Welcome to the official RU-vid channel for A First Look at Communication Theory! Here you will find video interviews with communication theorists, discussing the communication theories covered in the book.
The leading communication theory textbook today, A First Look at Communication Theory is authored by Em Griffin, Andrew Ledbetter, and Glenn Sparks.and published by McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Find more resources on communication theory at the book's website: www.afirstlook.com.
University students are reminded to go to YT and see if there is an interview of the author who wrote the theory they are using for their dissertation. Awesome, thank you!
Those eyebrows are distracting. We now know that my concentration in a group setting is directly proportional to the eyebrow size of those around me. This is a good video, though and gives a good idea of the group dynamics.
The two have done such great work and the results have aged well as today's world confronts us with even more anthromorphic technology; robots, AI, VR....
Agenda setting says it all , medias branch of government that herds the collective masses in any given direction , it’s coercion , and disingenuous , The entire narrative is controlled through news, movies TV, shows, billboard signs, smart phones, you name it , perfectly interfaces with public school programming , it’s a sinister as it gets, but what do you expect from a government crime family , whoever the establishment is that hides in the background, they sure have created a fictional reality matrix
You can learn more about relational dialectics theory on our textbook's website: www.afirstlook.com/edition-11/theory-resources/by-theory/Relational-Dialectics-Theory/overview The definition given there is, "The dynamic and unceasing struggle between discourses about interpersonal relationships." The idea is that any relationship is spoken into being by a variety of discourses (or streams of talk about the relationship), and these discourses inevitably change over the course of time. Hope this is helpful!
This old has is worthless as they come, worst professor at u of Iowa her tenure there. Bitter old ugly and liberal as sin. Now I'm worth more than her weight in gold when she told me I wasn't gonna succeed in life one day. Now I own 3 businesses and she's sitting at home with her miserable family she has.
Austin American Statesman, 129.5k daily, 183k Sundays. CNN digital, 200 million unique/month in US, 347 million worldwide.... Odd example, and honestly throws most of the rest of his study on the theory in question.
Thank you, Dr. Orbe for giving us "Co-cultural Communication Theory". I wonder what's the progress for the counter-part theory for "dominant groups"? Where can we read about it?
Good news--Razzante and Orbe have published dominant group theory! Razzante, R. J., & Orbe, M. P. (2018). Two sides of the same coin: Conceptualizing dominant grou ptheory in the context of co-cultural theory. Communication Theory, 28(3), 354-375. doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtx008 You can also read about dominant group theory on pp. 364-365 of the latest edition (11th) of A First Look at Communication Theory. www.mheducation.com/highered/product/first-look-communication-theory-griffin-ledbetter/M9781264296101.html
The agenda-setting theory says that the media focus our attention and tell us what to think about. The media can influence how we think, and even by extension, what we think - our attitude and opinion - but in some cases what we do. Media agenda-setting is an inadvertent by-product of the fact that the media have to select a few topics each day. The evidence suggests that most of the news plays pretty much right down the middle. Increasingly people say they don't trust the media, and some are convinced that there's a liberal bias.
Is this theory correct? Is the media the one setting the agenda for the country? Are they the ones determining what we are talking about or not? Or it is the politician? Or is it us who has more say on it?
In response to Glenn's question at the end of the video, Petronio is saying that scholars haven't studied emotional reactions during the process of privacy boundary management. Research could ask questions such as: How do we feel when our privacy boundaries are violated? What strategies do we use to manage our emotions? What do we do to respond to the emotions we perceive in others? Hope this helps clarify!
I think that the theory does not necessarily need to account for the emotional factors depending on how the theory is employed. For example, a jury in an important often eliminates the emotional factors quite well at some point while in session, and the theory would then be a very good tool to predict their decision-making. Not to say the Theory shouldn't ever account for those factors, but it is still very useful as is.
I think the part about different lived experiences is particularly interesting. I would be interested to interview Latino students and learn how their experiences differed. (Suburban versus inner city schools, majority versus minority immigrant population, sunbelt vs rust belt)
Thank you for the video and thank you for your website. You are truly helping students out!!! 6 years later and here I am citing your video and website!!
I was subscribed Stanley Deetz' "Transforming communication, transforming business: Building responsive and responsible workplaces" nearly twenty years ago. I recall learning about direct participation and consent from the book. Great ideas but it is so hard to implement when confronted or faced with overwhelming closures. It is very hard to find an organization that understands and applies these concepts.
