Understanding Communication Research Methods A Theoretical and Practical Approach Stephen M. Croucher

Understanding Communication Research Methods A
Theoretical and Practical Approach Stephen M.
Croucher download
https://textbookfull.com/product/understanding-communication-
research-methods-a-theoretical-and-practical-approach-stephen-m-
croucher/
Download full version ebook from https://textbookfull.com

We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click
the link to download now, or visit textbookfull.com
to discover even more!
Mathematical Problems in Data Science Theoretical and
Practical Methods 1st Edition Li M. Chen
https://textbookfull.com/product/mathematical-problems-in-data-
science-theoretical-and-practical-methods-1st-edition-li-m-chen/
Research Methodology: A Practical And Scientific
Approach Vinayak Bairagi
https://textbookfull.com/product/research-methodology-a-
practical-and-scientific-approach-vinayak-bairagi/
Research Methodology: A Practical And Scientific
Approach Vinayak Bairagi
https://textbookfull.com/product/research-methodology-a-
practical-and-scientific-approach-vinayak-bairagi-2/
Understanding Research Methods for Evidence-Based
Practice in Health 2nd Edition Trisha M. Greenhalgh
https://textbookfull.com/product/understanding-research-methods-
for-evidence-based-practice-in-health-2nd-edition-trisha-m-
greenhalgh/

Research Design and Methods: A Process Approach, 11th
Edition Bordens
https://textbookfull.com/product/research-design-and-methods-a-
process-approach-11th-edition-bordens/
Interventional Breast Procedures A Practical Approach
Cherie M. Kuzmiak
https://textbookfull.com/product/interventional-breast-
procedures-a-practical-approach-cherie-m-kuzmiak/
A Research Primer For Technical Communication Methods
Exemplars And Analyses George F. Hayhoe
https://textbookfull.com/product/a-research-primer-for-technical-
communication-methods-exemplars-and-analyses-george-f-hayhoe/
Research methods in applied linguistics A Practical
Resource Brian Paltridge
https://textbookfull.com/product/research-methods-in-applied-
linguistics-a-practical-resource-brian-paltridge/
Doing Academic Research A Practical Guide to Research
Methods and Analysis 1st Edition Ted Gournelos
https://textbookfull.com/product/doing-academic-research-a-
practical-guide-to-research-methods-and-analysis-1st-edition-ted-
gournelos/

Understanding Communication
Research Methods
Using an engaging how-to approach that draws from scholarship, real life, and popular culture, this textbook
offers students practical reasons why they should care about research methods and a guide to actually conducting
research themselves. Examining quantitative, qualitative, and critical research methods, this new edition helps
undergraduate students better grasp the theoretical and practical uses of method by clearly illustrating practical
applications. The book features all the main research traditions within communication, including online methods,
and provides level-appropriate applications of the methods through theoretical and practical examples and
exercises, including new sample student papers that demonstrate research methods in action.
Stephen M. Croucher is a Professor and the Head of the School of Communication, Journalism, and Marketing
at Massey University, New Zealand. He serves on the editorial boards of more than ten journals, and served as the
editor of the Journal of Intercultural Communication Research (2010–2019) and Speaker & Gavel (2010–2015). He
has held and holds various leadership positions in the National Communication Association, International
Communication Association, the World Communication Association, and also holds professorships at the
University of Jyväskylä, Universidade Aberta, and the Universidade de Coimbra.
Daniel Cronn-Mills is a Professor and Distinguished Faculty Scholar at Minnesota State University, Mankato,
USA. Dan has authored and co-authored three books, five book chapters, and a stack of journal articles. He served
for more than a decade as the editor of Speaker & Gavel (1997–2010) and has served on the editorial board of
eleven scholarly journals. Dan has served in numerous leadership roles at the local and national levels, including
the National Communication Association, the American Forensic Association, and the Communication and
Theatre Association of Minnesota.
3

UNDERSTANDING
COMMUNICATION
RESEARCH METHODS
A Theoretical and Practical Approach
Second Edition
Stephen M. Croucher & Daniel Cronn-Mills
4

