Understanding COMM

Page 1 of 9

2018

Week 1, Overview 1.2: Introduction to Communication Models and Processes

Commentary

The foundation of all human communication, in all contexts and across all mediums, is the exchange of messages (information) between two or more people to accomplish some kind of objective. How this is done has been the subject of much discussion for centuries, leading to a multitude of definitions and models of communication. Is it just information related behavior (Ruben, 1984)? Or is it the “sharing of ideas and feelings in a mood of mutuality” (Dale, 1969)? Does communication require “the transmission of information, ideas, emotions and skills . . . by the use of symbols” (Berelson & Steiner, 1964)? Or is it “the transmission of information, ideas, attitudes, or emotion from one person or group to another . . . primarily through symbols” (Theodorson & Theodorson, 1969)? Together, these definitions suggest a general picture of communication as interactive, albeit to a larger or smaller extent depending upon the context or medium. Each component in the communication process either contributes to or inhibits the effective movement of messages from sender to receiver (Nicotera, 2009).

Models of Communication

The earliest recorded model of communication is attributed to Aristotle, who focused on public oratory (Figure 1):

Fig. 1: Aristotle’s Model of Communication

Now jump forward many centuries to political scientist Harold Lasswell, who in 1948 designed a model that sought to describe the question, Who says what in which channel with what effect?

Fig. 2: Lasswell’s Model of Communication

Lasswell’s (1948) model (Figure 2) contributed significantly to our understanding of communication by contextualizing participants, a channel for the communication, and effects. However, the process that it

Speaker Listener M

Message

Page 2 of 9

2018

describes was largely transmissive or linear. Lasswell’s research was especially concerned with the effects of propaganda.

Researchers Shannon and Weaver (1949) developed the first comprehensive communication model to gain wide acceptance. Although also linear and intended to help engineers to design efficient ways to transmit electrical signals, this model has become a baseline for describing all human communication.

Fig. 3: Shannon and Weaver’s Model of Communication

Linear models take a one-way view of communication by assuming a message is sent by a source to a receiver through a channel. In Shannon and Weaver’s model (Figure 3), the receiver is the person who makes sense of the message. The channels or pathways by which the message travels have come to be understood as corresponding with visual, tactile, olfactory, and auditory senses. They also suggested messages can be warped by noise, which is anything not intended to be a part of the message by the sender. Communication in this transmission model of communication always is intentional.

These early models were created by people interested in communication as an element of some other field of study. Schramm (1954) developed a model that took into account the fields of experience the sender and receiver bring to the communication process. His interactional model of communication describes communication as a continuous, two-way circular process that involves the creation of shared meaning influence by what each participant brings to the table from their cultures, experiences, and heredity (Figure 4). This model also advanced the notion of feedback, our intentional or unintentional, verbal and nonverbal responses to a message.

Page 3 of 9

2018

Fig. 4: Schramm’s Model of Communication

The transactional model of communication that emerged next from scholars in the communication studies field emphasizes the simultaneous nature of message transactions (Barnlund, 1970; Frymier, 2006). Communication that is transactional is cooperative; the sender and the receiver are mutually responsible for the effect and the effectiveness of communication (Figure 5).

Fig. 5: Transactional Model of Communication

In this model, the participants construct shared meaning through the constant and continuous nature of the interaction. A communicator encodes (i.e., puts thoughts into words and gestures), then transmits a message via a channel (i.e., speech, email, text message) to another communicator(s), who decodes the message (i.e., takes the words, gestures, eye contact, etc., and applies meaning to all of it together). The message may encounter noise (e.g., any semantic, physical, psychological, or physiological distraction or interference), which could prevent it from being received or fully understood as the sender intended. It also will be influenced by the participants’ backgrounds (i.e., cultural and social groups).

To understand why this model provides a good model of communicative behaviors, think about this: Do you really stop "communicating" when someone is talking to you? No, you are making nonverbal responses, like shaking her head, folding your arms, or using fillers such as "hmm-hmm” to give the speaker continuous feedback. At the same time, you are processing the communication that you are continuously receiving by trying to understand it, placing it in its proper context, and imagining what will be the best responses.

The Models Compared

Comparing three major models in a real-world example may enhance your understanding of how each differs. Consider the following scenario.

