Understanding communication research methods stephen m croucher, daniel cronn mills, routledge, 2019 scan

Understanding Communication Research Methods Using an engaging how-to approach that draws from scholarship, real life, and popular culture, this textbook offers students practical reasons why they should care about research methods and a guide to actually conducting research themselves Examining quantitative, qualitative, and critical research methods, this new edition helps undergraduate students better grasp the theoretical and practical uses of method by clearly illustrating practical applications The book features all the main research traditions within communication, including online methods, and provides level-appropriate applications of the methods through theoretical and practical examples and exercises, including new sample student papers that demonstrate research methods in action Stephen M Croucher is a Professor and the Head of the School of Communication, Journalism, and Marketing at Massey University, New Zealand He serves on the editorial boards of more than ten journals, and served as the editor of the Journal of Intercultural Communication Research (2010–2019) and Speaker & Gavel (2010–2015) He has held and holds various leadership positions in the National Communication Association, International Communication Association, the World Communication Association, and also holds professorships at the University of Jyväskylä, Universidade Aberta, and the Universidade de Coimbra Daniel Cronn-Mills is a Professor and Distinguished Faculty Scholar at Minnesota State University, Mankato, USA Dan has authored and co-authored three books, five book chapters, and a stack of journal articles He served for more than a decade as the editor of Speaker & Gavel (1997–2010) and has served on the editorial board of eleven scholarly journals Dan has served in numerous leadership roles at the local and national levels, including the National Communication Association, the American Forensic Association, and the Communication and Theatre Association of Minnesota Taylor & Francis Taylor & Francis Group http:/taylorandfrancis.com UNDERSTANDING COMMUNICATION RESEARCH METHODS A Theoretical and Practical Approach Second Edition Stephen M Croucher & Daniel Cronn-Mills ROUTLEDGE Routledge Taylor & Francis Group NEW YORK AND LONDON Second edition published 2019 by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 and by Routledge Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2019 Taylor & Francis The right of Stephen M Croucher and Daniel Cronn-Mills to be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 All rights reserved No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe First edition published 2015 by Routledge Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Names: Croucher, Stephen Michael, 1978– author | Cronn-Mills, Daniel, author Title: Understanding communication research methods : a theoretical and practical approach / Stephen M Croucher & Daniel Cronn-Mills Description: Second edition | New York : Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2019 Identifiers: LCCN 2018011410| ISBN 9781138052659 (hbk) | ISBN 9781138052680 (pbk) | ISBN 9781315167664 (ebk) Subjects: LCSH: Communication—Research—Methodology Classification: LCC P91.3 C73 2019 | DDC 302.2/0721—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018011410 ISBN: 978-1-138-05265-9 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-138-05268-0 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-16766-4 (ebk) Typeset in Interstate by Florence Production Ltd, Stoodleigh, Devon, UK Visit the companion website: www.routledge.com/cw/9781138052680 Contents PART Introduction to Research and Research Paradigms Introduction and Ethics The Social Scientific Paradigm The Interpretive Paradigm The Critical Paradigm (by JAMES P DIMOCK) PART Research Design Data Evaluating Research – Warrants Hypotheses and Research Questions PART Research Methods 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Ethnography Interviewing Focus Groups Social Media and Research Methods (by HEATHER MCINTOSH) Content Analysis – Qualitative Content Analysis – Quantitative Discourse Analysis (by MARGARETHE OLBERTZ-SIITONEN) Surveys Descriptive Statistics Inferential Statistics Mixed Methods (by MALYNNDA JOHNSON) Rhetorical Criticism Critical/Cultural Methods (by JAMES P DIMOCK) Index 19 29 37 49 51 65 77 91 93 113 129 147 161 175 191 205 227 247 275 291 307 317 Taylor & Francis Taylor & Francis Group http:/taylorandfrancis.com Part Introduction to Research and Research Paradigms Taylor & Francis Taylor & Francis Group http:/taylorandfrancis.com Introduction and Ethics Chapter Outline • Welcome to Communication Research Methods • Why Take Research Methods? • A Few Key Terms to Start the Course • Research Ethics • Outline of the Textbook • Summary • Key Steps & Questions to Consider • Discussion Questions • Key Terms Welcome to Communication Research Methods Sir Edmund Hillary (1919–2008), a New Zealand-born explorer, mountain climber, and philanthropist, is best known for being the first confirmed person to reach the summit of Mt Everest in 1953 Sir Edmund sought out new areas of exploration and challenges, and also devoted a great deal of his efforts to building schools, hospitals, and other facilities for the Sherpa people of Nepal He was known for believing that all people are capable of great things In fact, he is known for saying, “I have discovered that even the mediocre can have adventures and even the fearful can achieve.” Stephen and Dan (the authors of your textbook) agree with this sentiment when thinking about research methods All too often we see students who not naturally take to research and, for a variety of reasons, show a great deal of resistance to it Fear is natural with anything However, we have seen all kinds of students excel in communication research, including those who did not think they would ever “reach the summit.” The key is to look at learning research methods, as corny as it may sound, as a journey You will