Second edition published 2019
by Routledge
52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017
and by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2019 Taylor & Francis
The right of Stephen M. Croucher and Daniel Cronn-Mills to be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with
sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means,
now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
First edition published 2015 by Routledge
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Names: Croucher, Stephen Michael, 1978– author. | Cronn-Mills, Daniel, author.
Title: Understanding communication research methods : a theoretical and practical approach / Stephen M. Croucher & Daniel Cronn-Mills.
Description: Second edition. | New York : Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2019.
Identifiers: LCCN 2018011410| ISBN 9781138052659 (hbk) | ISBN 9781138052680 (pbk) | ISBN 9781315167664 (ebk)
Subjects: LCSH: Communication—Research—Methodology.
Classification: LCC P91.3 .C73 2019 | DDC 302.2/0721—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018011410
ISBN: 978-1-138-05265-9 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-138-05268-0 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-315-16766-4 (ebk)
Typeset in Interstate
by Florence Production Ltd, Stoodleigh, Devon, UK
Visit the companion website: www.routledge.com/cw/9781138052680
5

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Contents
PART 1
Introduction to Research and Research Paradigms
Introduction and Ethics
The Social Scientific Paradigm
The Interpretive Paradigm
The Critical Paradigm (by JAMES P. DIMOCK)
PART 2
Research Design
Data
Evaluating Research – Warrants
Hypotheses and Research Questions
PART 3
Research Methods
Ethnography
Interviewing
Focus Groups
Social Media and Research Methods (by HEATHER MCINTOSH)
Content Analysis – Qualitative
Content Analysis – Quantitative
Discourse Analysis (by MARGARETHE OLBERTZ-SIITONEN)
Surveys
Descriptive Statistics
Inferential Statistics
Mixed Methods (by MALYNNDA JOHNSON)
Rhetorical Criticism
Critical/Cultural Methods (by JAMES P. DIMOCK)
Index
6

Part 1
Introduction to Research and Research Paradigms
7

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Chapter Outline
Welcome to Communication Research Methods
Why Take Research Methods?
A Few Key Terms to Start the Course
Research Ethics
Outline of the Textbook
Summary
Key Steps & Questions to Consider
Discussion Questions
Key Terms
Welcome to Communication Research Methods
Sir Edmund Hillary (1919–2008), a New Zealand-born explorer, mountain climber, and philanthropist, is best
known for being the first confirmed person to reach the summit of Mt. Everest in 1953. Sir Edmund sought out
new areas of exploration and challenges, and also devoted a great deal of his efforts to building schools, hospitals,
and other facilities for the Sherpa people of Nepal. He was known for believing that all people are capable of great
things. In fact, he is known for saying, “I have discovered that even the mediocre can have adventures and even the
fearful can achieve.”
Stephen and Dan (the authors of your textbook) agree with this sentiment when thinking about research
methods. All too often we see students who do not naturally take to research and, for a variety of reasons, show a
great deal of resistance to it. Fear is natural with anything. However, we have seen all kinds of students excel in
communication research, including those who did not think they would ever “reach the summit.” The key is to
look at learning research methods, as corny as it may sound, as a journey. You will confront challenges, face
frustrations, celebrate victories, and possibly experience some losses. Yet, in the end, we can all achieve and enjoy
the journey. Look around the room next time your class meets and you will see other people just like you. You are
not alone in the journey. Enjoy the trip—let your textbook serve as your roadmap and your teacher as your Sherpa
guide. As you start your research journey, we should first establish a few good reasons to study communication
research methods, second, identify key terms to help you progress quickly as a communication scholar, third,
discuss the importance of ethics in research, and finally, provide an overview for the rest of the chapters in the
textbook.
Why Take Research Methods?
You may be studying communication research methods because the course is required for your major or degree
program. However, one of the things Dan and Stephen do whenever they teach research methods, and which we
are sure is one of the things your instructor does as well, is discuss the academic and practical importance of
research methods (they often overlap). Let’s first talk about the academic benefits. First, research methods will
improve your ability to locate, critique, and use academic materials. In many research classes, students have to look
9

