verifiable principles involved in making
communication work can be used to achieve specific goals more effectively.
Pigeonhole mass communication:
Many people want to pigeonhole mass communication as involving one or two of
these aspects to the exclusion of the others. This pigeonholing has sometimes
reinforced unnecessary divisions in the field and obstructed the sharing of useful
information. It is our position that all three aspects are valid and valuable, and that
taking one approach does not mean that the others must be excluded. The primary
focus of this book is ort the aspects of communication that can be approached
scientifically, but we attempt to view them from the perspective of the communication
practitioner, whether this person is a newspaper reporter, a television director, an
advertising copywriter, or a public relations specialist. Many important questions
about mass communication that cant be dealt with in any other way can be dealt
with scientifically.
Scientific approach:
Since we are taking a scientific approach, when we use the word theory in this
book we will be referring to scientific theory. Theory can be thought of as our

understanding of the way things work (MacLean, 1972). This allows us to always have
some theory about anything we are doing. In the field of mass communication, much
of our theory in the past has been implicit. People have relied on folklore, traditional
wisdom, and common sense to guide much of the practice of mass communication.
Sometimes these assumptions are never even stated or written down anywhere.
Other times they take the forms of oversimplified aphorisms or maxims. Many of
these assumptions would benefit from being tested through research; the result
might be that the maxims are confirmed, disconfirmed, or confirmed only partially
(within certain limits). In any of these cases, the media practitioner will have a firmer
ground for taking action.
The communication scientist argues that since we have some theory operating all the
time anyway; why not try to make it the best theory that we can? The scientist
believes that the greatest faith should be placed in those statements about the way
things work that have been tested and verified and that have some generality and
predictive power. These are the kinds of statements that make up scientific theory.
And these statements are useful; as social psychologist Kurt Lewin said in an oftenquoted remark, There is nothing so practical as a good theory (1951, p. 169).
Communication theory is aimed at improving our understanding of the process of
mass communication. With better understanding, we are in a better position to
predict and control the outcomes of mass communication efforts. The act of
communication can be observed from a number of points of view, but two of the most
important are that of the source (or media practitioner), and that of the receiver (or
mass communication audience). We can add to our understanding by viewing mass
communication from either point of view. Some areas of mass communication theory
are particularly helpful to the practitioner in trying to accomplish specific
communication goals. Other areas of communication theory are more helpful in
understanding the uses of mass communication by an audience member, or the
effects of mass communication on an audience. Let us consider some of the important
observations made during the last half of the 20th century on the roles of practitioner
and audience.
Concerns of the Media User:
Mass communication can also be viewed from the point of view of the audience, and
from this point of view the concerns are somewhat different. The audience member is
likely to be more concerned about the uses of mass communication than about its
effects. The audience member probably thinks of newspapers, radio, television,
magazines, motion picture, and other media as things to be used for specific
purposes. These purposes can vary widely, from the light, such as providing leisure,
relaxation, and entertainment, to the serious, such as providing warnings of dangers
(tornadoes, floods, and terrorist attacks) or providing information to be used in
evaluating candidates for the presidency of the United States. In between are a host
of other uses, including obtaining information for daily life (weather reports, school
lunch menus), shopping information (sales, announcements of new products), or
news about community and neighbors.
Mass communication theory can help us understand these various uses the audience
makes of the mass media and can perhaps provide valuable information about
desired uses that the media are not meeting. The area of mass communication theory
called uses and gratifications is aimed at providing just that kind of information.
The audience:
The audience can also become concerned about the effects of mass communication,
however, particularly when those effects might be negative or undesirable. Watching
television violence might cause audience members to engage in aggressive behavior

toward others. Watching pornographic films might cause men to have more callous
attitudes toward women. Advertisements for beer, wine, and liquor, whether on
television or in print, might lead to increased purchase and consumption of alcoholic
beverages. Sexual stereotyping of men and women in advertisements and in
television entertainment programs might be teaching that males and females may
fulfill only certain roles, hold only certain jobs, and so forth. These are only some of
the many possible undesirable effects of mass communication about which people
have expressed concernin some cases, to the point of organizing political groups
boycotting certain products.
Criticisms of the mass media:
Criticisms of the mass media for producing undesirable effects have occasionally been
extended to an entire medium. Television has been compared to a narcotic drug in
Marie Winns The Plug-In Drug (1977) and Jerry Manders Four Arguments for the
Elimination of Television (1978).
Many undesirable effects are probably not intended by the producers of the
messages. Nevertheless, they could be real effects with serious consequences for
society. The fact that they are unintended does not mean that they are unimportant.
In fact, one scholar has suggested that the main task of the social sciences is to
explore the unintended social repercussions of intentional human actions (Popper,
1963).
What is crucial, however, is that these effects be investigated in the most careful and
rigorous way. The answers to the questions of whether these effects exist or not
should be from sciencefrom communication theorists and researchersand not just
from arguments by people and groups who have become adversaries in a public
controversy. Another problem for audience members in the 20th century is, the
growing issue of in overload (Miller, 1960; Klapp, 1978). Some writers have gone so
far as to say -ha: the audience for mass communication is no longer a receiver but
a victim. Richard Saul Wurman (1989) writes of the problem of information anxiety,
which he says is produced by the ever-widening gap between what we demand and
what we think we should understand. Sociologist Orrin E. Klapp (1978, 1982) has
described the increasing gap that is occur-r.: between information and meaning.
Information, as he uses it, refers to a reduction of uncertainty that can be measured
in bits while meaning refers to the making sense of information, to the finding of a
meaningful pattern. Klapp presents the metaphor of a giant funnel with pieces of a
jigsaw puzzle dropping out of the hole in the bottom. Klapp says members of the
audience for mass communication are like a person sitting under the funnel trying to
fit a jigsaw puzzle together. The job is difficult because not only do the pieces come
faster than we can process them, but many of them do not even belong to the puzzle
we are working on Significant developments, some of them still on the horizon of the
media landscape, have been altering the way media are used as well as how they are
generated.
Q.3 In your view what is the impact of new technology on communication
theory?
(10)
Human beings have dominated the natural world through our need to enhance
communication. We have conquered the globe with our older technology, eliminating
the concept of space with virtual extensions of our extremities: vehicles extend our
feet cross-country; telescopes enhance our optical capabilities enough to gaze deeper
into the heavens than ever thought possible; and even something as simple as the
written word, an extension of spoken language through time and spaceitself an
extension of basic thoughts, feelings, and intent lets the voices of great minds reach

