The Emergence of a Contemporary Academic Field
Think about the different departments and majors on the Indiana State University campus. What about the Department of Communication? How did it get there? You may not know it, but academic departments are a relatively recent phenomenon in human history. While there is evidence of speech instruction in the U.S. as far back as the colonial period, 100 years ago there were only a few departments of Communication in U.S. colleges and universities (Delia). From 1890 to 1920 the study of oral communication was generally housed in departments of English (Gray). The first large-scale demand to create distinct departments of Communication came at the Public Speaking Conference of the New England and North Atlantic States in 1913 (Smith). Here, faculty expressed the desire to separate from departments of English. The art and science of oral communication went in different directions than traditional areas of focus in English, and those with these interests wanted the resources and recognition that accompanied this field of study. By “1944 the United States Office of Education used its own survey of speech departments to assure the educational world that ‘the expressive arts have gained full recognition in college programs of study’” (Smith 448).
Case in Point: International, National, and Regional Organizations of Communication Study
A variety of professional organizations are devoted to organizing those interested in studying communication, organizing conferences for scholars to communicate about current research, and publishing academic journals highlighting the latest in research from our discipline. To find out more about what these organizations do, you can visit their websites.
The International Communication Association (ICA) was first organized in the 1940’s by various speech departments as the National Society for the Study of Communication (NSSC). By 1950 the NSSC had become the ICA and had the express purpose of bringing together academics and professionals around the world interested in the study of human communication. The ICA currently has over 3,400 members with over two-thirds of them working as teachers and researchers in educational settings around the world.
A relatively new organization that takes advantage of computer technologies to organize its members is the American Communication Association (ACA). The ACA was founded in 1993 and actually exists as a virtual professional association that includes researchers, teachers, and professionals devoted to communication study in North, Central, and South America as well as in the Caribbean.
The largest United States organization devoted to communication is the National Communication Association (NCA). NCA boasts the largest membership of any communication organization in the world. Currently there are approximately 7,100 members from the U.S. and more than 20 foreign countries. The NCA is a scholarly society devoted to “enhancing the research, teaching, and service produced by its members on topics of both intellectual and social significance” (www.natcom.org).
There are also smaller regional organizations including:
As Communication scholars formed departments of Communication, they also organized themselves into associations that reflected the interests of the field. Our current National Communication Association began during this time in 1914 as the National Association of Academic Teachers of Public Speaking, and became the Speech Communication Association in 1970. It wasn’t until 1997 that members voted to change it to its current name. As a result of the work of the early founders, a number of organizations are currently devoted to bringing together those interested in studying communication. Let’s examine some of the important events and people that shaped the study of communication during the 20th century.
From the mid 1800’s through the early part of the 20th century, significant changes occurred in politics, social life, education, commercialization, and technology. These changes are reflected in the organizations, universities, colleges, and mass production that we know today. As a result of all of this change, new areas of communication research emerged to answer the relevant questions of the day. From 1900–1940, communication study focused on five primary areas that experienced rapid changes and advances: “(1) work on communication and political institutions, (2) research concerned with the role of communication in social life, (3) social-psychological analyses of communication, (4) studies of communication and education, and (5) commercially motivated research” (Delia 25).
This period brought many changes to the political landscape, with new technologies beginning to significantly alter the communication of political messages. When you think about our focus on politics, much of our assessment of the communication in this arena came from the work of scholars in the early 20th century. They focused on propaganda analysis, political themes in public communication (magazines, textbooks, etc.), and public opinion research that explored the opinions of society at large on major political and social issues. If you follow politics, you’re obviously familiar with political polls that try to determine people’s beliefs and political values. This line of work was influenced by the early works of Walter Lippman who is considered the father of public opinion analysis. Similarly, Harold Lasswell’s pioneering work on propaganda set the foundation for studying how mass communication influences the social conscious of large groups of people. Public opinion polls and analysis of propaganda messages allow us to follow the sentiment of large groups of people.