up information on a subject. With the university library and the Internet at your disposal, you can find stacks of
information. The key is to know what is “good” information. This kind of class will help.
Second, you will likely have to write one or more papers in the course. Stephen and Dan have their students
conduct research papers of various lengths. The students are graded on content, their ability to follow a research
design, and on their writing abilities. Effective writing is important. We may have the best ideas, but if we cannot
communicate them properly, our ideas lose merit.
Third, as you progress through your research methods course and your program of study, you will be
introduced to a variety of concepts. Critical analysis of new concepts is important. Critical analysis involves three
things: 1) know what the concept means, 2) evaluate it, and 3) make a judgment about it. In this type of class you
will learn some of these skills, particularly when you learn about concepts such as reliability, validity, and claims.
Critical thinking is a great skill to have and crosses into every aspect of life.
Learning research methods has practical reasons and benefits. All teachers of research methods have stories
about students who have taken the skills into other avenues of their lives. Stephen recently spoke with a former
student who is now a Coordinator of Human Resources for a group of 15 hospitals. This student told Stephen:
Research skills are integral to my responsibilities. I would be lost without them. Every day I need to make our hospitals better places to work. To
do this I regularly propose new programs to the Board. When I do this, I have to be perfect in my proposal … the numbers have to add up, and
it must be well-written. I constantly ask questions such as: is this plan valid, are the measures reliable? My team and I regularly do reviews of
current literature to see the state of our industry, we always are analyzing data, and constantly writing reports. I am grateful I took this course.
Whenever I interview applicants, this is one thing I look for … research skills.
A former student of Dan’s had plans to become a pharmaceutical sales representative. While a student, she
conducted a research project focused on the communication interactions between sales reps and physicians. She
conducted extensive communication-focused interviews with reps and doctors and was able to identify the
strengths and weaknesses of their communication when the groups met. She was able to take her findings and
effectively use the results to advance her professional career.
A second student of Dan’s worked at a popular local restaurant during college. The restaurant had a high rate of
employee turnover. The restaurant, it seemed, was constantly hiring new staff. The student conducted a study,
with permission of the restaurant management, comparing communication expectations between staff and various
levels of management. The student identified several levels of mismatched expectations. The findings helped the
restaurant significantly improve communication and greatly reduce employee turnover. The student listed the
research report on his resume. During his first post-graduation interview, the potential employer was intrigued by
the study and they spent more than an hour discussing the research project during the interview. Seems the
potential employer was also frustrated with their rate of employee turnover!
Research methods enabled each of these students, and many others, to better communicate (e.g., prepare
presentations, reports), understand the professional world, and compete in the world after graduation. As you can
see, taking this course has lots of practical benefits. With these benefits in mind, let’s move forward on this
journey. Before we begin learning about research methods there are a few key terms we should define.
A Few Key Terms to Start the Course
Many of you may have already taken a basic communication course of some kind, while some of you may not
have taken such a course. Either way, it is always nice to review a few terms that will be used in this book that
would have been introduced in the basic communication course. The first term we want to define is
communication. There are so many definitions we could provide of communication. In this text we provide one
definition. Communication is a process of sharing meaning with others. There are a few elements of this
definition that should be explained. “Process” refers to the three elements of communication: there is a sender, a
message, and a receiver. When the receiver provides feedback (a response of some kind), a transaction occurs
between the communicators. Think about a conversation: person A (the sender) says “Hi” (the message) person B
(the receiver) receives the messages and responds with “Hi.” This is the classic sender-receiver model. However,
not all communication involves a direct response like the example we just provided. In some cases person B may
just nod (a non-verbal response), or in other cases person B may not respond at all. When there is no response,
you have one-way communication or unilateral communication.
Another key element of this definition is the idea of sharing meaning. When we “communicate” we are sharing
something with others, whether we intend to or not. You may have heard the saying, “you cannot not
10