across time to speak to us today. After such a thorough conquering of space and a
solid dominance over one aspect of time, the past, it is only natural that we should
devote our energies as a species toward the next step, the present. It all started with
electricity or, more specifically, the light bulb.
Mapping theoretical landscape and technology:
A discipline is defined in large part by its theoretical structure. Instead
communication, at its present state, might be considered a field of inquiry. Theory is
often borrowed from other social sciences, while communication provides few
examples of theories that have been exported to other disciplines. What is taught as
communication theory at one institution is unlikely to be at all similar to what is
taught within other communication schools. This theoretical variegation makes it
difficult to come to terms with the field as a whole. That said, there are some
common taxonomies that are used to divide up the range of communication research.
Two common mappings will be briefly presented here. Many authors and researchers
divide communication by what are sometimes called "contexts" or "levels," but more
often represent institutional histories.
Study and structure:
The study of communication in the different countries7 while occurring within
departments of psychology, sociology, linguistics, and anthropology among others,
generally developed from schools of rhetoric and schools of journalism. While many of
these have become "departments of communication," they often retain their historical
roots, adhering largely to theories from speech communication in the former case,
and mass media in the latter. The great divide between speech communication and
mass communication is joined by a number of smaller sub-areas of communication
research, including intercultural and international communication, small group
communication, communication
technology, policy
and legal
studies of
communication, telecommunication, and work done under a variety of other labels.
Some of these departments take a largely social science perspective, others tend
more heavily toward the humanities, and still others are geared more toward
production and professional preparation.
Inevitably approach:
These "levels" of communication provide some way of grouping communication
theories, but inevitably, there are theories and concepts that leak from one area to
another, or that fail to find a home at all. If communication is a cohesive field of
study, one would expect to see a cohesive set of theories, or at least a common
understanding of the structure of the field, and this appears to still be developing.
Although most people, including quite a few communications scholars, have trouble
embracing the notion that the light bulb is a medium in its own right, it is difficult to
argue against it if one accepts McLuhans definition of media and the messages they
send: a medium, any extension of ourselves has psychic and social consequences
through designs or patterns as they amplify or accelerate existing processes. This
change is always considered notable, regardless of the content produced. For
McLuhan, content is a meaningless triviality.

Understand function:
Using form to understand function adopting the medium as the message: Because we
are only able to understand the format of a medium once it has become the content
of the next, it can be suggested that the modern world is still in a state of
bewilderment when dealing with certain electronic media. with electric media Western
man himself experiences exactly the same inundation as the remote native. We are
no more prepared to encounter radio and TV in our literate milieu than the native of
Ghana is able to cope with the literacy that takes him out of his collective tribal world
and beaches him in individual isolation. We are as numb in our new electric world as
the native involved in our literate and mechanical culture.
Mass communication and practice along new media concept:
More than any other technologies for mass communication, contemporary media
allow for a greater quantity of information transmission and retrieval, place more
control over both content creation and selection in the hands of their users, and do so
with less cost to the average consumer. The Internet serves as the best example and,
through digital convergence, will form the backbone of most future mediated
communication. The Internet was designed to be decentralized, meaning that control
is distributed to all users who have relatively equal opportunity to contribute content.
The increased bandwidth of the Internet further enhances users ability to become
content producers and to produce material that is fairly sophisticated at low cost. In
addition, many of the new technologies are more portable and, therefore, more
convenient to use compared with older mass media.
Media influence today
These characteristics of the new media are cracking the foundations of our conception
of mass communication. Today, media institutions are changing such that mass
production is less mass. The explosion of available channels afforded by the new
technologies contributes to the degasification of the media by diffusing the audience
for any particular media product. This has resulted in channel specialization, and the
old model of broadcasting to the masses has given way to market segmentation and
targeting to niche audiences. Although existing media institutions are well positioned
to adapt to these changing conditions, the fact that the new me dia shrink the size of
the audience for any particular channel is likely to create opportunities for others.
That is, if smaller audiences mean reduced costs of production and distribution, then
more content producers will be able to enter the media market. In the near future,
the issue may be less about what media companies are doing to people and more
about what people are doing with the media.
Media ability and social problems:
The notion of the media as a social problem because of their unchecked power over
the means of mass expression is also breaking down with the emergence of the new
media. As described earlier, this idea rested on mass society theory and particularly
on the notion of a passive, atomized audience. Although the idea of an atomized
society has never really been correct (a more accurate descriptor, both then and now,
is a molecular society where individuals are embedded in small interpersonal
networks), it is even more far fetched today as new technologies extend our networks