The director of public relations at a major corporation presents a speech over closed-circuit television from the headquarters’ media studio to the marketing staff at regional offices across the country. This would be an example of the linear model of communication (one-directional, no chance for feedback, no opportunity to evaluate noise).

Page 4 of 9

2018

Later, this same person gives the same presentation in the corporation’s boardroom. She sticks to the script she prepared, making no effort to seek feedback or read the room for noise. Following the speech, she asks if there are any questions. A member of the board poses one, which she answers. The question- and-answer portion of her appearance demonstrates the interactional model of communication. The sender encoded and sent a message, it was received and decoded, feedback was given (the question), and adaptation was made (the answer).

Then, the marketing staff enters the room. The public relations director starts to speak. As she does, one of the marketing staffers asks a question. While the question is being asked, the speaker nods her head. She then verbally agrees with the marketing staffer. While this is happening, the marketing staffer also nods his head, indicating that he understands what was just said, and adds an “I get it” to confirm his understanding. This is an example of the transactional (multi-directional) model of communication in action.

To be an effective communicator at home, in the workplace, or in the community, you need to know how the communication process operates as a system, how you send and process information, how you reason your way to conclusions and evaluate the ideas that others communicate, and the relationship between communication and culture. In addition, good communicators know what ethical standards they are exercising in their communications.

Types of Noise

Imagine that you and another person are simultaneously throwing two balls back and forth to each other. This is how the transactional model of communication works. You can even imagine the channels of communication not being as strong by having the two people toss the balls with their eyes closed (a telephone conversation?). Or the channels can be weaker if you have a wall up between you, or you both play and catch with only one hand. The best communication likely occurs in a quiet room where two people are really paying attention to each other.

As for noise, that could be anyone else walking along who throws another ball at you while you are playing with another person. Or noise can be the wall over which you must throw your message. Another form of noise could be throwing balls that are unfamiliar to you (a new language or jargon used only at a particular job). Imagine if your instructor brought a bunch of whiffle balls into class to show the various aspects of the transactional model. Pretty soon the pairs begin to make rules about when they will throw the balls.

When the ball-throwing groups are made larger, the groups quickly figure out that there better be a fairly strictly governed order by which the group members throw their balls, so that "messages" are not lost under chairs! Indeed, as soon as communication gets into larger groups, the group needs to decide upon rules of communication so that everyone is heard and that messages are not lost. You no doubt have found the same need for stricter “rules” when groups try to communicate together—more formalized turn-taking and the assignment of a group leader so that the communication happens relatively easily. This is the foundation of group and organizational communication.

Components of the Communication Process

Page 5 of 9

2018

For our purposes, here are working definitions for each of the components in these models of communication:

Message: Messages are the content of all communication. Messages can include verbal, nonverbal, implicit, or explicit information, and often a combination of these general types.

Sender: All messages have a source, the sender, who has created the message, or in some cases adjusted a message they have received to be passed on or transferred to a receiver. In this theoretical model, and in practice for most communication, the sender takes into account the needs, interests, and capabilities of the receiver, or audience, of the message when creating it.

Receiver: All messages are created to be sent to another individual or multiple individuals. The receiver of a message is the individual and/or the entire group of individuals who can pick up and understand—if not all of the message content—enough of the content to make sense of the sender's intent. The receiver, therefore, includes those that the sender is directing the message to, as well as anyone else who is able to gain access to it and translate, interpret, or decode the message to gain some meaningful content.

Channel: The channel is the medium that carries or transmits the message. This includes any and all technologies for carrying messages, from printed media to sophisticated analog or digital transmissions. Often, multiple channels are used simultaneously as a way of assuring that the receiver extracts the correct meaning from a message transmitted by a sender. The use of parallel channels to transmit the same message is known as redundancy. The use of written reports handed out during a face-to-face meeting, and the use of e-mail follow-up messages to business telephone conference calls, are two examples of message redundancy over multiple channels or mediums.

Encoding: Encoding is the organizing of a message to enable the more or less effective transmission between sender and receivers. Encoding includes the selection of techniques for the management of the message to either increase its accuracy and efficiency of the transmission of meaning, or in the case of coded messages, to effectively block the ability of non-authorized receivers to gain access to the message and its meaning.

Decoding: The reciprocal of encoding is decoding, which is the process that the receiver undertakes to extract meaning from the message.