confront challenges, face frustrations, celebrate victories, and possibly experience some losses Yet, in the end, we can all achieve and enjoy the journey Look around the room next time your class meets and you will see other people just like you You are not alone in the journey Enjoy the trip—let your textbook serve as your roadmap and your teacher as your Sherpa guide As you start your research journey, we should first establish a few good reasons to study communication research methods, second, identify key terms to help you progress quickly as a communication scholar, third, 310 Critical/Cultural Methods facilities, and the training to seek the truth lying hidden behind the veil of distortion and misrepresentation, ideology, and class interest through which the events of current history are presented to us (p 60) Cloud (1994) argues, along the same lines, that the task of a cultural critique is “to unmask the shared illusions of a society as ideas promulgated by and serving the interests of the ruling class, or those who control the production and distribution of material goods” (p 145) Ideology is a false consciousness, a screen which separates us from the reality of the human condition The better we can see and understand the relations of production and understand the workings of power, the more able we are to resist them Thus, the role of the critic is not to lead the fight for change but to participate in it using his or her understanding of communication to support the struggle for change Like Marxist critics, postmodernists are concerned with power and praxis Their concern differs from Marxists The postmodernist critic has no specific vision of what society without oppression may look like or if one is even possible Marxism attempts to construct a basis upon which a socialist society can be built Postmodernism, on the other hand, is deconstructionist and seeks to deconstruct the systems and forms of oppression (Foucault, 2006) In his work on “critical rhetoric,” McKerrow (1989) offers one of the best explanations of what a critical theorist does The critic has two tasks The first is the critique of domination, or the “demystifying [of] the conditions of domination,” and the critique of freedom is “a selfreflexive critique that turns back on itself even as it promotes a realignment in the forces of power that construct social relations” (McKerrow, 1989, p 91) Critical communication scholars look at the practices of domination from a variety of perspectives while at the same time turning criticism back on itself, continually inviting more criticism rather than declaring the final judgment has been passed on a subject Summary This final chapter in the textbook introduced you to how to conduct a critical/cultural critique As you can see from the chapter, you can approach a critical/cultural critique in numerous ways The key is to pick one which is a good fit for your research point of view or theoretical stance We hope after reading the chapter, you feel a little more prepared to carry out this type of study On a final note, think back to the introduction and the story of Sir Edmund Hillary and remember “even the fearful can achieve.” You have finished the textbook , which is one phase of your research methods journey We wish you all the best in your future research and scholarly endeavors Stephen and Dan look forward to seeing your work presented at conferences and published in journals Key Steps & Questions to Consider Identify the artifact or text to be criticized Describe the text or artifact so the readers can get a full understanding of it Justify why the text is worthy of criticism Explain the purpose and what you hope to accomplish through the critique Determine if you are engaging in extrinsic criticism or an intrinsic criticism Critical/Cultural Methods 311 Activities Let’s return to our activity from Chapter on the Critical Paradigm Pull out the activity notes from your backpack/notebook/computer/tablet from the Chapter activity The notes may help streamline this activity Divide everyone into groups Give each group a different issue The issues are slavery, prohibition, women’s suffrage, same-sex marriage, and child sex abuse by priests Each group will prepare a brief presentation using the process of critique described in this chapter Discussion Questions What similarities and differences you see between rhetorical criticism (Chapter 19) and the critical process (Chapter 20)? How will your research claims about truth and reality be different between an experimental study and a critical/cultural study? Think about what is happening in current politics, sports, or the arts What events may be relevant for critique? Key Terms Artifact Context Critique Deconstructionist Description Extrinsic Criticism Impressionistic Intrinsic Criticism Justification Normative Standard Praxis Reflexive Symbolic Text References Chomsky, N (1987) The responsibility of intellectuals In J Peck (Ed.), The Chomsky reader (pp 59–82) New York: Pantheon Press Cloud, D (1994) The materiality of discourse as oxymoron: A challenge to critical rhetoric Western Journal of Communication, 58, 141–163 Dimock, J P., Cronn-Mills, D., & Cronn-Mills, K (2013) Climbing Brokeback Mountain: A wildernesscivilization dialectic reading Relevant Rhetoric: A Journal of Rhetorical Studies, 4, 1–21 Available http://relevantrhetoric.com/BrokebackMountain.pdf Foucault, M (2006) Truth and power In The Chomsky-Foucault debate on human nature (pp 140–171) New York: The New Press Marx, K (1978) Capital, volume one In R C Tucker (Ed.), The Marx-Engels reader (2nd ed.) (pp 294–438) New York: Norton Marx, K & Engels, F (1964) The communist manifesto New York: Washington Square Books McKerrow, R (1989) Critical rhetoric: Theory and praxis Communication Monographs, 56, 91–111 312 Critical/Cultural Methods Undergraduate Critical/Cultural Paper The Ethics of Pimpthisbum.com Suzanne Lumberg White “When Sean Dolan saw signs being carried by homeless people,” he didn’t see a economic crisis According Sabo (2009) “[H]e saw an opportunity” (para 1) Sean