across the globe and blur the boundaries between mass and interpersonal
communication.
Furthermore, tight control over access to the media by elites and professional
gatekeepers is waning as individuals and organizations of modest means become
content selectors and editors in their own right. Opportunities for self-expression once
denied by the old media are celebrated by the new media. This idea is encapsulated
in the now well-worn phrase on the Internet anyone can be an author. The threat of
homogenized media content is diminished as new technologies enable many millions
of individuals to become content producers and as audiences are reconceptualized as
smaller and discrete taste cultures, rather than as an amorphous mass.
Distribution and classification:
Also, the trend toward redistribution of power over the media from elites to users
makes obsolete the idea of a small handful of willful individuals attempting to impart
a dominant ideology to maintain the status quo. For example, in addition to allowing
a greater variety of voices and views into public discourse, the interactive capacity of
the new media creates new ways of grassroots organizing and coalition building. Also
along with media elites, the government is losing its power to control media content.
The rationale for regulating the broadcast media, namely scarcity of the
electromagnetic spectrum, is largely irrelevant with the new media and,
consequently, the governments legal basis for protecting public morals and safety
through content regulation is not easily applicable to this domain. In summary, as the
mass-ness of the media declines and as new technologies continue to empower
individuals social control by elite groups in society may become more difficult.
Academic study of mass communication
The academic study of mass communication must also change as a result of new
technologies, and not simply in name. However, this is less true for some aspects of
the discipline than for others. The study and use of practical skills in the preparation
of students to enter jobs in the media sector will continue as new media develop.
Skills such as writing, editing, and production may be slightly different, but they are
just as useful in the new media environment as they were in the old. The new media
do, however, seriously challenge the core assumptions of traditional empirical and
critical mass communication research.
Q.4

What is a model and what are the functions of a model?

(10)

The generation of a physical, conceptual, or mathematical representation of a real

phenomenon that is difficult to observe directly. Scientific models are used to explain
and predict the behaviour of real objects or systems and are used in a variety of
scientific disciplines, ranging from physics and chemistry to ecology and the Earth
sciences. Although modeling is a central component of modern science, scientific
models at best are approximations of the objects and systems that they represent
they are not exact replicas. Thus, scientists constantly are working to improve and
refine models.
Scientific modeling varies

10

The purpose of scientific modeling varies. Some models, such as the threedimensional double-helix model of DNA, are used primarily to visualize an object or
system, often being created from experimental data. Other models are intended to
describe an abstract or hypothetical behaviour or phenomenon. For example,
predictive models, such as those employed in weather forecasting or in projecting
health outcomes of disease epidemics, generally are based on knowledge and data of
phenomena from the past and rely on mathematical analyses of this information to
forecast future, hypothetical occurrences of similar phenomena. Predictive models
hold significant value for society because of their potential role in warning systems,
such as in the case of earthquakes, tsunamis, epidemics, and similar large-scale
disasters. However, because no single predictive model can account for all the
variables that may affect an outcome, scientists must make assumptions, which can
compromise the reliability of a predictive model and lead to incorrect conclusions.
The limitations of scientific modeling are emphasized by the fact that models
generally are not complete representations. The Bohr atomic model, for example,
describes the structure of atoms. But while it was the first atomic model to
incorporate quantum theory and served as a basic conceptual model of electron
orbits, it was not an accurate description of the nature of orbiting electrons. Nor was
it able to predict the energy levels for atoms with more than one electron.
Fully understand an object or system
In fact, in the attempt to fully understand an object or system, multiple models, each
representing a part of the object or system, are needed. Collectively the models may
be able to provide a more complete representation, or at least a more complete
understanding, of the real object or system. This is illustrated by the wave model of
light and the particle model of light, which together describe the wave-particle duality
in which light is understood to possess both wave and particle functions. The wave
theory and the particle theory of light were long considered to be at odds with one
another. In the early 20th century, however, with the realization that particles behave
like waves, the two models for these theories were acknowledged as complementary,
a step that greatly facilitated new insights in the field of quantum mechanics.
There are numerous applications for scientific modeling. For example, in the Earth
sciences, modeling of atmospheric and ocean phenomena is relevant for not only
weather forecasting but also scientific understanding of global warming. In the latter
case, one model of note is the general circulation model, which is used for simulating
human- and non-human-induced climate change. Modeling of geologic events, such
as convection within Earth and theoretical movements of Earths plates, has advanced
scientists knowledge of volcanoes and earthquakes and of the evolution of Earths
surface. In ecology, modeling can be used to understand animal and plant
populations and the dynamics of interactions between organisms. In the biomedical
sciences, physical (material) models, such as Drosophila flies and the nematode
Caenorhabditis elegans, are used to investigate the functions of genes and proteins.
Likewise, three-dimensional models of proteins are used to gain insight into protein
function and to assist with drug design. Scientific modeling also has applications in
urban planning, construction, and the restoration of ecosystems.
Testable idea

11

A scientific model is a testable idea created by the human mind that tells a story
about what happens in nature. Another definition is a description of nature that can
predict things about many similar situations. Models are developed when a scientists
creativity and insight are combined with data and observations about many similar
scenarios. Scientists try to identify and generalize patterns in these observations, and
use mathematical language to predict the outcome of related situations. The value of
a model is that we can trust its predictions about similar situations even if we dont
encounter each situation.
Lets look at a simple example. Although most people in 1492 thought that the Earth
was flat (because that is what they observed), nearly all educated people knew that
the Earth was a sphere. The difference in the spherical model of the Earth and the
prevailing model of the time led to differences in predictions: Columbus, for example,
knew you could not fall off the edge of a spherical Earth. By knowing the radius of
that sphere, one could calculate its circumference (C = 2 * Pi * r) and thus plan an
expedition to have enough supplies to reach a far-off destination.

