Welcome to a new semester and to COMM 3710! COMM 3710 is an asynchronous online course. For more information on the course, please see the course syllabus.
It is your responsibility to read the syllabus in its entirety and adhere to the course policies and information documented therein. Please revisit the syllabus as many times as necessary during the semester.
A Brief Introduction
Welcome to COMM 3710! Because of the coronavirus pandemic, COMM 3710 has moved online and will primarily be asynchronous. For more information on the course, please see the course syllabus.
I’m Prof. Sun and I’m an Associate Professor in the Department of Communication. I do empirical research in the areas of health communication, media effects, and meta-science. You can know more about my work here if you are interested.
Some Highlights from the Syllabus
Course Textbook
Your textbook is available on Canvas through Inclusive Access. It is a great resource and I highly encourage you to use it as we progress through the semester.
Additional readings will be available as PDFs on Canvas.
Technology
- Ensure that you are familiar with Canvas. Set up your notifications according to your preferences. If you need help with Canvas, review this page.
- Check your University email account (unid@utah.edu) regularly. Ideally, you should check this email account every day. If you need to contact me, please email me at my Umail (ye.sun@utah.edu).
- You will need Microsoft software (Word, Excel, PowerPoint) and Adobe Acrobat.
- You will also need access to R. More information about R will be provided as the semester progresses.
- You will need a webcam and a microphone to participate in drop-in office hours. We will use Zoom for virtual office hours.
- The U’s Teaching & Learning Technologies recommends that you have the latest versions of at least two browsers installed. The preferred web browser is Google Chrome.
Some Helpful Resources
Canvas Help
If you need help in Canvas, click the Help button in the right sidebar or contact:
- Phone: +1 844-527-0328
- Chat with Canvas Support
Campus Help Desk
For help with UMail, uNID, VPN, Box, Office 365, and CIS log-in, contact the Campus Help Desk:
- Phone: 801-581-4000 (option 1)
- Email: helpdesk@utah.edu
- Website: https://it.utah.edu/help/
Help is available Monday through Saturday. Please visit the Campus Help Desk website for more information.
Note-taking for Success in College
I recommend taking notes while you review the content online. This will help you learn and recall material.
One note-taking system that you might consider trying is the Cornell system. This system is detailed in the book below:
Pauk, W., & Owens, R. J. Q. (2013). How to Study in College (11 edition). Cengage Learning.
A (Brief) History of the Social Sciences
Ancient Greek scholars did not make a distinction between the social and physical sciences. In fact, many studied both and considered both physical and social processes as things to be studied scientifically. Here are a few examples:
- Hippocrates of Cos
Hippocrates was the first scientist (or philosopher) to classify his patients according to personality. He was, of course, also a physician–many of us will be familiar with the Hippocratic oath in medicine. Interestingly, the phrase that commonly attributed to this oath, “First, do no harm,” is not explicitly contained within this text. Instead, there are modern versions that some medical schools adopt.
- Plato
Plato used geometric proofs, a physical science concept, to study the intrinsic state of knowledge, which is a social scientific concept.
- Aristotle
Aristotle studied poetry and rhetoric with the same scientific rigor and processes with which he studied planetary motion.
This lack of division between physical and social sciences stayed intact until the publication of Sir Isaac Newton’s Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy) in 1687. This is considered one of the most important works in the history of science.
- In these volumes, Newton argues that the underlying rule of all physical nature is mathematics.
As a result, physical scientists gravitated to and successfully applied Newton’s writings. Social scientists, on the other hand, were slower to make their studies more quantitative.
Charles Darwin’s theory was another point at which we see a divide between the “hard” and social sciences; social scientists were slower than biologists to see how Darwin’s theory applied to social science.
In the late 1800’s to the early 1900’s, quantitative measurements in the physical sciences became the norm.
Then, at the turn of the 20th century, we begin to see a divide among scholars who study humans and the social scientific vs. the humanistic perspectives emerge.
Social Science Research During and Post-WWII
During WWII, the US government became more involved in social science research in order to understand propaganda, public opinion, and persuasion. In order to main high morale during wartime, the US government realized that media was critical and created the US Office of War Information.