and his father, Kevin, had approached a homeless man named Tim Edwards with a proposition Exchange his usual “will work for food” sign with one reading “Pimpthisbum.com.” For his efforts, the Dolan’s would then pay him $100 a day So a website dedicated to helping the homeless was born Visitors to the website can buy him anything from a cheeseburger to laser hair removal to a college education Edwards joked to CBS (2009) that he is “the world’s first online bum” (para 10) But, as Cullers (2009) has pointed out, “some homeless advocates are upset over the word ‘pimp’ and are alleging that Tim is being exploited” (para 1) The Dolan’s website has gotten the attention they wanted Attention for their advertising firm They have made the front pages of newspapers all over the world and appeared on nearly every single major news network The Dolan’s have achieved their ultimate goal of proving that they can sell anything So if Pimpthisbum.com is able to raise money to help the homeless, isn’t a little bit of exploitation OK? While some have argued that pimpthisbum raises our awareness of the homeless and puts a needed face on the issue, I argue, based on the critical ethical theory of German philosopher Jurgen Habermas,that the Dolan’s have engaged in unethical communication In the first two paragraphs, Suzanne does two things First, she gives her readers a description of the text she has selected for criticism Her description provides readers with enough information about the text to be able to understand what is going on without getting bogged down in unnecessary details Second, Suzanne justifies the text as an object of criticism On the one hand, the website is trying to something about the problem of homelessness, but on the other hand, Suzanne questions the ethics of this sort of appeal Habermas’s philosophy of ethical communication is, to quote Burleson and Kline (1979) “formidable,” “obscure,” “dense and technical” but Habermas is also one of the most important social philosophers of the 20th century and one of the most important of the critical theorists Because his work concerns both communication and ethics, his framework is appropriate to use in critiquing pimpthisbum.com For Habermas, communication is unethical when it undermines what he called the lifeworld and, according to Foss, Foss and Trapp (2001) the lifeworld entails communicative action Habermas asserted that when communicative action is blocked, unethical impersonal systems take over Marmura (2008) points out that while all complex societies require some level of systems, “social inequality and ultimately social pathology originate” when those systems become “unmoored from the interests and values of the communities” (p 4) In order to prevent Critical/Cultural Methods 313 the colonization of the lifeworld by systems, we need to engage in communicative rationality which requires the use of constetives, regulatives, and avowels First, ethical communicative action requires the use of regulatives Regulative utterances negotiate the relationship between the people So when I ask you if you’re ready for me to speak, it says something about what I think of the relationship between us These regulatives result is mutual understanding Unethical communication systematizes the relationship, defining it through noncommunicative means like power differences and structures Second, ethical communication must involve avowels Avowels are speech acts relative to our feelings, affections, and intentions Foss, Foss, and Trapp (2001) explain that avowels don’t refer to the world around us or to our relationships with others but reflect our internal states and the validity of an avowal is determined by “the sincerity of the stated intentions” (p 259) Unethical communication, then, involves the use of dishonest or insincere avowals Finally Habermas (1979) claimed that in order to present an ethical message, the author must present constatives Habermas says in Communication and the Evolution of Society that constatives “imply an unmistakeable validity claim, a truth claim” (as cited in Foss, Foss, & Trapp, 2001, p 257) For instance, this round has five people These statements that can be validated protect the world from manipulative systems Unethical communication occurs when regulative are inappropriate, when avowals are insincere, and constatives are not valid Now that we understand Habermas’s criteria for ethical action we can now apply those criteria to pimpthisbum.com Suzanne does a good job of explaining a complicated critical theorist like Habermas, although some might argue she has oversimplified his work Others will see her explanation as appropriate for undergraduate research She does make an effort to justify using Habermas’ theory of ethical communication as a normative standard by which to evaluate the ethics of a communicative act Habermas is an important figure in critical theory Suzanne could spend more time developing a review of Habermas’ work and could strengthen her paper if she used more primary sources instead of relying on secondary sources First, unethical messages, involve inappropriate regulatives, or a distorted understanding of relationships It is important to bear in mind the purposes of the relationship between Edwards and the Dolans It is about raising the profile of the Dolan’s marketing firm By making Tim popular, they say, “we can make anything popular.” And pimpthisbum is riddled with links to major media outlets that have covered the story But what this does is to commodify Edwards, to turn him into an object to be marketed and sold for the Dolan’s profit Thus the relationship between them is inappropriate and pimpthisbum is unethical according this criteria Second, a rhetor must use sincere avowels In public statements, Sean and Kevin Dolan and Ascendgence Tactical Online Marketing, repeatedly depict pimpthisbum as a way to help the homeless For example, Edwards has said, “The whole idea of this project is to get people off the street” (as cited in CBS, 2009, p 10) But we already know that isn’t true The whole idea is to raise the public profile of the Dolan’s and their advertising firm, Ascendgence More importantly, it undermines our ability to treat Edwards’s avowals as valid Edwards is being paid by the Dolans We simply cannot assume that he is any more sincere than a $100 a day 314 Critical/Cultural Methods buys If we can’t accept Tim’s avowals at face value, then we have to conclude that pimpthisbum is unethical according to yet another of Habermas’s criteria Finally, in order to present an ethical message, the author must first present constatives- or asserted truth In Habermas’s theory of ethics, constatives are the ultimate check on systemic colonization of the lifeworld because they can be verified We can hold statements up to reality and see if they line up Mamura points out that when unchecked, “bureaucratic standards of rationality or the profit orientation of commercial enterprise” the “ability to question, or even recognize the rules which govern [our] actions [are] greatly diminished.” By putting an altruistic mask on an entirely business motive, the Dolan’s violate the third and final of Habermas’s criteria Now that we have examined how pimpthisbum.com fails to fulfill Habermas’s model, we must return to our research question: So if Pimpthisbum.com is able to bring attention to the problem and raise money to help the homeless, isn’t a little bit of exploitation OK? And to answer this question we will look to two implications First because Edwards’s voice is constrained by commercial interests and second because Edwards actually obscures the face of homeless First, Edwards’s ability to function as voice for the homeless is distorted by commercial interests Habermas’s Edwards is repeated described as funny, upbeat, educated, and does not blame others for being homeless This explanation of homelessness is great .if you are ultimately not interested in dealing with the problem of homelessness A report available at the website for the National Coalition for the Homeless (2009) demonstrates a clear link between rising homelessness and the foreclosure crisis Certainly, some people are homeless because they made bad choices many are victims of mental illness, domestic violence, lack of affordable housing and other factors beyond their control If the faces of tragic circumstances don’t sell products, this helpful exploitation will not even presented Finally, positioning Edwards as ‘the face’ of homelessness obscures important dimensions of the problem The Dolan’s have made a “homeless man the symbol of all homelessness” (Daily Write) But Edwards isn’t a poster-child for homelessness the way Rosa Parks came to symbolized segregation or Matthew Shepherd became a face for victims of hate crimes The difference is rather clear: ‘the symbol of homelessness’ in America should look like the homelessness in America According Pimpthisbum’s (n.d.) website, they “but we humanized homelessness by focusing on a particular individual” (para 4) This particular homeless individual, however, looks and sounds a lot more like the demographic the Dolan’s are interested in than the typical homeless person According to the National Coalition for the Homeless (2007), 51% of the homeless population are, like Tim Edwards, male But the homeless are far less likely to be white, like Edwards The fastest growing segment of the homeless population is families with children Edwards, an educated and articulate white man, is not the face of homelessness and doesn’t give the homeless a voice Instead his image obscures the voices of millions of people It isn’t just that the Dolan’s are capitalists It is that they let their interest in system of profit obscure important issues and questions about an important problem that is getting worse Suzanne applies extrinsic standards in her evaluation, putting her scholarship at the Marxist end of the critical spectrum Second, she uses actual statistics about homelessness in the United States to point out the conflict between the image of homelessness created by the Dolans and the reality of homelessness The Dolans’ discourse contributes to a false consciousness which Suzanne’s critique attempts to correct Critical/Cultural Methods 315 Although, the Dolans seemed to make a difference, their help has proven to be unethical, and potentially harmful to our future The goal of my paper is to not just engage in a criticism of communication but to be a critical communicatior just as Habermas engages in communicative action Buying someone a virtual cheeseburger does not ethically confront the issue of the homeless To put it simply, it is not about pimping but rather caring and communicating and that is something we can all In the conclusion, we get a clear indication of praxis, and discover that Suzanne’s motives are not just to critique pimpthisbum.com, but to confront the problem of homelessness References Burleson, B R., & Kline, S L (1979) Habermas’ theory of communication: A critical explication The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 412 – 428 CBS (2009, March 9) Is it right to pimp this bum? Retrieved from cbsnews.com Cullers, R (2009, March 27) Pimp this bum: Salvation or exploitation Adweek Retrieved http://www adweek.com/adfreak/pimp-bum-salvation-or-exploitation-14427 Foss, S K., Foss, K A., & Trapp, R (2001) Readings in contemporary rhetoric Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press Marmura, S (2008) Surveillance, mass vulture and the subject: A systems/lifeworld approach Democratic Communiqué, 22(2), – 18 National Coalition for the Homeless (2007) Who is homeless? Retrieved from http://www.nationalhomeless org/publications/facts/Whois.pdf National Coalition for the Homeless (2009) Foreclosure to Homelessness 2009: The forgotten victims of the subprime crisis Retrieved from http://www.nationalhomeless.org/advocacy/Foreclosureto Homelessness0609.pdf Pimp This Bum (n.d.) About the PTB project Retrieved from pimpthisbum.com Sabo, T (2009, March 26) PimpThisBum.com employs irony on homeless man’s behalf Retrieved from CNN.com Taylor & Francis Taylor & Francis Group http:/taylorandfrancis.com