During the early 20th century, society changed through urbanization, industrialization, and continued developments in mass media. As a result, there was a need to understand how these changes impacted human communication. A very influential group of scholars studied communication and social life at the Chicago School of Sociology. Herbert Blumer, Charles H. Cooley, John Dewey, George Herbert Mead, and Robert E. Park committed themselves to “scientific sociology” that focused on the “sensitivity to the interrelation of persons’ experiences and the social contexts of their lives” (Delia 31). They focused on how people interacted; examined the effects of urbanization on peoples’ social lives; studied film and media institutions and their effects on culture; explored culture, conflict, and consensus; highlighted the effects of marketing and advertising; and researched interpersonal communication. This group of scholars moved the field from being solely humanistic (focused on public speaking, performance, and analysis), to social scientific (exploring the social impacts and realities of communication through scientific methods).
The third focus of communication inquiry during this time was the advancement of Social Psychology, which explored individual social behavior in communication contexts. If you have seen the Jacksass movies/show or the older show Punk’D, you’ve witnessed how the characters of these shows violate communication norms to get a reaction from others. Social Psychologists focused on issues such as communication norms and the impact of our communication in social contexts. In other words, where do we get ideas of “normal” communication behaviors and how does our communication impact social situations? Another area of focus in Social Psychology was the study of the effects of media on communication outcomes. A particular focus was movies. It’s likely that you’ve heard debate and discussion about the potential harm of seeing violence in movies, television, and video games. Much of this research began with the Social Psychologists of the early 20th century and continues today as we discuss the impact of mass media on society, culture, relationships, and individuals.
The study of communication in education was the fourth important development in the field between 1900 and 1940. Do you have good professors? A great deal of the way your college classroom is organized and conducted can be traced back to early research in instructional communication. Early on, the possible impacts of every major new technology (radio, film, and television) on educational outcomes became a primary focus of this specialization. Many thought that these technologies would completely change how we received an education. Later, many people theorized that the personal computer would revolutionize classroom instruction. Instructional communication research in the early 1900’s through the present day seeks to discover the best communicative techniques for teaching.
The fifth important development in communication study during this period focused on commercialism and human communication. With an increase in national brands, marketing, and advertising, commercial organizations were interested in influencing consumer habits. During this period, people began to understand mass media’s ability to persuade (think advertising!). There were incredible financial implications for using mass media to sell products. These implications didn’t escape those who could profit from mass media, and prompted lines of research that examined the impacts of advertising and marketing on consumer behavior. Paul Lazarsfeld studied mass communication to understand its commercial implications and was an early pioneer in understanding persuasion and advertising. What advertising messages are most likely to influence you to purchase a product? Think of the thousands of radio, TV, movie, billboard, and internet advertisements you encounter everyday.
World War II played a major role in shaping the direction of communication study during the 1940’s. Two instrumental players in communication research during this era, Kurt Lewin and Carl Hovland, studied group dynamics and mass communication. Following World War II, scholars wanted to bring more credibility and attention to their research. One approach they used to accomplish this was to call for Communication study to be its own field of research at universities. They began using the terms “mass communication” and “communication research” more frequently in their writings, which helped begin the process of distinguishing Communication research and departments from other fields such as political science, psychology, and sociology (Rogers, 1994). This served as the big push to create departments of Communication that you are familiar with today.
In 1949 Lazarsfeld and Stanton argued that, “the whole field of communications research should be covered simultaneously” (xi), which was an attempt to formalize communication study as a field that included not only the humanities, but the “social science of communication aimed at theory development” (Delia 59). These Communication scholars began forming Communication into its own academic field by creating and adopting a vocabulary specific to the field, writing core subject matter into Communication textbooks, and agreeing to a relatively stable set of communication processes that could be taught in college and university classrooms.
The 1950’s saw two areas of research develop that are still a major focus in our field today–research on voting and mass media, and experimental studies on persuasion (Hovland). The move from mass media and political communication research in the early 1900’s to a more theoretical approach in the 1940’s and 1950’s brought together two areas that make Communication study such an important academic field today–theory and practice. Research in the 1940’s and 1950’s was conducted using experimental and survey methods with an emphasis on generating theories of how and why we communicate. As the field began to grow and emerge, Delia states that it struggled with the following question: “Was the field to be interdisciplinary or autonomous; and if autonomous, on what terms? Communication study in the late 1940’s embraced divergent and contradictory attitudes that leave this question unresolved after 50 years” (72).
Teaching and Learning Communication Now
If you are interested in what Communication Scholars do and study, you can always look up Tedx talks that they have given to find out more. Communication scholars are actively presenting their ideas about their work and the discipline around the country and the world. The National Communication Association has compiled a webpage where you can find examples of Tedx talks by those in Communication.