In 1941, Paul Lazarsfeld and his colleagues at the Bureau of Applied Social Research at Columbia University published the first review of the discipline of communication. In this review, they identified 4 categories of communication:
- Who…
- said what…
- to whom…
- and with what effect?
Another important milestone in the history of communication research is the work of Carl Hovland’s group at Yale University. This group examined a wide range of variables shown to influence persuasion including sources credibility, personality traits, and fear appeals.
The legacy of research conducted by Hovland’s group led to future researchers examining other communication contexts. To get a better idea of how research from this historical legacy has influenced the discipline of communication, see Figure 1.1 in the textbook.
Epistemologies in Communication Research
In communication research, there are 3 epistemological traditions:
- social scientific (positivism)
- qualitative (interpretive)
- rhetorical (critical)
Qualitative / Interpretive
Qualitative researchers believe that to understand human communication, one must explore and appreciate how individuals at the center of specific interactions or communicative acts understand their own communication.
An example of a research question that might be asked in this tradition is “What does it mean to be a member of the LDS church?”
Rhetorical / Critical
Rhetorical/Critical scholars believe the central role of research is to examine the interplay between ideology and science.
An example of a research question that might be asked in this tradition is “How are crisis messages steeped in power and privilege?”
Ordinary vs. Scientific Ways of Knowing
It is also integral that we articulate and know the distinction between ordinary (or common) and scientific ways of knowing. Importantly, the difference between these ways of knowing lies in the process.
Ordinary Ways of Knowing
- Tradition: This is often determined by culture. It is undeniable that traditions dictate how we interact and communicate with each other.
- Authority: We also come to know things by relying on experts. For example, we rely on our doctors for health information and on priests for religious teachings.
Scientific Ways of Knowing
As mentioned, the difference between ordinary and scientific ways of knowing has to do with the process of generating scientific knowledge. This process relies on 6 steps:
Conceptualization: When we rely on scientific ways of knowing, it is important to delineate what is being studied and what is not.
Reading the literature: Reviewing what has already been done is important. We need to ensure that our scientific knowledge is supported by data-driven evidence, not just opinion.
Careful measurements: The ability to quantify something allows us to have an objective way of arriving at knowledge.
Collecting samples: Samples allow us to make predictions about larger populations. For example, in order to make predictions about U.S. adults, researchers often take samples of 1,000 respondents. If the sample is representative of the population, then we can make accurate and valid inferences (more about this in Week 10 when we discuss sampling).
Analyzing data and presenting results: Because scientific ways of knowing rely on objective data, scientists can spend entire careers learning how to analyze data.
Ethics and politics: Importantly, researchers and scientists must collect, analyze, and report data in ethical ways, which include minimizing potential biases.
The Wheel of Science
A figure representing the “wheel” of science can be found in your textbook (Figure 2.1). Your textbook refers to this as the scientific method. Below is a short video explanation of the “wheel” of science.
Next, let’s practice identifying some inductive and deductive forms of reasoning. Watch the clip below from Monty Python and the Holy Grail and try to identify the type of reasoning (inductive or deductive) used in various parts (Hint: Both inductive and deductive logic is used at different times in the clip).
Check your answers using the video below:
Defining Research
Watch the video below defining “research.”
Probabilistic vs. Deterministic Predictions
Deterministic predictions
- All data are known (i.e., one can determine the outcome).
- Example: Predicting the amount of money you will have in your bank account next year.
Probabilistic predictions
- There is an element of chance involved. When we do not have all the data, our predictions will necessarily be probabilistic.
- Example: Predicting human communication behavior and attitudes.
Social Sciences Research Post-WWI
Post-WWI, we begin to see social science research expand and flourish. In 1981, for example, the field of social psychology, i.e., the study of people’s attitudes, is established. The focus on social science during this period of time is partly a result of WWI being a time of great social change and people’s need to understand this change.
By the 1920s, marketing agencies were surveying consumer behavior, and politicians and media outlets realized that the new techniques being created by social scientists to research humans could examine political preferences. This resulted in new ways of measuring attitudes, many of which we still use today.
For example, the Likert and semantic differential scales were developed during this time:
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes (Ph.D.). Columbia University, New York, NY. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1933-01885-001
Osgood, C. E. (1952). The nature and measurement of meaning. Psychological Bulletin, 49(3), 197–237. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0055737
Back to top