Index Page numbers in italic denote figures and in bold denote tables 95% rule 85 academic journals 198 access to communities 100 adequacy: in ethnographic research 102–3; in focus groups 138; in interviewing 119 advertising: CA of 173, 175–6, 178–9; focus groups in 129–30; on social media 149–50 aesthetic merit 70–1, 74 alpha significance level 85–6, 251 alternate forms 67, 73 Althusser, Louis 42–4 anonymity: in interviewing 127; in research ethics 10–11 ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) 248, 253; oneway 248, 254–8, 255, 256–7, 269; and regression 268; in student papers 222–5, 287–8 anthropology: cultural 94; data sources for 52 Arab Spring 150 archives, collecting data from 58 Argumentativeness Scale 68 Aristotle 6, 40, 293, 295 artifacts: critique of 307–8; for rhetorical criticism 293–300, 302–4; see also texts asymmetrical distributions 83, 235 audio recordings: and discourse analysis 195, 199; focus groups 133–6, 138; interviews 117, 123 autoethnography 94, 97–8, 103–4, 107–11 avowals 313–14 axial coding 164, 167–8 bar charts 228–31, 229–30, 239–40 baseball 227–8, 234, 239 bell curve 83, 87, 235, 248 Belmont Report 8–9, 16 beneficence 8–9, 154–5, 157 big data 150, 156 bimodal distributions 231, 236 Black Twitter 152 Blumer, Herbert George 32, 102 Boas, Franz 52 brainstorming 130, 137 Brexit referendum 247, 259, 265, 269 A Bug’s Life 37–8, 42 Bush, George W 45, 55, 248 CA (content analysis) 15, 32, 52, 161–2, 168, 175–6; for focus groups 136; qualitative 161–8, 170–4; quantitative 176–84, 186–8 CARM (Conversation Analytic Role-Play Method) 192 categorical-level data 60 categories: in CA 164–5, 168, 178–80; in discourse analysis 198; overlapping or unbalanced 211–12 causal hypotheses 80–1, 87–8 causality 74, 183, 263 cause-and-effect relationships 80–1 Central Limit Theorem 54, 83, 87, 248 central tendency, measures of 231–3, 244 change, openness to 100 cherry-picking 55 Chicago School 32 Chi-Square test 182–3, 248, 259–61, 269 Chomsky, Noam 309–10 Christianity, and ethics 6–7 Cicero, M Tullius 295 class 41–2 Clinton, Hillary 175, 178, 253, 261, 292 coding: in CA 164, 167–8, 180–3; in discourse analysis 198–9; of interview transcripts 122 coding frame 162–4 coding process 162–6, 182, 187 coding schedule 175, 180, 182–3 coding sheet 180–3 coercive power 38, 47 Cohen’s kappa 67, 182–3 coherence: in ethnographic research 102–3; in focus groups 138; in interviewing 119–20; meaningful 69, 71–2 communication, use of term communications, use of term 5–6 communications networks, ideological function of 43 communication studies, hermeneutic research in 31 The Communist Manifesto 309 comparative messages 179 Comte, Auguste 22, 31 concepts, in CA 165, 168 conceptual definitions 59–60, 63; powerful 66, 73 concurrent study design 279, 281 concurrent validity 69 318 Index confidence intervals 85 confidentiality: in interviewing 127; in research ethics 11–12, 155; in research evaluation 71 consistency, internal 67–8, 73 constatives 313–14 construct validity 69, 73 constructionist perspective 33 content meaning 163 content validity 69, 73 context unit of analysis 179–80, 183–4 contextual meanings 70, 163 continuous data 60, 63, 229, 239 contributions, significant 69, 71–4 control, in scientific method 21 convenience sampling 55–6, 63 conventional qualitative content analysis 162–3, 168 convergence, in social media 149 Convergent Parallel study 280–1 conversation analysis 193, 197, 203 Cooley, Charles Horton 32 correlation 251, 259, 261–9, 265; in undergraduate papers 222–3, 271–4 credibility: of research 69–71, 74; of researcher 102–3, 119, 138, 163 criterion-related validity 68–9, 73 critical analysis 4, 52, 107 critical/cultural paradigm 19–20, 37–47; and ethnography 96; evaluating research in 71–4; and focus groups 130; and generalizability 54, 57; and mixed methods 276; see also critique critical discourse analysis 193 critical ethnography 98 critical theorists see critical/cultural paradigm critical thinking 4, 151 criticism, and critique 307 criticism-by-whim 294 critique 39, 47, 307–11; autoethnography as 107; evaluation of 71–4; undergraduate paper 312–15 cross-sectional design 214–15 crowdsourcing 153 cultural identity theory 34 cultural institutions 44 curvilinear relationship 262, 263 cyberstalking and cyberbullying 151, 155 DA see discourse analysis data 51, 62; visual representations of 228–9; see also big data data analysis: for ethnography 102; and interviewing 121–2; qualitative 121, 136, 162, 165–8 (see also CA); quantitative 182–3; for surveys 215–17 data collection: for CA 163–5, 177–8; costs of 136; for discourse analysis 195, 199; ethnographic 99–102; from interviews 117, 125; mixed methods 276, 279, 281, 283, 287; quantity of 242; settings for 58–9, 63 data distributions: non-overlapping 249; shapes of 235–40; symmetry of 83–4 data entry, errors in 67 data sampling see sampling data saturation point 101, 117–18, 123 data storage 214 debriefing 8–9, 12–13, 16, 136 deception, avoiding 71 deductive content analysis 179, 184 deductive research 208, 217 degrees of freedom 251 dependent variable 87; definition 78; and inferential statistics 248–9, 252, 254, 258, 265–8 descriptive claims 97–8, 118, 130 descriptive statistics 227–8, 239–40, 255, 264; undergraduate paper 241–5 determinism 24, 34, 44 dialectic 39, 47 digital inequalities 156–7 Dilthey, Wilhelm 31 directional hypotheses 79–80, 87–8, 263, 270 directive qualitative content analysis 163, 168 disclosure, Knapp’s stages of 107 discourse: in postmodernism 45, 47; reasons to study 191–2 discourse analysis 15, 136, 191–2, 199; conducting 198–9; defined 192–4; methods and data 193, 194–5; undergraduate paper on 202–4 discursive formations 46 discussion guide 134–8 division of labor 41 double-barreled questions 209, 211 double negatives 209, 211, 217 doxxing 155 dramaturgy 297–8 Durga Puja 113–14, 118, 121–2 Durkheim, Émile 22, 31, 41 educational institutions 43 effect size 255, 259 ello 149 emancipation 72–4 embedded study designs 280 emergent themes 104, 123 emic research 116 empirical generalizations 20–1 empiricism 21, 26, 30, 66 Engels, Frederick 43 EOC (ethnography of communication) 94–8, 102–3 EOS (ethnography of speaking) 94–8, 102–3 error: distributions of 83–5; types of 67 Eta-squared 255, 258–9 ethical communication 312–13 ethics 16; in discourse analysis 195; and research evaluation 69, 71–2; and science 7–8; use of term 6; see also research ethics ethnography 32, 93–4, 103–4; approaches to 94–7; claims in 97–8; of communication see EOC; credibility in 70; data sources for 52, 99–102; defined 94; and social media 153; of speaking see EOS; warrants for 102; see also autoethnography ethos, in rhetoric 295–6, 299 etic research 122 evaluating research 65–73 Index 319 evaluative claims 98, 118 examples, coherent 104, 123 experience: in interviewing 119–20; of researcher 103 explanations, evaluation of 25, 34 Explanatory Sequential study 280 explicit content 162 explicit knowledge 94 Exploratory Sequential study 280 extrinsic criticism 308, 310, 314 Facebook 148–53; CA of 176–8; impact on emotions 147; relational development on 79 Facetime 153 faithfulness 103, 119–20 false consciousness 43–5, 310, 314 falsification 21–2 fantasy theme analysis 297–8, 300 feminist criticism 298 the field 58–9, 63 field notes 52, 101, 103–4, 119–20, 122, 165, 195 Finnish saunas 93–8, 100–3 focus group advertising 138 focus groups 32, 129–30, 137–8; advantages and limitations 136–7; conducting 135–6; and discourse analysis 194; preparing for 131–4; size of 145; undergraduate paper on 140–5; uses of 130–1 forcefulness, in qualitative data 166, 168 formal interviews 130 Foucault, Michel 45–6 free will 24, 34 F-test 253, 269 functional theory 179, 182 Gadamer, Hans-Georg 31 Games Howell test 254, 258 gay marriage 291, 294–8, 300 gay rodeos 52, 64 generalizability 54, 57–8, 72, 216, 283 generalizations 21, 34, 54, 62–3, 66; see also inferences Good Housekeeping 186–8 Google bombing 155 Google Forms 154 Google Hangouts 153 grounded theory 14; and CA 163, 166–8; and ethnographic data 102; and focus groups 136; and interviewing 121–3 group effect 130, 132, 136–7 group interviews 130, 137 groupthink 285, 288 Habermas, Jürgen 31, 312–15 hashtag campaigns 151–2, 156–7 Hegel, G W 31, 38–40, 44, 47, 309 Heidegger, Martin 31–2 hermeneutics 31, 33, 35 heuristic contribution 71, 74 Hillary, Edmund 3, 310 histograms 229–31, 235–6, 240 human nature 22, 24, 26, 33–4 Human Subject Review Board 10, 104, 123, 214, 283 Hume, David 20, 22 Husserl, Edmund 31–2 hypotheses 77–8, 87; elements of good 81, 88; and interpretive paradigm 30; in scientific method 21–2, 26; for surveys 208; testing 82–6; types of 78–81 Ideological State Apparatus 43–4, 47 ideology, in critical theory 38, 42–3, 45, 47, 71, 74, 310 implicit knowledge 94 incentives for participation 132, 135–7 independent variable 87; definition 78 independent variables, and inferential statistics 248–9, 252, 254, 258, 265–9 inductive content analysis 179, 184 inductive reasoning 22 inferences 54 inferential statistics 247–8, 269; undergraduate paper on 271–4 influence 38, 47 informal interviews 130 information: evaluating 4; shared 155 informed consent 9–11, 16; for focus groups 134; in research evaluation 71; and social media 154 inoculation theory 22, 24, 130 Instagram 148, 152 instrument confusion 67, 73 integrated data 279, 281 intercoder reliability 67, 73, 182–4 interpretive claims 98, 118, 130 interpretive methods, merging 71 interpretive paradigm 19, 29–30, 35–6; and autoethnography 107; and critical theory 72; defined 30; development of 31; and ethnography 96; evaluating research in 69–71, 73; and focus groups 130; and generalizability 54, 57; and interviewing 119–21; key approaches 31–2; key questions for 33–5 interval-level questions 209–10, 212, 221 interval variables 60–3, 209, 249, 254, 263, 266 interviewees, standards for selecting 125 interviewing 14, 113–14, 122–3; approaches to 114–15, 116, 117; claims in 118; communicationfocused 4; data from 52–3, 117–18, 121–2; defined 114; and discourse analysis 194; in ethnography 99–100, 102–4; and focus groups 130; mediated 153; undergraduate paper 125–8; warrants for 119–21 intrinsic criticism 308–10 invention, in rhetoric 295, 302 IRBs (Institutional Review Boards) 8–9, 16; and debriefing 13; in ethnography 104; and interviewing 123; requirements for informed consent 11; and study design 280, 283; and survey data 214 Islam, ethics in 6–7 jargon 9, 210, 217 journalism 117–18 justice: and ethics 6–7; in research ethics 8–9 320 Index Kendall’s tau-b 270 key terms, defining 59; see also conceptual definitions keywords 154, 161, 166, 195, 198 knowledge: cultural 94; and power 45–6 knowledge claims, good or bad 25, 34 Krippendorf’s alpha 67, 182–3 kurtosis 235–6, 238, 239–40, 266 the lab 59, 63 labor, in Marxism 40–2, 47, 309 Laswell, Harold 176, 183 latent analysis 163, 168 latent content 162, 176 leading questions 211 legitimate power 38, 47 leptokurtic distribution 236, 238, 239 Levene’s test for equality 252–3 lifeworld 312–14 Likert scale 60–1, 63, 209–10, 221 literature: hypotheses based on 81; and research questions 82 literature review 82, 140–1, 165 Locke, John logos, in rhetoric 295–6, 299 longitudinal design 214–15 Lyotard, Jean-Franỗois 45 Marx, Karl 405, 47, 72, 307, 309 Marxism 40–1, 43–4, 47; as extrinsic criticism 308–9, 314; feminist and PoC critiques of 73; and postmodernism 45–6, 309–10; and rhetorical criticism 298; and social science 72 The Matrix 51, 53, 58–9 Mead, George Herbert 32, 102 Mead, Margaret 52 mean 232–3, 239; comparisons of 258; and skew 236; in t-test 251, 253 mean differences, tests of 15, 248–61, 269 meanings, shared 95, 102 measurement: levels of 60, 62–3, 210; reliability 66–7, 73 media frames 285, 287 median 231–3, 239 medical interviews 115 memes 148, 151–2, 156–7 memory, canon of 295, 302, 304 Merleau-Ponty, Maurice 32 metadata 150, 152–3, 157 metanarratives 45–7 metaphor: in autoethnography 102; and CA 165 metaphor criticism 297, 300, 303 metaphoric analysis 136 method, use of term 6, 171 methodological contribution 71, 74 methodological power 66, 73 methodological rigor 70 methodology, use