In the same way, basic evidence was used to determine that the Earth is round, some
of the most powerful insights into nature can be obtained from a model based on a
few simple ideas. It is this kind of model that we will be developing in this series for
the structure of matter.
What makes a model good?
Any model is based on a certain set of observations. A good model must be able to
explain as many characteristics of these observations as possible, but also be as
simple as possible. This second point is a restatement of the Occams razor principle
alluded to in the video. To extend our spherical-Earth example, sailors in the fifteenth
century also noticed that a ship appears to sink as it goes over the horizon the
last part of a departing ship you can see is the top of the mast. The spherical Earth
model explains this well: the curvature of the Earth becomes visible as you deal with
greater distances. This model also explains why the sinking illusion happens
regardless of what direction the ship moves away from you: a spherical Earth
curves downward in all directions from someone standing anywhere on its surface.
Both aspects of this observation are explained well by our model.

12

In addition, a good model must be able to explain phenomena that are seemingly
different from the ones we used to develop the model in the first place. For instance,
even though the spherical Earth model was used to explain sailing phenomena,
educated people were able to link this idea to lunar eclipses. A lunar eclipse happens
when the Earth passes between the Sun and the Moon. If we subscribe to the
spherical Earth model, we would expect the shadow of Earth to be round as it
passes across the Moon and indeed, it is. This new, seemingly different situation is
explained with the same model.
Examples
An example of a model that doesn't stand up as well to Occam's razor is the
"continuous," "continuum," or "plenum" model of matter presented in the video. In an
extended interview, science historian Al Martinez described how a proponent of the
continuum model might use it to explain how a container of air (like a syringe) weighs
the same whether the air in it is compressed or not.
Dr. Martinez pointed out that a particle theorist can easily explain that there are the
same number of particles of air in both the open and closed syringe, but that they
occupy less space. A continuum theorist, however, would have to cite Aristotles
theory of four elements, which states that everything in the world is made of some
combination of Earth and water, the heavy elements, and air and fire, the light
elements. According to the continuum theory, the air that is contained in the syringe
would actually be composed of a combination of air, fire, earth, and water. Hence,
when you push in the plunger of the syringe, you would lose some of the light matter
and some of the heavy matter through the walls of the syringe, allowing for a net
difference of zero in the weights.
Likewise, the continuum theorist would say that when you pull the plunger out, air
flows back in through the walls of the syringe. The question then becomes, If there's
now more matter in the syringe, why doesnt it weigh more than it did when there
was less? According to another feature of Aristotles theory, some of the air that
comes into the syringe actually has negative weight, or levity, because it contains air
and fire. Because it has levity, it tends to go upwards, which counteracts the heavy
matter that flooded in, this accounting for the fact that, again, the difference in
weight is zero.
In this example, it is clear that the continuum explanation is less elegant and
economical than the particle one. It's interesting to note, however, that it took from
Aristotle's time until the eighteenth century, when more was learned about gases, for
the continuous model of matter to finally get "cut" by Occam's razor.
When do scientists change a model?
No scientific model has ever been totally complete. When credible observations of a
new situation come into conflict with the predictions of a model, something must be
changed because either the data or the model is incorrect. Although Columbus used
the spherical Earth model to predict the length of his voyage to the Indian
subcontinent, his estimate of the Earths radius was much smaller than what we now
know it to be. Thus, Columbus underestimated the circumference of the Earth and the
length of his voyage to India. (Fortunately for Columbus, there were two other rather
large continents for him to reach before he ran out of supplies.) Later, the model of

13

Earth as a sphere was refined to include a better estimate of its radius, and thus
make better predictions about distances to locations on its surface. The model was
correct,
but
its
parameters
had
to
be
refined.
We will see in the rest of the series that our particle model will not have to be thrown
out when it doesnt sufficiently explain new data, but adding some detail or refining
some parameter of the model will explain these new observations.
Limitations of models
All models have limitations no model can possibly explain every detail of a scientific
phenomena. For instance, if we wanted to predict the distance we would need to
travel from one side of the country of Nepal to the other, we could predict it using our
spherical Earth model, but well find our estimate is far from accurate. Why?
Although the Earth is a sphere, there are many topographical features on its surface,
including the Himalayan Mountains, which span Nepal. Although we could add all the
mountain ranges in the world to our spherical-Earth model, this would make the
model quite complex and defeat the utility of having a simple model to make useful
predictions.
Similarly, we will find that, while our particle model explains many things about
matter, it is not comprehensive for example, it cannot predict why certain
materials have different electrical properties. We could add further refinements that
are outside the scope of this course to enable it to do so, but it would make our
model so complicated that it would no longer be useful to us.
Q.5 What are the criteria for evaluation of a model? Evaluate Newcombs
Symmetry model and Osgoods model by using the criteria of evaluation of a
model.
(15)
The emergence of a database technology in recent years has focused interest on the
subject of data models. A data model is the class of logical data structures which a
computer system or language makes available to the user for the purpose of
formulating data processing applications. The diversity of computer systems and
languages has resulted in a corresponding diversity of data models, and has created a
problem for the user in selecting a data model which is in some sense appropriate to
a given application. An evaluation procedure is needed which will allow the user to
evaluate alternative models in the context of a specific set of applications. This paper
takes a first step toward such a procedure by identifying the attributes of a data
model which can be used as criteria for evaluating the model. Two kinds of criteria
are presented: use criteria, which measure the usability of the model; and
implementation criteria, which measure the implement ability of the model and the
efficiency of the resulting implementation.
The use of the criteria is illustrated by applying them to three specific models: an nary relational model, a hierarchic model, and a network model.
Absolute risk is the probability that an individual who is free of a given disease at an
initial age, a, will develop that disease in the subsequent interval (a, t]. Absolute risk
is reduced by mortality from competing risks. Models of absolute risk that depend on
covariates have been used to design intervention studies, to counsel patients
regarding their risks of disease and to inform clinical decisions, such as whether or

14

not to take tamoxifen to prevent breast cancer. Several general criteria have been
used to evaluate models of absolute risk, including how well the model predicts the
observed numbers of events in subsets of the population (calibration), and
discriminatory power, measured by the concordance statistic. In this paper we
review some general criteria and develop specific loss function-based criteria for two
applications, namely whether or not to screen a population to select subjects for
further evaluation or treatment and whether or not to use a preventive intervention
that has both beneficial and adverse effects. We find that high discriminatory power is
much more crucial in the screening application than in the preventive intervention
application.
Evaluate Newcombs Symmetry model and Osgoods model
Heiders Balance Theory:
Most writers usually credit Fritz Heider (1946) with the earliest articulation of a
consistency theory, although the informal concept can be traced back to earlier work
(see Kiesler et al., 1969, p. 157). As a psychologist, Heider was concerned with the
way an individual organizes attitudes toward people and objects in relation to one
another within that individuals own cognitive structure. Heider postulated that
unbalanced states produce tension and generate forces to restore balance. He says
that the concept of a balanced state designates a situation in which the perceived
units and the experienced sentiments co-exist without stress (1958, p. 176).
Heiders paradigm focused on two individuals, a person (P), the object of the analysis,
some other person (O), and a physical object, idea, or event (X). Heiders concern
was with how relationships among these three entities are organized in the mind of
one individual (P). Heider distinguished two types of relationships among these three
entities, liking (L) and unit (U) relations (cause, possession, similarity, etc.). In
Heiders paradigm, a balanced state exists if all three relations are positive in all
respects or if two are negative and < one is positive (1946, p. 110). All other
combinations are unbalanced.
In Heiders conception, degrees of liking cannot be represented; a relation is either
positive or negative (Figure 8.1). It is assumed that a balanced state is stable and
resists outside influences. An unbalanced state is assumed to be unstable and is
assumed to produce psychological tension within an individual. This tension becomes
relieved only when change within the situation takes place in such a way that a state
of balance is achieved (Heider, 1958, p. 180). This pinpoints the communicators
interest in the theory for it implies a model of attitude change and resistance to
attitude change. Unbalanced states, being unstable states, are susceptible to change
toward balance. Balanced states, being stable states, resist change. Data supporting
Heiders balance theory are discussed in Zajonc (1960), Kiesler et al. (1969), and
Abelson et al. (1968)
Newcombs Symmetry Theory:
Social psychologist Theodore M. Newcomb took Heiders idea of balance out of the
head of one person and applied it to communication between people. He uses the
term symmetry to distinguish it from balance theory and contends that we attempt to
influence one another to bring about symmetry (or balance or equilibrium). As
discussed in some detail

15

Figure 8.1 Examples of Balanced and Unbalanced States according to

Heiders Definition of Balance (Solid Lines Represent Positive Relations;
Broken Lines, Negative Relations.)
Newcomb postulates that attempts to influence another person are a function of the
attraction one person has for another. In this respect Newcombs theory is more of a
theory of interpersonal attraction than one of attitude change. If we fail to achieve
symmetry through communication with another person about an object important to
both of us, we may then change our attitude toward either the other person or the
object in question in order to establish symmetry.
Because Newcombs model (see Chapter 3) deals with two people and the
communication between them, he labels them A and B (rather than Heiders (P and
O) and retains X to represent the object of their attitudes. As with Heider, he
assumes a human need for consistency, which he calls a persistent strain toward
symmetry. If A and B disagree about X, the amount of this strain toward symmetry
will depend on the intensity of As attitude toward X and As attraction for B. An
increase in As attraction for B and an increase in As intensity of attitude toward X
will result in (1) an increased strain toward symmetry on the part of A toward B about
their attitudes toward X, (2) the likelihood that symmetry will be achieved, and (3)
the probability of a communication by A to B about X. The last item, of course, is the
focus of our concern.
Osgoods Congruity Theory
The congruity model is a special case of Heiders balance theory. Though similar to
balance theory, it deals specifically with the attitudes persons hold toward sources of
information and the objects of the sources assertions. Congruity theory has several
advantages over balance theory, including the ability to make predictions about both
the direction and the degree of attitude change. The congruity model assumes that
judgmental frames of reference tend toward maximal simplicity. Because extreme
judgments are easier to make than refined ones (see discussion of either-or thinking
and two valued evaluation, valuations tend to move toward the extremes, or there is
a-entinuing pressure toward polarization. In addition to this maximization of
simplicity, the assumption is also made that identity is less complex than
discrimination of fine differences (either-or thinking and categorization). Because of
this, related concepts are evaluated in a similar manner.