communicate.” What this means is that we are always communicating, even when we do not mean to
communicate. The sending of messages to others, either verbally or non-verbally, is always happening. If you sit in
the back of the room and you cross your arms and you look away from the instructor, what are you
communicating? Well, to non-verbal researchers, you might be communicating that you are uninterested. Maybe
you are not, but our body language tells a lot about what we are thinking/feeling. Ultimately, the thoughts/feelings
that we intend or do not intend to share with others is done through this sender/receiver process we call
communication. We will not go further into defining communication, but we wanted to provide a preliminary
definition of this process, particularly as this textbook focuses on communication research methods.
A second key term to define is communications. Communications is a technological system for the
transmission of information. Examples of communications systems include telephone, cable, television, fiber
optics, the Internet, etc. There is a key difference between communication and communications. Communication
is a human process of sharing meaning with others; communications is a technological system for the transmission
of information. Stephen and Dan have both known professors and industry professionals who are very particular
about this difference, so make sure you know the difference.
The third term we want to define is theory. A theory is a formal statement of rules on which a subject is based
or an explanation of the relationship between variables. In essence, a theory is a statement that is intended to
explain facts in the social or scientific world. If we look to the social sciences or humanities, where communication
departments are located, we will find various ways to approach theory. Chapters 2–4 each discuss different ways
communication researchers define and approach the study and research of “theory.”
The fourth term is research. Research is the detailed or in-depth study of a subject (often a theory) to reach a
greater understanding of or to obtain new information about the subject. This is what you will be doing in this
class, in other classes, and in life, when asked to do research: you will be reaching a greater understanding of or
obtaining new information about a subject (like a theory).
The fifth term is method. A method is a systematic technique or procedure used to conduct research. In
Chapters 8–20 of this textbook, we describe various methods you can use in communication studies. Each of the
methods is slightly different; however, each of the methods is systematic. Each has particular “rules” or guiding
principles you need to follow. Hopefully, as you read through the textbook, you will find one or more methods
which “speak to you.”
The final term is methodology. While method and methodology may sound similar, they are quite different.
Methodology is the study of one or more methods. A method is how you conduct your research; for example,
using interviews to collect data for your project. Methodology is the study of interviews as a method. In a
methodology, you would explain what makes interviewing an appropriate choice for your research, the history of
interviewing as a method, your data analysis technique, etc. Essentially, in a methodology you discuss the theory
behind the method. So, remember, the method is the “how-to,” and the methodology is the theory behind the
method.
Research Ethics
Ethics has many different definitions. Aristotle defined ethics as living well and doing good things. Quintillian, a
Roman orator, identified a clear relationship between communication and ethics when he defined an ethical man
as one who speaks well. English philosopher Thomas Hobbes in his 1651 book Leviathan described ethics as the
actions one takes in order to maintain a social contract in society. In Leviathan, Hobbes praised ideas such as
autonomy, preservation of relationships, justice, and fairness. All of these ideas are essential for maintenance of the
social contract, which is an ethical aspect of life. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy defines ethics as the
“principles of right and wrong that govern our choices and pursuits” (Audi, 1999, p. 286). Arnett, Harden Fritz,
and Bell (2009) define ethics as “practices that enact or support a good, a central value or set of values associated
with human life and conduct” (p. xii). We define ethics as the actions, thoughts, values, principles, and
communicative practices one enacts in determining how to interact with and treat others.
If you were to write a paper on ethics, paying particular attention to how Western (European and North
American, for example) scholars conceptualize ethics, you would find many of the same attributes as outlined in
Leviathan. An ethical person, from a Western perspective, is one who typically upholds justice, fairness, the
preservation of relationships, and autonomy (Pojman, 2005). Let’s take a closer look and compare the two largest
religious populations in the world today—Christianity and Islam. The emphasis among Christians for such
11

