Introduction to the interdisciplinary nature of communication

Q3 Social Sciences Review of Communication Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI:10.1080/15358593.2023.2207259
S. Croucher
{"title":"Introduction to the interdisciplinary nature of communication","authors":"S. Croucher","doi":"10.1080/15358593.2023.2207259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Interdisciplinary research is research that draws on theories and methods from multiple disciplines. The fact that communication, as a field of study, is interdisciplinary is not new. Researchers have been discussing the interdisciplinarity of the field for decades. If you look through any book on the history of the discipline, you will find countless discussions of how the discipline we know today has drawn from and continues to draw from the countless humanities, social science, and more recently scientific disciplines. Reflecting on my own postgraduate education in communication, aside from what would be traditionally considered “Communication,” I read rhetoric (Aristotle to Burke), philosophy (Gebser, to Voltaire), Sociology and Anthropology (Hall to Butler), political science (Arendt), Economics (Keynes), as well as History (Eisenstein and Gaspard), to name a few. This interdisciplinary education has shaped how I and my postgraduate students conceptualise and operationalise “communication.” This diversity of perspective, which is increasingly common and accepted in the field, is what encouraged this themed issue for the Review of Communication. Miller’s piece, “Reimaging tenure and promotion for creative faculty: The Creative Scholarship Pathways Framework,” explored the struggles creative scholars experience when communicating their work’s value. Using semistructured interviews, Miller showed how creative researchers often conduct work involving numerous community members; however, this work is often not evaluated for its engagement. Miller formalizes a Creative Scholarship Pathways Framework to assist in evaluating such work rooted in the creative and engaged scholarship. This piece shows not only the mixing of various disciplines, but also the effects of not understanding interdisciplinary work within academia. Shin’s piece, “An interdisciplinary inquiry in the communicator: Implications of Relational Social Paradigm, Practice theory, and Biological Science,” proposes introducing a sociological approach to understanding the communicator in communication studies. Drawing specifically on relational sociology and practice/embodiment theory, Shin suggests communication should also expand in its borrowing from biological sciences. Through this analysis, Shin provides pathways for theoretical inquiries into the ontology of the communicator. Spencer and Graves’ analysis of “What communication brings to the study of gaslighting: Metatheory toward disciplinarity” argues that the interdisciplinary nature of communication provides a unique position for critique. Using the case of gaslighting, the authors argue that research in sociology, psychology, philosophy, and other disciplines will benefit from including a communication point of view. In particular, the gaslighting","PeriodicalId":53587,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication","volume":"23 1","pages":"95 - 97"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2023.2207259","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Interdisciplinary research is research that draws on theories and methods from multiple disciplines. The fact that communication, as a field of study, is interdisciplinary is not new. Researchers have been discussing the interdisciplinarity of the field for decades. If you look through any book on the history of the discipline, you will find countless discussions of how the discipline we know today has drawn from and continues to draw from the countless humanities, social science, and more recently scientific disciplines. Reflecting on my own postgraduate education in communication, aside from what would be traditionally considered “Communication,” I read rhetoric (Aristotle to Burke), philosophy (Gebser, to Voltaire), Sociology and Anthropology (Hall to Butler), political science (Arendt), Economics (Keynes), as well as History (Eisenstein and Gaspard), to name a few. This interdisciplinary education has shaped how I and my postgraduate students conceptualise and operationalise “communication.” This diversity of perspective, which is increasingly common and accepted in the field, is what encouraged this themed issue for the Review of Communication. Miller’s piece, “Reimaging tenure and promotion for creative faculty: The Creative Scholarship Pathways Framework,” explored the struggles creative scholars experience when communicating their work’s value. Using semistructured interviews, Miller showed how creative researchers often conduct work involving numerous community members; however, this work is often not evaluated for its engagement. Miller formalizes a Creative Scholarship Pathways Framework to assist in evaluating such work rooted in the creative and engaged scholarship. This piece shows not only the mixing of various disciplines, but also the effects of not understanding interdisciplinary work within academia. Shin’s piece, “An interdisciplinary inquiry in the communicator: Implications of Relational Social Paradigm, Practice theory, and Biological Science,” proposes introducing a sociological approach to understanding the communicator in communication studies. Drawing specifically on relational sociology and practice/embodiment theory, Shin suggests communication should also expand in its borrowing from biological sciences. Through this analysis, Shin provides pathways for theoretical inquiries into the ontology of the communicator. Spencer and Graves’ analysis of “What communication brings to the study of gaslighting: Metatheory toward disciplinarity” argues that the interdisciplinary nature of communication provides a unique position for critique. Using the case of gaslighting, the authors argue that research in sociology, psychology, philosophy, and other disciplines will benefit from including a communication point of view. In particular, the gaslighting
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
介绍传播学的跨学科性质
跨学科研究是指借鉴多学科理论和方法的研究。作为一个研究领域,传播学是跨学科的,这一事实并不新鲜。几十年来,研究人员一直在讨论该领域的跨学科性。如果你翻阅任何一本关于这门学科历史的书,你会发现无数关于我们今天所知道的这门学科是如何从无数的人文科学、社会科学和最近的科学学科中汲取并继续汲取的讨论。回想我自己在传播学方面的研究生教育,除了传统意义上的“传播学”,我还读了修辞学(从亚里士多德到伯克)、哲学(从格布塞尔到伏尔泰)、社会学和人类学(从霍尔到巴特勒)、政治学(阿伦特)、经济学(凯恩斯)以及历史学(爱森斯坦和加斯帕德),等等。这种跨学科的教育塑造了我和我的研究生如何概念化和操作“沟通”。这种观点的多样性在这一领域日益普遍和被接受,正是鼓励《传播评论》发表这一主题的原因。米勒的文章《创造性教师的任期和晋升:创造性奖学金途径框架》探讨了创造性学者在传达其工作价值时所经历的挣扎。通过半结构化访谈,米勒展示了富有创造力的研究人员如何经常开展涉及众多社区成员的工作;然而,这项工作往往没有评估其参与程度。米勒正式制定了一个创造性奖学金途径框架,以帮助评估这种植根于创造性和参与性奖学金的工作。这件作品不仅展示了不同学科的混合,也展示了学术界不理解跨学科工作的影响。Shin的文章《传播者的跨学科探究:关系社会范式、实践理论和生物科学的含义》建议在传播学研究中引入社会学方法来理解传播者。申特别借鉴了关系社会学和实践/具体化理论,他建议传播也应该扩大对生物科学的借鉴。通过这一分析,申为对传播者本体的理论探究提供了途径。斯宾塞和格雷夫斯对“传播给煤气灯研究带来了什么:面向学科的元理论”的分析认为,传播的跨学科性质为批判提供了一个独特的位置。以煤气灯为例,作者认为社会学、心理学、哲学和其他学科的研究将受益于纳入交流的观点。特别是煤气灯
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Review of Communication
Review of Communication Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
Student-to-student confirmation: a review and recommendations for research Theorizing about persuasive message repetition in communication research: a systematic review Students’ peer network quality: effects on academic resilience and intention to persist Marginalizing mortality: the fight against death as the communicative cultural condition Assessing the communicative experience of student orientation leaders: peer and professional
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1