of term 6, 171 Milgram experiments 8, 12 Mill, John Stuart 7, 22 mixed methods 275–6, 281, 282, 283–4; conducting research 280–1; defined 276–7; planning study 277–9; undergraduate paper 285–9 modality 235–6 mode 239 moderators, for focus groups 129–30, 133–8, 194 moral relativism 72 multimodality 193, 200 multiphase study 279–80 narrative analysis 194, 199, 298 natural sciences, and social sciences 23, 33 negative correlation 262–4, 263, 266 neo-Aristotelian criticism 295–7, 299, 303–4 Newton, Isaac 20 noise 67 nominal-level questions 209, 211–12 nominal variables 60, 63, 249, 254, 259 non-directional hypotheses 79–80, 85, 87–8 non-parametric tests 259, 269–70 non-random sampling 55–6, 63, 117 nonverbal cues 153, 203 normal distribution 83, 87, 235, 249, 254, 259 normative standards 308 null hypothesis 84, 86–7; definition 78–9 objectivity 21, 25–6, 73 observations: as data 52, 63; ethnographic 116, 121 Observer’s Paradox 195 Occupy Movement 150, 152 October Sky 77, 80, 86 one-shot surveys see cross-sectional design one-tailed correlation 263, 270 online dating 161, 163–5, 168–9 online surveys 59, 63, 153–4, 156–7, 213, 215, 217–18, 220 open coding 164, 167–8 open-ended interviews 135–6, 165, 194 open-ended questions: in interviews 114; for qualitative self-reports 53; in surveys 209, 212 operationalization 59–60, 62 opinion polls 206–7, 247–8 ordinal-level questions 209–10 ordinal variables 60, 63, 248–9, 254 organizational dissent 177, 264, 266–7 Organizational Dissent Scale 61, 209 other-reports 53 outcome measure, primary 278 outline of the book 13–15 PACs 175, 178–9; see also Super-PACs paper-based surveys 212, 213, 215, 217 parametric tests 259 parsimony 66, 73 participant observation 99–100, 103–4, 153 pathos, in rhetoric 295–6, 300, 302–4 Pearson’s correlation 67, 182–3, 261–2, 264 percent agreement 67, 182–3 performed texts 52 persuasive power 38, 47 Pfau, Michael 19, 22, 24–6 phenomenology 31–5 pie charts 228, 229, 231, 239–40 pilot study 182–3 pilot tests, for surveys 208, 214 Index 321 plagiarism 13 platforms, in social media 149, 156 platykurtic distribution 238, 239 political participation 150, 265 polysemy 46–7 Popper, Karl 21–2, 25 popular criticism 293–4, 299 positive correlation 262, 264, 266 positivism 22, 72 post-hoc comparisons 255–8 postmodern criticism 47, 298, 308–10 postmodernism 44–5, 47; and Marxism 45–6, 309–10; and social science 72 Potter rule 194 power: and critical theory 37–8, 74, 307, 309–10; Marx on 43; in postmodernism 45–6; of research 66; traditional approaches to study of 38–9 practical contribution 71, 74 praxis 72, 309–10, 315 precision 66, 73 pre-determined themes 104, 123 predictions, developing 21 predictive validity 69 privacy: in research evaluation 71; for research participants 9, 11–12, 16, 155; and social media 150–1 production: means of 41–2, 45; relations of 42–3, 73, 310 propositions, theoretical 78 pseudonyms 127, 196 purposive sampling 55–6, 58, 63, 132 qualitative content analysis see CA qualitative research: data saturation in 117–18; evaluation criteria for 69; participant privacy in 12 qualitative self-reports 53 Qualtrics 59, 154, 213 quantitative content analysis see CA quantitative self-reports 53 quantitative studies: hypotheses in 78; participant privacy in 12; and sampling 55 questionnaires, self-administered see selfreports questions: multiple levels of 209–10; types to avoid 211 quota sampling 55–6, 63 R2 268 random human differences 67, 73 random sampling 54–7, 63, 83, 186 range 233, 240 rapport, building in interview process 115–16, 123 rapport with participants 100, 104 ratio variables 60, 62–3, 249, 253–4, 263, 266 ratio-level questions 209, 212 rationalism 30, 35, 38–9, 44–5, 66 realist ontology 23 reality: multiple 107, 119, 281; nature of 23, 33, 45 recording unit of analysis 179–80, 183 recordings see audio recordings; video recordings recurrence, in qualitative data 165–6, 168 reflexivity 72–4; in ethnography 101–2, 104; in interviewing 119, 121 reformist claims 97–8, 103, 118 regression, simple 265–9, 267 regulatives 313 relationships, expected 81, 87 relationships and prediction, tests of 15, 248, 261 reliability 65–7, 73; inter-coder 175, 180; measurements of 67–8; threats to 67, 73 religious institutions 43 repetition, in qualitative data 163, 166, 168 replication 25, 34, 131 Repressive State Apparatus 43, 47 research: purpose of 23, 33; use of term 6; value-free 25–6 research agenda 55, 131 research ethics 8–9; and human subjects 9–13; in school 13; and social media 154–7 research hypotheses 79–80, 86 research methods, reasons to study 3–5 research questions 77–8, 87–8; and CA 162–3; good 81–2, 88; and hypotheses 79–81; for surveys 208 research topics, worthy 69–70 researcher bias 85, 163 resonance 69–70, 72–4 respect for individuals 8–9 reward power 38, 47 rhetoric: critical 310; defined 293; five canons of 295, 299–300, 302–4; history of 292 rhetorical analysis 121 rhetorical criticism 52, 291–3, 299–300; and critique 311; defined 293–4; organizing 298–9; theoretical approaches 295–8; undergraduate paper on 302–5 rhetorical theories 292, 294–5 rhetorical vision 298 rigor, rich 69–71 sampling: advantages and disadvantages of techniques 57–8; for CA 178; difference between social science and interpretive paradigms 69, 73; in ethnography 104; and interviewing 54–6, 117, 123; for relationship tests 263, 266, 272 sampling error 85, 249, 254, 263 Sartre, Jean-Paul 32 Scheffé test 254–5, 269 Schultz, Alfred 32 scientific method 20–2, 30, 86 Scylla and Charybdis 72 Second Life 154 self-disclosure 107–11, 131 self-reflection 104, 123, 283; see also reflexivity self-reports: bias in 244; data from 53–4, 63; as structured interviews 115; surveys as 206–7, 216–17 semantic differential scales 60–1, 63 semi-structured interviews 100, 115–19 sender-receiver model sensitive populations 136 sensitive questions 212 sentences, declarative 81 322 Index sequential study design 279–81 Shelley, Mary significance, statistical 85–7, 255, 268 significant difference 86, 176, 251, 258, 261 Simmel, Georg 31 simple-random sampling 56–7, 63 sincerity 