传播学研究中的概念化、组织化和积极调节

IF 4.7 1区文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION

Communication Theory Pub Date : 2020-08-01 DOI:10.1093/CT/QTZ006

R. Holbert, Esul Park

{"title":"传播学研究中的概念化、组织化和积极调节","authors":"R. Holbert, Esul Park","doi":"10.1093/CT/QTZ006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Meta-theoretical focus is given to how communication researchers are approaching and hypothesizing moderation. A moderation typology is offered and an evaluation of the field’s common practices for positing moderation reveals an inability to discern between three overarching classifications (Contributory, Contingent, Cleaved). A content analysis of eight communication journals reveals moderation hypotheses lacking a level of precision that can best aid the field’s knowledge generation. In addition, vague hypothesizing is leaving communication researchers vulnerable to the commitment of Type III error (i.e., correctly rejecting a null hypothesis for the wrong reason). Recommendations are provided in an effort to improve the field’s conceptualization and presentation of moderation.","PeriodicalId":48102,"journal":{"name":"Communication Theory","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/CT/QTZ006","citationCount":"87","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conceptualizing, Organizing, and Positing Moderation in Communication Research\",\"authors\":\"R. Holbert, Esul Park\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/CT/QTZ006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Meta-theoretical focus is given to how communication researchers are approaching and hypothesizing moderation. A moderation typology is offered and an evaluation of the field’s common practices for positing moderation reveals an inability to discern between three overarching classifications (Contributory, Contingent, Cleaved). A content analysis of eight communication journals reveals moderation hypotheses lacking a level of precision that can best aid the field’s knowledge generation. In addition, vague hypothesizing is leaving communication researchers vulnerable to the commitment of Type III error (i.e., correctly rejecting a null hypothesis for the wrong reason). Recommendations are provided in an effort to improve the field’s conceptualization and presentation of moderation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48102,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Communication Theory\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/CT/QTZ006\",\"citationCount\":\"87\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Communication Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/CT/QTZ006\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/CT/QTZ006","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 87

摘要

元理论的重点是传播研究人员如何接近和假设适度。提供了一种适度类型，对该领域提出适度的常见做法的评估表明，无法区分三个总体分类（贡献型、偶然型和分裂型）。对八种传播期刊的内容分析表明，适度假设缺乏最有助于该领域知识生成的准确度。此外，模糊的假设使沟通研究人员容易受到III型错误的影响（即，以错误的理由正确拒绝无效假设）。提供建议是为了改进该领域对适度性的概念化和表述。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Conceptualizing, Organizing, and Positing Moderation in Communication Research

Meta-theoretical focus is given to how communication researchers are approaching and hypothesizing moderation. A moderation typology is offered and an evaluation of the field’s common practices for positing moderation reveals an inability to discern between three overarching classifications (Contributory, Contingent, Cleaved). A content analysis of eight communication journals reveals moderation hypotheses lacking a level of precision that can best aid the field’s knowledge generation. In addition, vague hypothesizing is leaving communication researchers vulnerable to the commitment of Type III error (i.e., correctly rejecting a null hypothesis for the wrong reason). Recommendations are provided in an effort to improve the field’s conceptualization and presentation of moderation.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Communication Theory COMMUNICATION-

CiteScore

9.00

自引率

2.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Communication Theory is an international forum publishing high quality, original research into the theoretical development of communication from across a wide array of disciplines, such as communication studies, sociology, psychology, political science, cultural and gender studies, philosophy, linguistics, and literature. A journal of the International Communication Association, Communication Theory especially welcomes work in the following areas of research, all of them components of ICA: Communication and Technology, Communication Law and Policy, Ethnicity and Race in Communication, Feminist Scholarship, Global Communication and Social Change, Health Communication, Information Systems, Instructional/Developmental Communication, Intercultural Communication, Interpersonal Communication, Journalism Studies, Language and Social Interaction, Mass Communication, Organizational Communication, Philosophy of Communication, Political Communication, Popular Communication, Public Relations, Visual Communication Studies, Children, Adolescents and the Media, Communication History, Game Studies, Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Studies, and Intergroup Communication. The journal aims to be inclusive in theoretical approaches insofar as these pertain to communication theory.