Feedback: Feedback is a responsive communication sent by the receiver to the sender of a message that alerts or informs the sender that the message has been received and that its meaning has been more or less successfully extracted on the receiving end. In other words, feedback enables the sender to make a determination as to whether the message has been received correctly, and by the sender's targeted audience.

Noise: Noise is anything and everything that in combination interferes with communication of the message, including blocking or distracting the receiver's ability to decode the message and effectively extract its meaning. Noise includes environmental and technical interference. Noise can also include cultural, social, and psychological interference with message communication. Semantic noise, for example, refers to slang, jargon, colloquialisms, specialized language, even

Page 6 of 9

2018

accents—linguistic influences on reception of the message. Environmental or physical (external) noise refers to sounds outside the receiver, such as a car horn. Psychological noises refers to a communicator’s prejudices, biases, and predispositions toward the message or others in the communication process. Physiological noises involve biological influences on the process, such as hunger and fatigue.

Environment: The environment within which communication occurs has an impact upon both the sender's capabilities of transmitting meaningful messages and the receiver's ability to extract meaning from the messages received. The nature of the environment within which a face-to-face meeting occurs affects the quality of the communication among the participants. The environment within which an individual is reading a book or magazine certainly affects their ability to absorb and understand the content. The very nature of the communication "environment" of the Internet has a profound effect on the meaning of the content of Web sites and e-mails.

Shared Meaning: The result of successful communication is shared meaning, which is the effective access and interpretation of the sender's message by the receiver whereby the sender's meaning is now "shared" by and with the receiver. Shared meaning is not necessarily measured by the message content being fully shared but in practice is a continuum of message content understanding between sender and receiver (Crable, 2009).

Message Management: Message management refers to the handling of all of the activities, mediums, and abilities required to create and transmit messages between sender and receiver where the result is shared meaning.

There are many reasons for communication failure. In today's complicated and technologically complex world of endless multiples of messages and mediums, effective communication is actually becoming more difficult and fragile. On the one hand, if anything can go wrong with communication, it will. On the other hand, our capabilities and venues for effective communication are expanding exponentially. These models suggest communication fails in the following ways:

Inadequate Information: The problem of inadequate communication is the withholding or blocking of enough of the message content resulting in not enough information getting through to the receiver to enable the extracting of usable meaning from the message.

Information Overload: Failure of communication from information overload results from the sender being bombarded with so much information from so many simultaneous sources, that it becomes problematic or impossible to extract meaning from an individual sender or source.

Poor Information Quality: Closely related to information overload is the relative poor quality of information, or negative qualitative content. When information is poorly organized, filled with

Five Myths about Communication

 Everyone is an expert in

communication.

 Communication can solve any

problem.

 Communication can break down.

 Communication is inherently

good.

 More communication is always

better.

Page 7 of 9

2018

misleading, erroneous, or ambiguous components, the message can degrade to a point where the meaning of the message is unusable or lost by the receiver.

Inappropriate or Bad Timing: It is not enough for the receiver to receive the message and be able to decode enough of it to extract its meaning. The message timing has to be such that the receiver is able to make use of the information and meaning that is being communicated. The receiver can receive a message too early, too late, or in parallel to other conflicting messages, all of which can make the meaning unusable.

Ineffective or Insufficient Feedback: Almost all active communication requires feedback from the receiver back to the sender that enables the receiver to judge if the message's meaning is being extracted by the receiver as the sender intends it to be understood. Lacking feedback, the sender is forced to either keep attempting to resend the message, or abandon the attempt at communication. Even venues that appear to be passive, such as broadcast radio and television or magazines and newspapers, spend great amounts of time and money in assessing the impact of their communication on targeted audiences through audience research activities.

Channel Problems: These problems occur when senders incorrectly use specific communication mediums, are not adequately skilled in the use of mediums they are using, or are selecting the wrong medium for a particular type of message. Some communication channels are self-limiting, which can sometimes result in communication problems. Even with the growth and proliferation of e-mail in our society, the lack of nonverbal communication components in e-mail messages often leads to misinterpreting message meaning. These types of communication problems do not occur as easily in face-to-face communication.

Incompetent Communication: Complex communication environments and venues require both sender and receiver to have the skills to use the communication tools competently for affective message transmission. Incompetent usage of communication technology, mediums, and venues by the sender results in frustration of the receiver, which quickly causes the receiver to relegate the message to the category of noise.