Following World War II, Communication research also focused on public speaking, instructional communication, communication anxiety, persuasion, group dynamics, and business communication. While the early 20th century saw major new approaches for studying communication, the 1960’s and 1970’s saw renewed emphasis and focus on the works of those from the Classical Period. Thus, the 1960’s and 1970’s worked to bridge together the old and new school of Communication study for the first time. While scholars in the 1960’s and 1970’s reconsidered classical approaches, others such as Kenneth Burke pushed the boundaries of rhetorical study. Rather than focusing on the speeches of “dead white guys,” Burke wanted to analyze a much broader scope of communication events including protest rhetoric, film, television, and radio (Delia 81).
Communication departments now have professors who study and teach classical rhetoric, contemporary rhetoric, empirical social science, and qualitative social science. As each era generated new research, previous knowledge laid the foundation for the innumerable challenges of studying communication in a rapidly changing technological, postmodern world. Since the 1970’s, we have seen more technological and world changes than at any other time in history, guiding the ways in which we now study communication.
1970 to the Present Day
The emergence of the women’s-rights, civil-rights, and anti-war movements in the 1960’s and 1970’s reintroduced old social questions and concerns that had gone largely ignored by society. Fortunately, the field of Communication was progressive enough to take on the challenge of responding to these questions and concerns from its own perspective. Thus, the 1970’s saw a rise in scholarship that contributed greatly to a field that has seen progressive and consistent development since 400 BCE by those not afraid to tackle the dominate social problems of the day.
Teaching and Learning Communication Now
Remember our discussion earlier regarding the overwhelming exclusion of women in education, including communication study? In its report, Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities Summary Report 2013, The National Opinion Research Center Reported that 649 Ph.D.s were awarded in Communication in 2013. Of those, 403 were awarded to women. This means 63.2% of Ph.D.s earned in Communication in 2006 were earned by women. We’ve come a long way from the Classical Period. Now, it’s more likely that you will have a female professor than a male professor! While change has been slow, it is happening.
Women have, and continue to be, active in the National Communication Association. In fact, NCA has a page devoted to the Women’s Leadership Project that details how women have be instrumental in contributing to the advancement of the discipline.
Two pioneering organizations devoted to women’s scholarship in Communication are the Organization for the Study of Communication, Language, and Gender (OSCLG) founded in 1972, and the Organization for Research on Women and Communication (ORWAC) founded in 1977. Over the course of the next decade, women’s scholarship gained prominence in the various professional organizations devoted to teaching and researching communication. Feminist researchers have been instrumental in the formation of a well-established and respected body of research that challenged the status quo of many of our theoretical assumptions and research practices established in past eras.
From the 1980’s until the present day, the field of Communication has continued to grow. The field maintains strong teaching and research interests in areas such as rhetoric, mass communication, instructional communication, interpersonal communication, group communication, organizational communication, intercultural communication, gender communication, health communication, visual communication, communication and sport, Latino/Latina Communication Studies, public relations, family communication, and many more.
Communication Study Today and Tomorrow
Today, many colleges and universities have Communication as part of their curriculum. Likewise, our professional organizations are still active in growing and strengthening the field through teaching and research. Even with the increased recognition, there is still considerable growth, change, and movement taking place in communication study. Those involved in the field actively and openly debate and discuss various theoretical and methodological approaches for studying human communication. The study of human communication continues to be a wide and diverse field, with each area increasing our understanding of how humans communicate.
As history explains, changes in the world will continue to guide our approaches for understanding and researching communication. We have moved from an industrial age to an information age and have yet to fully understand the communicative implications of this shift. Advances in communication and information technologies are forever changing the ways we research and teach communication in our colleges and universities. While it is difficult to predict the specific areas and phenomena of study for future communication research, it is safe to assume that continued global and social changes will shape the development of our field.
The New School of communication study brought about more formal academic departments of Communication in the 1800-1900s. Along with these academic placements came the formation of professional organizations such as NCA that helped foster greater recognition and development of the study of communication on a national and international scale. As the U.S. and world was challenged by changes in technology, politics, and social life, Communication scholars sought to address them by focusing on five areas of research — political institutions, the role of communication in social life, social-psychological analyses of communication, communication and education, and commercially motivated research. Following WWI and WWII scholars continued to be motivated by global and social issues such as the women’s movement, the civil rights movement, and the anti-war movement. The trend continues as current scholars are driven by the prominent social and technological issues of the day such as technology, health care, social issues, and the environment.