16

In the congruity paradigm a person (P) receives an assertion from a source (S),
toward which he has an attitude, about an object (O), toward which he also has an
attitude. In Osgoods model, how much P likes S and O will determine if a state of
congruity or consistency exists (Figure 8.2).
According to congruity theory, when a change occurs, it is always toward greater congruity with prevailing frames of reference. Osgood uses his semantic differentia

In essence, the definitions of balance and congruity are identical. Incongruity exists
when the attitudes toward the source and the object are similar and the assertion is
negative or when they are dissimilar and the assertion is positive. An unbalanced
state has either one or all negative relations.
Percy Tannenbaum had 405 college students evaluate three sourceslabor leaders,
the Chicago Tribune, and Senator Robert Taftand three objectsgambling, abstract
art, and accelerated college programs. Sometime later the students were presented
with newspaper clippings that contained assertions attributed to the sources about
the objects. The entire range of predicted changes was supported by Tannenbaums
data, as summarized in Table 8.1. The direction of change is indicated by either a plus
or a minus sign, while the extent of change is indicated by one or two such signs.
Festingers Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive dissonance is the term used in modern psychology to describe the state
of
holding
two
or
more
conflicting cognitions (e.g.,ideas, beliefs, values, emotional reactions) simultaneously.
In a state of dissonance, people may sometimes feel surprise, dread, guilt, anger, or
embarrassment.[1] The theory of cognitive dissonance in social psychology purposes
that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by altering existing
cognitions, adding new ones to create a consistent belief system, or alternatively by
reducing the importance of any one of the dissonant elements.[1] An example of this
would be the conflict between wanting to smoke and knowing that smoking is
unhealthy; a person may try to change their feelings about the odds that they will
actually suffer the consequences, or they might add the consonant element that the
short term benefits of smoking outweigh the long term harm. The need to avoid
cognitive dissonance may bias one towards a certain decision even though other
factors favour an alternative.
The phrase was coined by Leon Festinger in his 1956 book When Prophecy Fails,
which chronicled the followers of a UFO cult as reality clashed with their fervent belief
in an impending apocalypse.[3][4] Festinger subsequently published a book called A
Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, published in 1957, in which he outlines the theory.

17

Cognitive dissonance is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in
social psychology.
Cognitive dissonance theory warns that people have a bias to seek consonance
among their cognitions. According to Festinger, we engage in a process he termed
dissonance reduction, which he said could be achieved in one of three ways:
lowering the importance of one of the discordant factors, adding consonant elements,
or changing one of the dissonant factors.[5] This bias gives the theory its predictive
power, shedding light on otherwise puzzling, irrational, and even destructive
behavior.

Decision Making

Forced Compliance

Selective Exposure and Selective Attention

Entertainment Choices.
Q.6

Define perception. What are those factors that influence perception?

(20)

One of the central assumptions of the constructivist approach to perception is that

perception is not determined entirely by external stimuli. As a consequence, it is
assumed that emotional and motivational states, together with expectation and
culture, may influence peoples perceptual hypotheses and thus their visual
perception. This notion that perception is influenced by various factors is often
referred to as perceptual set. This is a perceptual bias or predisposition or readiness
to perceive particular features of a stimulus. Basically, it is the tendency to perceive
or notice some aspects of the available sense data and ignore others. The factors
that influence perception and create perceptual set are discussed below. The mass
media have a slow news day problem. They have pages and time to fill, even when
events are mundane. A common solution at such times is to focus on sports and the
lives of celebrities (people who are well known for their well-knownness, as Andy
Warhol once put it), or to take something relatively trivial and expand it into
something important. Mass media encompass much more than print and electronic
forms of communication (such as magazines and television). Sporting events,
churches, museums, theme parks, political campaigns, catalogs, and concerts are
also forms of mass media, although many people consider them to be something
other than mass media.
Competitive environment:
In a stimulating competitive environment, a media program must score quickly. Since
you're still reading this column, the title and opening paragraph must have sufficiently
caught your attention so you continued. Emotional arousal drives attention, which
drives learning and conscious behaviour so it's important for mass media
programmers to understand and present content that will emotionally arouse
potential participants. Our basic biological challenge is to survive and get into the
gene pool, so avoiding danger and taking advantage of opportunities for
eating/shelter/mating are cognitively important. Events related to these needs are
inherently emotionally arousing, and successful mass media programmers understand
this. People complain about the amount of violence, sexuality, and commercialism in
mass media, but let's look at the issue from a TV programmer's perspective. Channel
surfers will give a TV program only a few seconds before moving to the next channel,

18

so programmers focus on content sequences with a high probability for emotional

arousal - and program content and commercials related to violence, sexuality, and
food/shelter do attract and hold attention. Consider the recent media focus on
terrorist violence, the Taliban treatment of women, the food/shelter problems now
facing the families of those killed and Afghani refugees -- and the resultant
widespread outpouring of anger and support.
How do people make sense of the words and images they get in messages?
Research on perception and information processing can help us answer this question.
Mass communicators want audiences to pay attention to their messages, learn the
contents of the messages, and make appropriate changes in attitudes or beliefs or
make desired behavioral responses. Perceptual theory tells us that the process of
interpreting messages is complex and that these communicator goals may be difticuk
to achieve. Perception has been defined as the process by which we interpret sensory
data. Sensory data come to us through our five senses. Research has identified two
types of influences on our perception: structural and functional. Structural influences
on perception come from the physical aspects of the stimuli to which we are being
exposed for instance, the closer together a series of dots, the more they are seen as
forming a line.
Functional influences
Functional influences are the psychological factors that influence perception, and
therefore, introduce some subjectivity into the process. Selective perception is the
term applied to the tendency for peoples perception to be influenced by wants,
needs, attitudes, and other psychological factors. Selective perception plays an
important role in communication of any sort. Selective perception means that
different people can react to the same message in very different ways. No
communicator can assume that a message will have the intended meaning for all
receivers or even that it will have the same meaning for all receivers. This
complicates our models of mass communication. Perhaps mass communication is not
just a matter of hitting a target with an arrow, as some models suggest.
Purpose and values:
The message can reach the receiver (hit the target) and still fail to accomplish its
purpose because it is subject to the interpretation of the receiver. The process of
receiving and interpreting a message is referred to in many communication models as
decoding. The process involves perception, or the taking in of stimuli through the
senses and the subsequent processing of that information. Before we consider the
operation of perception in the decoding of a mass communication message, we will
discuss some of the research findings about perception in general. Modern psychology
has shown perception to be a complex process, rather different from the naive view
that many people held a century ago. The old view which we might refer to as the
commonsense view saw human perception as largely a physical or mechanical
process. The human eye and the other sense organs were thought to work much like
a camera or a tape recorder. This view of perception held that there was a quite
direct correspondence between an external reality and a persons perception, or
what was in the mind. This view would hold that everybody perceives the world in
essentially the same way.

