Theories of Symbolic Organization Chapter Six Theories of Symbolic Organization

Social Scientific Approaches to Symbolic Organization Metaphors for Understanding how people make sense of social lives Consistency seeker (e.g., cognitive dissonance theory) Naïve scientist (e.g., attribution theory) Cognitive miser (e.g., schema theory)--efficiency

Schema Theory: What are schemas? Schemas are templates that help us understand the social world (cognitive economy)—have been studied as what (content) and how (process of activation) Many types of schemas – self, other people, roles, and events (Table 6.1) Exist at various levels of abstraction and may be organized into memory organization packets

Schema Theory: How do schemas work? When are schema developed and activated? When new situations arise or when the current situation “matches” an already developed schema How are schema changed? Several models have been proposed: bookkeeping, conversion, and subtyping (most empirical support)

Schema Theory: Applications in Communication Consideration of memory organization packets (MOPs) to understand conversation Consideration of schemas that guide our expectations about relationships Consideration of schemas in imagined interactions Consideration of schemas we hold for mass communication programming

Schema What are some schemas for funerals? Are there MOPS? How might the schema be altered? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfDyTUiL8xs Schema in the media: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvyelwDA0Ws

Attribution Theory: Basis Concepts Views people as “naïve scientists” who look for causal explanations in social life (“why” questions) Locus of attributions can be internal (within the person) or external (within the situation) Fundamental attribution error (negative vs. positive behaviors) Attributions can also be seen in terms of the stability and controllability of social behavior

Attributions in Interpersonal Contexts Part of day-to-day talk Influenced by relationship quality (satisfaction)—see example, next two slides Whether making an attribution in public or privately to partner If we believe that resistance is based on controllable and internal attribution, we are more persistent in persuasive strategies such as guilt or appeals to altruism

Patterns of Attribution in Relationships: Satisfied Partner’s Behavior Your Attribution Partner’s Response Internal Stable Controllable Positive Positive External Unstable Uncontrollable Positive Negative

Patterns of Attribution in Relationships: Dissatisfied Partner’s Behavior Your Attribution Partner’s Response External Unstable Uncontrollable Negative Positive Internal Stable Controllable Negative Negative

Attribution Theory in Mediated Communication Media provides attributions for events/behaviors Movies influence viewers’ attributions Third-person Effect We assume that others are more strongly influenced by the media than we are (we have more common sense)

Interlude Schema theory and Attribution theory in social scientific theory building What are the variables? What are some propositions?

Humanistic Approaches to Symbolic Organization Humanistic approaches—not looking for cognitive structures or causal explanations Looking for ways to making sense of or understand the social and symbolic world Subjective and value-laden

Narrative Theory: Walter Fisher The narrative paradigm can be distinguished from a “rational world paradigm.” (Table 6.3) “Humans experience and comprehend life as a series of ongoing narratives, as conflicts, characters, beginnings, middles, and ends.” “…the narrative paradigm is a philosophical statement that is meant to offer an approach to interpretation and assessment of human comm.”

Narrative Theory: Analysis of Narrative Rationality The “goodness” of a story can be judged in terms of narrative coherence and narrative fidelity Narrative coherence considers the integrity of a story’s structure Narrative fidelity considers whether the story “rings true” with the beliefs of listeners

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjV2AWzBQNo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylvAovoO2kk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJl-lDFNGPg&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHD1uxujnFQ&feature=related

Question to consider: Fidelity In some measure, fidelity is a judgment call—what is truthful and humane in everyday lives and the world Fisher: imagines an audience that believes in the values of truth, the good, beauty, health, wisdom, courage, temperance, justice, harmony, order, communion, friendship, and oneness with the Cosmos Do the stories of modern culture (rap music, reality tv, movies, etc.) offer this?

Narrative Theory: Applications and critiques Applications have included consideration of parental support groups (Toughlove story) and of political party platforms Some critiques of the narrative paradigm have been raised about its use in the analysis of a wide range of texts Fisher, however, believes that all forms of communication be analyzed as stories

Kenneth Burke’s Dramatism Wide-ranging influence in rhetoric and communication discipline Burke’s work can be used to analyze (1) language as a form of action (2) human action as dramatic in form (3) human action as rhetorical (4) pluralistic and dialectical program for analysis of human behavior

Dramatism: Language as a Form of Action Distinction between motion and action is what distinguishes humans from other animals—humans have agency Humans engage in symbolic action Several implications, including (1) separation from natural world, (2) reflexivity, (3) introduction of “the negative,” and (4) introduction of hierarchy

Humans are the symbol-making, symbol-using, symbol-misusing animal inventor of the negative separated from our natural condition by instruments of our own making goaded by the spirit of hierarchy acquiring foreknowledge of death and rotten with perfection (qtd. in Coe 332-333). http://www.cla.purdue.edu/dblakesley/burke/human/index.html

Dramatism: Action as Dramatic Can consider the “grand sweep” of life’s drama through the process of guilt and redemption This process involves mortification and scapegoating Can also consider smaller “dramas of life” through consideration of dramatistic pentad (act, scene, agent, purpose, and agency)—language as a terministic screen

Act: What happened. What is the action. What is going on Act: What happened? What is the action? What is going on? What action; what thoughts? Scene: Where is the act happening? What is the background situation? Agent: Who is involved in the action? What are their roles? Agency: How do the agents act? By what means do they act? Purpose: Why do the agents act? What do they want? Of dramatism, Burke said: "If action, then drama; if drama, then conflict; if conflict, then victimage. http://rhetorica.net/burke.htm An example: http://burton.byu.edu/Composition/Burke-Pentad_files/frame.htm

Question for Burke How might a communication scholar analyze the Iraq War using the dramatistic pentad (act, scene, agent, purpose, and agency) from the perspective of someone A. Opposed to the war (pull out now) B. Supports finishing the war ConsubstantiationIt’s more than credibility

Dramatism: Application http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFKtgTsKDIg&feature=related How does the speaker build (or not build) consubstantion? Choose an “act” in the story (e.g., “this spectacle”)—who is the agent? Walk through the rest of the pentad. Who are the villains (devil-term)? Who can provide redemption? Can you determine a pentadic ratio?