Linguistic and Cultural Barriers: The demands of international and multicultural communication at the dawning of the twenty-first century make an awareness of cultural and language barriers to communication very important. English is the dominant language of global communication, the Internet, and international business. However, this can often create communication problems because native English speakers often assume that their message meaning is being correctly extracted when it is, in fact, being misinterpreted. Sensitivity to diverse cultures and culturally divergent ways of communicating is a skill that a global communication environment requires.

Summary

An important point to remember when applying any communication theory to practical real-world situations is that human communication always consists of a combination or series of communication components at any given time. These various communication components actually operate as what some theorists are now calling coupled systems. In practice, all human communication contains many

Page 8 of 9

2018

coupled systems that create points of integration, where various components of communication join and operate as integrated components for a given period of time.

To demonstrate the reality of coupled systems human communication, let us consider our director of public relations again. Imagine she is at a staff meeting this time. It has been called to introduce the PR staff to a new product that is about to enter its initial marketing launch. The following is an outline of the communication components that would be operating as coupled systems at this meeting:

 Verbal communication between the participants in the meeting, as well as other participants who might be "attending" the meeting via conference telephone and video conferencing technology.

 Nonverbal communication between all participants who have the capability to see each other, either directly or via video conferencing technology.

 Written communication in the form of reports and charts being physically distributed to participants in the conference room, and via digital images being displayed in the conference room and transmitted to those participants attending the meeting via electronic channels. Also in notes that might be passed between participants in the meeting room, and e-mail messages between all participants via the Internet.

 Image communication of photographic, graphic, and video images of the product under discussion being displayed to the participants in the conference room via video screens, and simultaneously being transmitted in "real time" to participants attending the meeting electronically.

To fully understand the communications occurring in this scenario, we must not only analyze each within a communication model, such as Shannon and Weaver’s, but also the impact of the different forms of simultaneous communication occurring as coupled systems. Communication is dynamic, continuous, irreversible, interactive, and contextual. It is dynamic because the process is constantly in a state of change. As the attitudes, expectations, feelings, and emotions of the participants change, the nature of their communication changes. Communication is continuous because it never stops. We are always processing ideas and information through our dreams, thoughts, and expressions. So long as our brains are active, we are communicating—even as we sleep. Communication is irreversible. Once sent, no amount of counter messages, denials, or apologies can undo its effect. Communication is interactive. We react to our own speech and actions, and then we react to those reactions, and others do too. A cycle of action and reaction is never ending. Finally, communication is contextual. The complexity of communication requires us to develop the awareness and skills to adapt to the setting (both where it is taking place and the attitudes of those who are in the environment), the people who are present, and the purpose of the communication. It is the integration of all of the communication components, along with the effect of the coupling of components and the parallel operating mediums or channels that are carrying the information, which together make up the transmission of shared meaning.

Keywords

Models of communication, linear, interactional, transactional, communication process, noise, channels,

intentionality, communication competence

References

Page 9 of 9

2018

Barnlund, D. C. (1978). A transactional model of communication. In. C. D. Mortensen and K. K. Sereno

(Eds.), Foundations of communication. New York, NY: Harper and Row.

Berelson, B., & Steiner, G. (1964). Human behavior: An inventory of scientific finds. New York, NY:

Harcourt, Brace, and World.

Crable, B. (2009). Meaning theories. In S. W. Littlejohn and K. A. Foss (Eds.), Encyclopedia of

communication theory (Vol. 1, pp. 619-623). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Dale, E. (1969). Audiovisual methods in teaching (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Dryden Press.

Frymier, A. B., & Nadler, M. K. (2006). Persuasion: Integrating theory, research, and practice. Dubuque,

IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Lasswell, H. (1948). The structure and function of communication in society. In L. Bryson (Ed.), The

communication of ideas. New York, NY: Harper and Row.

Nicotera, A. M. Constitutive view of communication. In S. W. Littlejohn and K. A. Foss

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of communication theory (Vol. 1, pp. 176-179). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Ruben, B. D. (1984). Communication and human behavior. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing.

Schramm, W. (1954). How communication works. In W. Schramm (Ed.), The process and effects of mass

communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Shannon, C., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematics of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois

Press.

Theodorson, S., & Theodorson, A. (1969). A modern dictionary of sociology. New York, NY: Cassell.

©2018 University of Maryland University College