qualities in an ethical person stems from the Bible and the teachings of Jesus Christ (Croucher, 2011). The 39
books of the Old Testament provide a litany of rules, or ways people should live their lives to be “good” or
“ethical” Christians. While many Christians do not follow everything in the Old Testament, the rules and laws it
sets forth paint a picture of what was meant at the time of the Testament’s writing of what was needed to be
“good” (Croucher, 2011). For many Fundamentalist Christians (strict followers), many aspects of the books hold
true as roadmaps to ethical behavior and salvation. The 27 books of the New Testament state that, among many
other things, autonomy, the preservation of relationships, justice, forgiveness, and fairness are all necessary
attributes for the “good” or “just” person. In the New Testament, readers are taught that these values and actions
lead to salvation. These actions and values have served as the bedrock of classical and modern Western thought on
ethics (Croucher, 2011).
Traditional ethics in Islam, the second largest religious group in the world, differs a bit from traditional
Christian ethics. Traditional Islamic ethics is based on the Koran and the teaching of the Prophet Muhammad.
Three principles are of key importance—forgiveness, shame, and patience. The Koran states that Allah (God) is
forgiving and merciful. Thus, forgiving an individual who wrongs you is more valued and ethical than to demand
justice and/or punishment (Croucher, 2011). These tenets are similar to the Christian philosophy, “To err is
human, to forgive divine.” Shame is a trait of an ethical person, particularly in conflict situations. Let’s say you
have been disrespected in some way; it is easy to remain upset instead of being a better person and trying to work
out the problem. The ethical solution is to work through the conflict with the person, maybe by using a third
party to avoid shame for all parties involved. An escalation of conflict only brings more shame to all involved.
Patience is an important part of the Islamic ethic. One should not rush to judgment. One should contemplate a
situation, pray for God’s guidance, and seek the help of a third party if needed. A decision should be based on a
logical, patiently thought-out plan. The different approaches to ethics between these two religious groups reveal
various ways to think about “What is ethical?”
Ethics and the Scientific Community
The place of ethics in philosophy, science, and medicine used to be a much more contentious issue than it is
today. Philosophers like John Locke and John Stuart Mill argued that ethical concerns had no real place in science
because ethical issues belonged to a priori knowledge (or knowledge independent of experience and evidence). For
philosophers like Locke and Mill, science should be amoral, detached, and separate from moral obligations to best
ascertain truth. These scientists were responding to fears that gripped the scientific community in the days of
Copernicus and Galileo. Science was silenced by the Catholic Church because scientific discoveries and knowledge
questioned and challenged Catholic doctrine. A fear of scientific knowledge being hindered by religious dogma, or
other such “moral” or “ethical” principles, led philosophers like Locke and Mill to call for scientists who were
amoral.
Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel, Frankenstein; or the Modern Prometheus can be interpreted as a challenge to what
Locke, Mill, and Max Weber were calling for with amoral science. For Shelley, when science is amoral, we are left
with a Frankenstein monster. Mill (1861/1957) disagreed with Shelley concerning the place of morals and ethics
in science. His philosophy of utilitarianism proposed a very different view of science and research than Shelley’s
Frankenstein monster. He asserted that individuals should have full liberty except in harming others. The concept
of utilitarian ethics, which stems from utilitarianism, means that one should have full freedom to conduct
research, as long as the benefits of the research outweigh the potential harms of the research (Christians, 2000).
While medical and scientific research blossomed in the 18th
and 19th
centuries, the utilitarian ethic was
misconstrued quite a bit in the 20th
century. During World War I, medical researchers working for the United
States, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and other European powers experimented on humans with
various chemical and biological agents. Researchers and governments argued that such experiments were carried
out to better advance science and to protect national security. In World War II, Nazi and Japanese doctors both
conducted numerous experiments on prisoners. Such experiments explored pain thresholds, responses to poisons
and temperatures, and involved injecting individuals with viruses, and many other experiments. Numerous
doctors were tried for crimes against humanity at Nuremberg for unethical and inhumane treatment of humans
during World War II. The doctors argued they were following orders or that the work was for the benefit of
mankind.
Numerous instances exist in the history of the United States during the 20th
century in which researchers and
12

doctors violated numerous ethical principles in the “name of science.” For example, from the 1930s to the 1970s,
black men in Tuskegee, Alabama who had syphilis were told they did not have the disease and were refused
counseling for the disease. Many of these individuals were airmen in the U.S. military. Many other men, and some
women, were intentionally injected with the disease. The purpose of the experiments was to study the progression
of syphilis. The experiments lasted until the 1970s (Kampmeier, 1972). Countless people died and generations of
lives were affected by U.S. government sponsored experiments. In 1963, Drs. Southam and Mandel at the Jewish
Chronic Disease Hospital in New York injected 22 debilitated patients with live cancer cells without their consent
(Mulford, 1967). The physicians were interested in exploring the effects of cancer on the human body.
In the social sciences, researchers have also been questioned about their ethics. The 1961 Milgram experiments
at Yale University explored individuals’ obedience to authority figures. While the experiment offered valuable
insights into people’s behaviors under pressure from authority, the techniques used by Milgram and his colleagues
have been deemed less than ethical (Baynard & Flanagan, 2005). The psychological stress suffered by many of the
participants is something you do not want when conducting research. The 1971 Stanford Prison Experiment is
another classic example of a psychological experiment run amok, ethically speaking. The experiment conducted by
Phillip Zimbardo concluded that, given the right circumstances, just about anyone’s personality could shift from
follower to leader, and vice versa (Stolley, 2005). These results are of particular interest in contexts such as the
military and prisons. The study, which examined conflict between superiors and subordinates, was fraught with
problems, such as physical abuse between participants and poor debriefing of participants (we will talk about
debriefing later in the chapter).
In response to many of these incidents (Tuskegee in particular), the National Commission for the Protection of
Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, a federally funded Commission, was created in 1974.
This Commission met and wrote the Belmont Report, in which they outlined ethical guidelines and principles for
research with human subjects. