在处理、利用或评估一个理论的解释力时，平衡一般领域和特定子领域的贡献

IF 2 2区文学 Q2 COMMUNICATION

Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media Pub Date : 2022-08-08 DOI:10.1080/08838151.2022.2120481

R. Holbert, Elizabeth S. Baik, Meghnaa Tallapragada, C. Tolan, Heather L. LaMarre, Bruce W. Hardy

{"title":"在处理、利用或评估一个理论的解释力时，平衡一般领域和特定子领域的贡献","authors":"R. Holbert, Elizabeth S. Baik, Meghnaa Tallapragada, C. Tolan, Heather L. LaMarre, Bruce W. Hardy","doi":"10.1080/08838151.2022.2120481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Explanatory power is a key criterion for assessing the strength of a theory. This essay provides an expanded detailing of explanatory power’s three components: Plausibility, range, and postdiction. In addition, a case is made for how plausibility advancements signal field-general contributions, range-based works gravitate toward subfield-specific offerings, and postdiction assessments can be field-general or subfield-specific. This discussion is grounded with a focus on four theories: Agenda Setting, Cultivation, Uses and Gratifications, and Social Cognitive Theory. Implications for future theory advancement are discussed and short- and long-term research initiatives are detailed.","PeriodicalId":48051,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media","volume":"66 1","pages":"515 - 539"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Balancing Field-General and Subfield-Specific Contributions When Addressing, Utilizing, or Assessing a Theory’s Explanatory Power”\",\"authors\":\"R. Holbert, Elizabeth S. Baik, Meghnaa Tallapragada, C. Tolan, Heather L. LaMarre, Bruce W. Hardy\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08838151.2022.2120481\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Explanatory power is a key criterion for assessing the strength of a theory. This essay provides an expanded detailing of explanatory power’s three components: Plausibility, range, and postdiction. In addition, a case is made for how plausibility advancements signal field-general contributions, range-based works gravitate toward subfield-specific offerings, and postdiction assessments can be field-general or subfield-specific. This discussion is grounded with a focus on four theories: Agenda Setting, Cultivation, Uses and Gratifications, and Social Cognitive Theory. Implications for future theory advancement are discussed and short- and long-term research initiatives are detailed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48051,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media\",\"volume\":\"66 1\",\"pages\":\"515 - 539\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2022.2120481\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2022.2120481","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要解释力是评价理论强度的重要标准。这篇文章提供了解释力的三个组成部分的扩展细节:合理性，范围和立场。此外，还提出了一个案例，说明了可行性进步如何表明一般领域的贡献，基于范围的工作如何倾向于特定子领域的产品，以及岗位评估可以是一般领域的或特定子领域的。这一讨论以四个理论为基础:议程设置、培养、使用和满足以及社会认知理论。讨论了未来理论发展的意义，并详细说明了短期和长期的研究计划。

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

“Balancing Field-General and Subfield-Specific Contributions When Addressing, Utilizing, or Assessing a Theory’s Explanatory Power”

ABSTRACT Explanatory power is a key criterion for assessing the strength of a theory. This essay provides an expanded detailing of explanatory power’s three components: Plausibility, range, and postdiction. In addition, a case is made for how plausibility advancements signal field-general contributions, range-based works gravitate toward subfield-specific offerings, and postdiction assessments can be field-general or subfield-specific. This discussion is grounded with a focus on four theories: Agenda Setting, Cultivation, Uses and Gratifications, and Social Cognitive Theory. Implications for future theory advancement are discussed and short- and long-term research initiatives are detailed.

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

Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media COMMUNICATION-

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

6.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Published quarterly for the Broadcast Education Association, the Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media contains timely articles about new developments, trends, and research in electronic media written by academicians, researchers, and other electronic media professionals. The Journal invites submissions of original research that examine a broad range of issues concerning the electronic media, including the historical, technological, economic, legal, policy, cultural, social, and psychological dimensions. Scholarship that extends a historiography, tests theory, or that fosters innovative perspectives on topics of importance to the field, is particularly encouraged. The Journal is open to a diversity of theoretic paradigms and methodologies.