69–71, 73, 313 skew 84, 235–6, 237, 239 Skype 118, 153 slang 210, 217 Snapchat 148 snowball sampling 55–7, 63, 117, 287 social comparison theory 187–8 social constructionism 191, 193–4, 278 social context 31; membership in 103, 119–20, 125 social desirability bias 53, 216–17 Social Identity Theory 126 social interaction, in interpretivist paradigm 32–3 social media 147, 156–7; data collection via 195; defined 148; and discourse analysis 195; features of 148–9; participation in 149–50; political use of 265, 292, 297; privacy and surveillance on 150–1; as research site 151–2; as research tool 59, 132, 152–6; types of user 156; undergraduate paper on 285–9 social reality 191, 194, 199 social sciences: ethics in 8; and interpretive paradigm 30–1 social scientific paradigm 19–20; bias in 187; critical theory and 72; defined 20–2; development of 22; error in 83; evaluating research in 66–9; interviewing in 118; key questions underlying 23–6; and Marxism 44, 309; and mixed methods 276 Sophists 38 Soviet Union 44–5 SPCC (self-perceived communication competence) 59–60 SPEAKING Framework 95–6, 102, 104 Spearman’s rho 67, 182–3, 270, 272–3 speech events, naming 98 spoken texts 52 SPSS: and descriptive statistics 234, 239; inferential statistics in 249–53, 260, 264, 267; and quantitative analysis 182; and statistical significance 85; for survey data 215; and visual representations 231 standard deviation 84, 233–4, 240; in t-tests 251, 253 standard error 87, 251, 253, 268 standardization of questions 216–17 Stanford Prison Experiment the state, use of term 43 statistical analysis, and CA 162–3 statistical tests, for survey questions 208 stereotypes 25, 155, 241, 244 stratified random sampling 56, 63 structured interviews 114–15, 117 study designs 56, 280–1 study diagram 281, 282 subjective understanding 31 subjectivity, and research paradigms 21, 30, 35, 72, 74 substructure 42, 47 summative qualitative content analysis 163, 168 Super PACs 175 superstructure 42, 47 surveillance, and social media 150–1 survey instructions 213–14 SurveyMonkey 59, 115, 154, 213, 215, 218 surveys 205–6, 217; administering 214–15; advantages and disadvantages 216–17; creating 207–12; logistical concerns for 214; open-ended and closed-ended 53; types of 212–13; undergraduate paper on 220–5; uses of 206–7 symbolic convergence theory see fantasy theme analysis symbolic interactionism 31–5, 102 symbolic messages 52, 62 symbolic objects 308 symmetrical distributions 83, 235 symmetry 235 systematic random sampling 56, 63 tables, formatting of 243 tail of distribution 235–6 Teamsterville 52, 71, 98, 118–21 technological affordances 149 TED talks 123 television, primetime 177–8 testability 24, 81, 87 test-retest method 67, 73 texts: as data 52, 62; and discourse analysis 193–5; for rhetorical criticism see artifacts thematic analysis 165, 168, 179 themes: in CA 164–5, 168; identifying 144, 165, 198 theoretical coding 164, 168 theoretical contribution 71, 74 theoretical framework, for surveys 207–8, 217 theory: in scientific method 20–1; and social science 24, 26, 34; use of term thick description 34, 70; in ethnography 96, 102, 109–10; and interviews 117, 127 Tönnies, Ferdinand 31 training: in interviewing 119–20; of researcher 103 transcriptions: CA of 164–6; conventions of 196–7; in discourse analysis 195–9; of focus groups 136; of interviews 51, 99–100, 103–4, 121–3; software for 117, 133 transferability 70, 74 transformative study designs 280 translations 197 triangulation 70, 74, 277, 283, 288 Trump, Donald 22, 175, 178, 253, 261, 292 t-tests 248–9, 253, 269; dependent samples 249–51, 250, 253; independent samples 251–3, 272–3, 287–8; principles of 249 Tukey’s test 255, 269 Tumblr 149, 152, 297 Tuskegee syphilis experiment Twitter 148–52; CA of 176 two-tailed correlation 263–4, 270 unanswered questions 215 units of analysis 179–80, 184 Index 323 unstructured interviews 115–18 US Presidential elections: 2000 54–5; 2016 22, 175, 178–82, 259–61, 292 utilitarian ethics 7–8, 16 validity 65–6, 68–9, 73; internal 120, 163; through transparency and access 195, 200 values: and critical theory 46; in research 25, 34–5 variability, measures of 233–4 variables: levels of measurement 60–3; relationships and differences between 82, 85 variance 233–4, 240; equality of 253, 255, 258 varied understandings 29 verstehen 31 video games 23, 33, 170–4 video recordings: and discourse analysis 195, 199; ethnographic 104; focus groups 133, 135–6, 138; interviews 116–17, 119, 123 visual framing 140–5 voluntarism 34–5 Web 2.0 148–50, 156 web-based surveys see online surveys web scraping 153–4, 156 Weber, Max 7, 31, 43 Wikipedia 297 wikis 153, 156 written texts 52, 166 Young Hegelians 39 YouTube 150, 152, 178 Taylor & Francis Group an informa business Taylor & Francis eBooks www.taylorfranci5.com A single destination for eBooks from Taylor & Francis with incr-eased functionality and an improved userexperierlCe LO meet the needs of our customers 90,000+ eBooks of award-winning academic contenL in Humanities, Social Science, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Medical writterl by a global network of editors and authors TAYLOR & FRANCIS EBOOKS OFFERS: A streamlined experience for our library customers A single point of discovery for all of our eBook content Improved search and discovery of content at both book and chapter level REQUEST A FREE TRIAL su pport@taylorfrancis.com ROUTLEDGE Routledge Tdylor & Fr.mcis Group C CR CRC Press Tilylor &franci~ Group ... 14 Communication is a process of sharing meaning with others Communications is a technological system for the transmission of information Communication and communications are different Communication. .. Names: Croucher, Stephen Michael, 1978– author | Cronn- Mills, Daniel, author Title: Understanding communication research methods : a theoretical and practical approach / Stephen M Croucher & Daniel. .. communication and communications Communication is a human process of sharing meaning with others; communications is a technological system for the transmission of information Stephen and Introduction