Abstract
There is a communication “explosion” in modern life but no acceptable theory for its understanding. This, in part, is because of the current emphasis on objective approaches. It is proposed here instead that communication can be studied best from a subjective standpoint, where the concern is with the bodies of verbal (or other) statements people make, or may make about any matter. One distinguishes, however, statements of fact (the concern of information theory) from statements of opinion. The latter are subjective and basically self-referent: a theory of communication is proposed for these. In this a person’s ‘position’ or ‘overview’ is modeled as a Q sort, and the communication domain by Q metatheory. The theory has the widest possible applicability, wherever subjectivity is at issue.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
ALMOND, G. A. & VERBA, S. 1963. The civic culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
AYAR, A. (Ed.) 1955. Studies in communication. London: Seeker and Warburg.
BASCHWITZ, K. 1951. Du und die Masse. Studien zu einer exakten Massenpsychologie. Amsterdam.
BROUWER, M. 1967. Prolegomena to a theory of mass communication. In L. Thayer (Ed.) 1967, Communication: Concepts and perspectives. Washington D. C: Spartan Books.
BROWN, S. R. 1968. Bibliography on Q-technique and its methodology. Perceptual and Motor Skills, Mono. Suppl. 4-V26.
CHERRY, C. 1957. On human communication. New York: Wiley Press.
DANCE, F. X. (Ed.) 1967. Human communication theory: Original essays. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston.
FISHMAN, J. A. 1966. A systematization of the Whorfian hypothesis. In A. G. Smith (Ed.), Communication and culture. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
FOX, W. T. R. (Ed.) 1959. Theoretical aspects of international relations. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
FRIEDSON, E. 1955. Communication research and the concept of the mass. In W. Schramm (Ed.), The process and effects of mass communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. (Reprinted from the American Sociological Review, 1953).
Gerbner, G. 1966. On defining communication: Still another view. The Journal of Communication, 16, 99–103.
HEMPEL, C. G. 1952. Symposium: Problems of concept and theory formation in the social sciences. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
JACOBSON, E. 1964. The self and the object world. New York: International Universities Press.
KATZ, D., & LAZARSFELD, P. F. 1952. Personal influence. Glencoe: Free Press.
KELMAN, H. C. 1965. International behavior: A social-psychological analysis. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
KLAPPER, J. T. 1967. Discussion in L. Thayer (Ed.), Communication: Concepts and perspectives. Washington, D. C: Spartan Books. Pp. 238–39.
LASSWELL, H. D. 1935. World politics and personal insecurity. New York: Whittlesey.
LASSWELL, H. D. 1965. The climate of international action. In H. C. Kelman (Ed.) International behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
LEIGHTON, A. H. & OPLER, M. E. 1955. Psychiatry and applied anthropology in psychological warfare against Japan. In W. Schramm (Ed.), The process and effects of mass communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
LIPPMANN, W. 1955. Essays in the public philosophy. New York: Macmillan and Company.
MILLER, G. R. 1966. On defining communication: Another stab. The Journal of Communication, 16, 88–98.
PLATH, D. W. 1964. The after hours: Modern Japan and the search for enjoyment. Berkeley: University of California Press.
POOL, I. de SOLA & PRASAD, K. 1958–59. Indian student images of foreign people. Public Opinion Quarterly, 22, 292–304.
RICKS, D. 1960. “I” and “me”: A study in self consistency. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago.
ROSENBERG, M. J. 1965. Images in relation to the policy process: American public opinion on cold-war issues. In H. C. Kelman (Ed.), International behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
SCHRAMM, W. 1964. Mass media and national development. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
SINGER, J. D. 1961. The level-of-analysis problem in international relations. In K. Knorr and S. Verba (Eds.) The international system. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
STEPHENSON, W. 1936. The foundations of psychometry: Four factor systems. Psychometrika, 1, 195–209.
STEPHENSON, W. 1953 The study of behavior: Q technique and its methodology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
STEPHENSON, W. 1964. Application of Q method to the measurement of public opinion. The Psychological Record, 14, 265–73.
STEPHENSON, W. 1965 Perseectives in psychology: XXIII. Definition of opinion, attitude and belief. The Psychological Record, 15, 281–88.
STEPHENSON, W. 1967. The play theory of mass communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
STEPHENSON, W. 1968. Evaluation of public relations programs. Rivista Inter-nazionale di Scienze Economiche (to appear in 1968), Milana, Italy.
STEPHENSON, W. 1968. Application of Q to the assessment of public opinion. Unpublished manuscript, copies available from the author.
SUNOO, D. 1967. A Q-methodological study of consumer behavior. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia.
THAYER, L. (Ed.) 1967. Communication: Theory and research. Springfield, Illinois: C. C. Thomas, (a)
THAYER, L. (Ed.) 1967. Communication: Concepts and perspectives. London: Macmillan and Company, (b)
THOMPSON, G. C. 1966. Public opinion and Lord Beaconsfield. In B. Berelson and M. Janowitz (Eds.), Reader in public opinion and communication. Glencoe: Free Press.
THURSTONE, L. L. & CHAVE, E. J. 1929. The measurement of attitude. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
TROLDAHL, V. C. & VAN DAM. R. 1966. Face-to-face communication about major topics in the news. Public Opinion Quarterly, 24, No. 4, 626–37.
WHORF, B. L. 1956. Language, thought and reality. New York: Wiley Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Like Gerbner (1966), I use the word “communication” (singular) with reference to act, condition, or process. “Communications” (plural) has reference instead to means, channels, media, programs, schools and so on of communication.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stephenson, W. Foundations of Communication Theory. Psychol Rec 19, 65–82 (1969). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03393830
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03393830