19

Manipulative potential:
Given such manipulative potential over our affective processes, it's important to know
who determines the content of mass media. A relatively small number of large
corporations control much of our nation's print and electronic media (newspapers,
publishing houses, radio/TV stations, cable systems, etc.). Further, a relatively small
number of media stars reach vast audiences syndicated newspaper columnists and
cartoonists, radio and TV talk show hosts, late night TV comedians. On the other
hand, most newspapers include editorial columnists who disagree with each other,
and the Sunday morning political TV shows are characterized more by argument than
agreement. A major media organization that defines itself too narrowly risks reaching
a limited audience when they need a massive audience to survive so this financial
reality forces at least some balance in programming. Magazines and radio stations are
perhaps the most successful narrowly defined mass media formats - typically being
upfront about seeking an audience who shares their narrow perspective (e.g., Rolling
Stone, Gourmet, Ms., The Christian Century, Sports Illustrated - golden oldies, jazz,
classical, rock music radio stations).
The Computer Age:
The Computer Age has revolutionized mass media. The Internet allows the universal
inexpensive publication of ideas, whether it's an email message sent to everyone on
one's list or a narrowly-defined website that's available to anyone. Desktop
publication and advances in duplicating technology have reduced the need for authors
to go through a publisher.
Perception in media concept:
The fact is that media does influence people and their perception of reality and it is
for this reason that people use media for getting or maintaining their power. The
election campaigns are the persuasive communication that allow or force people to
vote for a particular individual or ideology. In fact, the press was considered as the
fourth pillar of democracy for no other reason than its capacity to reach the masses
and allow the newly formed bourgeois democratic system to seek their approval.
Objectivity and subjectivity - perceptive reality
How objective is our perception in reality? A statement is objective if it is neutral and
not influenced by prejudices, feelings and interests. An objective statement is
consequently independent of the person who makes this statement. The objective
statement corresponds with the facts. We often tend to view our own perception of
things or events as objectively correct. What others think of the same events or
things we frequently categorize as incorrect or subjective (perceptive reality).
A good example is the weather: Two weeks of sunshine, high temperatures and no
rain for many people is seen as desirable and good. The farmer however would like
some rain in between times because otherwise his fields dry out, older people are not
so happy with high air temperatures because it causes breathing difficulties etc. Who
is being objective here? Obviously our assessment of the weather depends amongst
other things significantly on what we want to do (swimming in an outdoor pool,

20

working in the field, working in an office, travelling, resting etc.), upon our mood and
our state of health. Exactly the same weather on a given day gives one person great
pleasure and another one annoyance. But even within ourselves the assessment
depends strongly on our plans: If we are working in an office three successive days of
rain normally would not bother us too much. If however we are on a beach holiday we
would want other weather!
Good example is the weather:
Two weeks of sunshine, high temperatures and no rain for many people is seen as
desirable and good. The farmer however would like some rain in between times
because otherwise his fields dry out, older people are not so happy with high air
temperatures because it causes breathing difficulties etc. Who is being objective
here? Obviously our assessment of the weather depends amongst other things
significantly on what we want to do (swimming in an outdoor pool, working in the
field, working in an office, traveling, resting etc.), upon our mood and our state of
health. Exactly the same weather on a given day gives one person great pleasure and
another one annoyance. But even within ourselves the assessment depends strongly
on our plans: If we are working in an office three successive days of rain normally
would not bother us too much. If however we are on a beach holiday we would want
other weather!
We largely influence our perception ourselves as to whether we find the weather
good or bad. No one forces us for example to feel that hot summer weather is
bad. We are free to choose whether this is good or bad in our own eyes (perceptive
reality). Each of us has certain individual claims on the weather today or tomorrow.
According to what the weather is really like will we be more or less satisfied.
Human beings reaction
Just imagine how much trouble there would be if human beings could actually control
the weather! Presumably you will agree that in our judgment of the weather there is
no objectivity. Every opinion is correct, but every opinion is also subjective.
Lets look at the question of the objectivity of our perception in another example: We
will examine personal relationships between people and in particular here the
relationship between man and woman. Most of us have probably already experienced
more than once the end of a love affair: If it was not you but your partner who ended
the relationship, with great probability you will have seen the end of the relationship
at the time as being awful, unjust and wrong. Weeks, months or at least years
afterwards people normally feel that the end of that relationship was a good thing.
They are presumably happy about it because completely different options opened up
for them.
What happened in the meantime? The event is still the same: Our partner left us. If
we no longer judge this to be awful and unjust, but instead sensible and good, it must
be we ourselves who have changed - perceptive reality. Our perception of the same
event reflects this change (perceptive reality). Just like our example of the weather
our perception with respect to personal relationships is also subjective.

21

The most obvious fields to consider here are those of science and/or technology. In
these fields we can define a respective partial system and then establish the relevant
laws in this partial system according to our current knowledge. Within this partial
system and under the defined preconditions we can then make objective
measurements and observations. As soon as we leave this partial system however it
loses its objectivity since there the preconditions are no longer conclusively valid. It is
only when we know and understand everything on the earth and in the cosmos, that
objectively correct observations are theoretically possible.
Q.7

Discuss Westley-MacLean Model and Gerbner Model.

(20)

Westley-MacLean Model
The discipline of communication was the Westley and MacLeans model of
communication proposed in the year 1957 by Bruce Westley and Malcolm S. MacLean
Jr.
Let us try to understand this model with the help of below examples:
At night, when suddenly an individual experiences the shaking and trembling of the
earths crust or indications of an earthquake, he immediately wakes up and conveys
to his family that they immediately need to vacate the house.
Jackson had important meetings lined up during the day. The moment he was about
to step out of his door, he was greeted by a heavy downpour. He had no other option
but to cancel all his appointments however urgent they were and had to stay indoors.
Why did he take the decision of not going to work? Due to the heavy shower, Jackson
preferred staying indoors and rescheduled all his meetings.
On the way to office, if one witnesses a road accident or a murder, the first thing he
does is to call his friends or relatives and share his experiences with them. He passes
on his message to his relatives and tells them to be safe and call him immediately
after reaching their respective destinations.
In all the above cases, the individual received signals from the environment and then
began communicating with others. Thus the communication actually was initiated by
the external environment which then led the speaker to convey his information to the
others. This explains the Westley and MacLeans model of communication. Unlike
Frank Dance, Westley and MacLean believed that communication doesnt start from
day one but actually begins when the speaker receives signals or messages from his
external surroundings. In this model again the process of initiating communication by
first sending messages takes a back seat and suggests that communication actually
starts with receiving messages from the environment.

22

Jim works with a leading advertising firm. His key responsibility area is to design ads
for his clients. One fine day, while he was driving back to his apartment, he noticed a
hoarding advertising a certain product. Immediately he called his subordinate, shared
his brilliant idea which just originated the moment he saw the hoarding. In this case,
communication actually began with Jim receiving the message from the signboard
and then further sending it to his team members - an example of Westley and
MacLeans model of communication.
This model considers a strong relation between the signals from the surroundings and
the process of communication. According to this model the process of communication
begins with receiving messages rather than sending messages.
(Receives message)
Environment----------------------------------------------Sender----then sends message
(Communication starts)
In this model it is not necessary that the signals coming from the surroundings are
intentionally sent to start the process of communication. Sometimes events might
accidentally occur or the thought can be accidentally received. As in the case of Jim,
the hoarding was there for quite a long time, Jim took the same road for almost a
year, but one fine day he suddenly received the idea from the banner and initiated
the process of communication. Thus signals can be received anytime and
communication can begin anytime. It was Jim who saw the hoarding, his team
members did not see it and thus there are fair chances they might download the
message with few errors. This is a common loophole of this model of communication,
where the information sometimes gets modified when it is passed from one person to
the other individual.
Gerbner Model
Mr. George Gerbner is one of the pioneers in the field of communication research. His
works are descriptive as well as very easy to understand any other before. He is
working as a professor and head of the Annenberg School of Communications in the
University of Pennsylvania. In 1956, Gerbner attempted the general purpose of
communication models. He stressed the dynamic nature of communication in his work
and also the factor which affecting the reliability of communication.

23

(Note: This model can be best understood when read along with the diagram
beginning at E Event.)
(i) Perceptual Dimension:
An E is an event happens in the real life and the event content or message is
perceived by M (Man or a Machine). After Perceives the message from E by M is
known as E1. E1 is not same as like E. Because any man or machine cant
perceives the whole event and they perceives only the part of the event (E1). This is
known as Perceptual Dimension.
These 3 factors are involves between E and M

Selection
Context
Availability

M (man or machine) cannot perceive the entire content of the event E. So M

selects the interesting or needed content from the entire event and filtering the
others. The context occurs in the event and Availability is based on Ms attitude,
mood, culture and personality. (For eg. How a journalist perceives the messages from
the event and also cant focus the whole event so they filter the unwanted or
unrelated content from the event. This filtered content is not same as like the actual
event content because the journalist edits the content based on his attitude, mood
and cultural background or press policies).

24

(ii) Means and Controls dimension:

E2 is the event content which is drawn or artified by M. Here M becomes the source of
a message about E to send someone else. M creates a statement or signals about the
message and Gerbner termed its Form and content as SE2. S (Signal or Form) it
takes and E2 (Mans content). Here Content (E2) is structured or formed (S) by M
and it can communicate in a different ways or based on the structured ways.
M has to use channels (or media) over to send the message which he has a greater or
lesser degree of control. The question of control relates to Ms degree of skill in using
communication channels. If using a verbal channel, how good is he using words? If
using the Internet, how good is he at using new technology and words?
This process can be extended to infinitum by adding on other receivers (M2, M3etc.)
who have further perceptions (SE3, SE4 etc.) of the statements about perceived
events.
Important Note:
Message at every level is altered or changed.
Example:
In case of news reporting, E can be any event that has happened and the reporter
(M) selects a particular part of event (E1) that may be provide his channel higher TRP
ratings or the news may boost the particular party which his channel supports. This
SE2 is sent through a medium to the mass audience. Then the audience distributed
the message (SE2) and he (M1) sends to his friends with his interpretation and the
process continues.

25