- What are the specializations of the Communication professors at Indiana State University?
- How did your professor get started in the field of Communication?
- If you wanted to study some type of communication phenomenon, what would it be and why?
- With the increasing emphasis on communication and information technologies, what kind of communication research do you think will happen in the future?
Bizzell, P., & Herzberg, B. The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present. Second Edition edition. Boston, MA. Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Blumer, H. (1933). Movies and Conduct. New York, The Macmillan Company. Retrieved fromhttps://archive.org/details/moviesandconduct00blumrich
Burke, K. (1969). A grammar of motives. Berkeley, CA. University of California Press.
Burke, K. (1968). Language As Symbolic Action: Essays on Life, Literature, and Method. Berkeley, CA. University of California Press.
Cooley, C. H. (1992). Human Nature and the Social Order. Transaction Publishers.
Cooley, C. Horton. (1911). Social organization: a study of the larger mind. New York, NY. C. Scribner’s.
Delia, J. (1987). Communication Research: A History. Handbook of Communication Science, Newbury Park, CA. Sage Press.
Dewey, J. (1922). The Human Nature and Conduct: An Introduction to Social Psychology. Henry Holt and Company.
Dewey, J. (2012). The Public and Its Problems: An Essay in Political Inquiry. Penn State Press.
Gangal, A., & Hosterman, C. (1982). Toward an examination of the rhetoric of ancient India. Southern Speech Communication Journal 47(3) 277–291.
Gray, G. W. (1954). Some teachers and the transition to Twentieth-Century speech education. History of Speech Education in America. New York, NY. Appleton Century Crofts.
Harris, W. (1991). Ancient Literacy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Boston, MA.
Hovland, C. I. (1959). Reconciling conflicting results derived from experimental and survey studies of attitude change. American Psychologist 14(1) 8–17.
Hovland, C, I., Lumsdaine, A. & Sheffield, F.D. (1949). Experiments on mass communication. Studies in Social Psychology in World War 2(3). 581-588.
Hovland, C., Irving, J. L., & Kelley, H.eds. (1953). Communication and Persuasion. Psychological Studies of Opinion Change. New Haven, CT. Yale University Press.
Laswell, H. (1927). Propaganda Technique in the World War. New York, NY.
Laswell, H.D., Casey, R.D. & Smith, B. L. (1946) Propaganda, Communication, and Public Opinion: A Comprehensive Reference Guide. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1940). Radio and the Printed Page: An Introduction to the Study of Radio and Its Role in the Communication of Ideas. Duell, Pearc and Sloan, New York.
Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B. & Gaudet, H. (1965). The People’s Choice: How the Voter Makes up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign. Columbia University Press, New York, NY.
Lazarsfeld, P. F., Hadley, C. & Stanton, F. Current radio research in universities. Journal of Applied Psychology 23, p. 201–204.
Lazarsfeld, P.F. & Stanton, F. (1949). Communication Research, 1948-1949. Harper, New York, NY.
Lewin, K. (1941). Self-hatred among Jews. Contemporary Jewish Record, IV, 219–232. Republished in Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics 186–200. New York, NY. Harper & Row.
Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics I: Concept, method, and reality in social science, social equalibria, and social change. Human Relations 1(1) p. 5–42.
Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics II. Channels of group life; Social planning and action research. Human Relations 1(2) p. 143–153.
Lewin, K.(1936). Some social-psychological differences between the United States and Germany. Journal of Personality 4(4) p. 265–293.
Lippmann, W. (1947). Public opinion. New York: Macmillan.
Mead, G. H. (2009). Mind, Self, and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. University of Chicago Press
Park, R. E. (1923). The natural history of the newspaper. American Journal of Sociology 29(3) p. 273–289.
Park, R. E., Burgess, E. W., & McKenzie, R. D. (1967). The city. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Park, R. E. (1922). The immigrant press and its control. New York: Harper & Brothers.
Rogers, E. M. (1997). A History of Communication Study: A Biographical Approach. New York: The Free Press.
Smith, D. (1954). History of Speech Education in America. Appleton-Century-Crofts. Retrieved from https://archive.org/stream/historyofspeeche00wall/historyofspeeche00wall_djvu.txt