The paper "Communication Theories and Models" is a good example of business coursework. The aim of this essay is to identify and discuss communication model and theories. It also cites a case that applied a revised communication strategy. Audiences have been blamed for not accepting messages but in reality, it is the channel, encoding process or the sender that was incorrectly applied. Communication reaches a deadlock if lacking feedback since the receiver cannot be established if he or she received the message (Watzlawick et al. 2007:68). Communication models as perceived by Kinnevay are a representation earlier brought out by Aristotle in the model of proof.
Pathos is inherent to the audience, ethos to the speaker and logos to message itself and content. On the contrary, their model's accounts remain two-dimensional hence cannot account for multiple dimension of the typical communication event. This also involves multiple messages and broader context. Communication Models and Theories There is no closure, pure redundancy and break in the action. In all the communicative experience, is non-repeatable and a product of learned events developing into social meaning and self-consistency. However, Watzlawick et al.
(2007:64) argued that communication starts with persons selectively responding to their immediate physical surroundings and does not begin when one person starts to talk. They learn that the model accounts for the sensory field, feedback, non-binary interactions and different modes. Chapanis (2001:117) learns that communication is additive, continuous and accumulative where the current forces at work are derived from previous occurrences. He notes that there is no break in the action and that all the experience contributes to the shape of the moment unravelling. According to Barnlund (2008:88), communication functions simultaneously at four levels of analysis.
They identified the intrapersonal process, interpersonal, group interaction and cultural level. In addition, they learned that each activity levels have communicative functions such as evaluating, sending, receiving and channelling. The model was seen as focusing more on actual determinants of the process and less on structural attributes message, communication source and receiver. Holographic model by Deutsch (2002:371) objects to the analytical approach is dissected by the elements of communication. He argues that the knowledge arises in seeing the whole in each part but not the parts in the whole hence providing a boundary-less event. Fractal communication allows for conceptualization of communication event in infinite density.
Lackman (2000:122) also applied the fractal theory in chaos management and found that there is a pattern of complexity in natural systems and that they may not be captured in any formula and profoundly complex. She established that the initial conditions limit the outcome of systems given that the communication model draws from chaos theory and fractals that respond to initial condition variation and reflecting on this complexity. There are common barriers to communication which can be overcome by effective design and delivery of messages, relating common experience between source and destination and offering a way of meeting personality needs.
Gerbner (2006:185) added the context of relationship and how it affects communication between person X and Y. He argues that the social environment influences the frame of reference between communications X and Y. Sereno & Mortensen (2000:127) learns that artificial censorship, limitation of social contact, media gatekeepers and shrinking of new holes are some of the barriers to effective communication.
This is also coupled by little time to pay attention. For example, Hawthorne effect objects that there is no need to always use words in communicating. She gave instances where a company that does not afford raises can refresh and repaint the workplace. This is seen to increase employee productivity. Diffusion theory compliments interpersonal communication as it assists in accomplishing major changes. Sereno & Mortensen (2000:127) also argue that the channels of interpersonal communication are very effective such as word-of-mouth. This happens in instances where a target audience is required to talk about the information obtained by reading the papers or seen on television.
Communication cycle would then be complete after the awareness phase, interest, evaluation, trial and later adoption. The Systemic Model of communication provides that communication is not thought by individuals under own autonomous power but as people interacting through messages (McGuire, 2001:83). Hence, the minimum measurement unit ties the respective parties into an indivisible and coherent whole.
Barnlund, D C 2008, Interpersonal Communication: Survey and Studies. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. pp 88.
Barret, D 2002, Change Communications: Using strategic employee communication to facilitate major change. Corporate communications: An International Journal, 7(4), 219-231. pp 225.
Chapanis, A 2001, Men, Machines, and Models, American Psychologist, 16:113-131. pp117.
Deutsch, K 2002, On Communication Models in the Social Sciences, Public Opinion Quarterly, 16:356-380. Pp 371.
Gerbner, G 2006, Toward a General Model of Communication, Audio-Visual Communication Review, 4:171-199. Pp 185 & 193.
Kaplan, A 2004, The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science. San Francisco: Chandler, 1964. pp89.
Lackman, R 2000, The Model in Theory Construction, Psychological Review, 67:113-129. pp 121.
McGuire W 2001, Theoretical Foundations of Campaigns. In Ronald Rice and William Paisley (eds.), Public Communication Campaigns, Sage. pp 63, 72 & 83.
Sereno, K K & Mortensen, C D 2000, Foundations of Communication Theory. New York: Harper & Row. pp 127.
Watzlawick, P Beavin, J & Jackson, D 2007, Pragmatics of Human Communication. New York: Norton.pp 64 & 68.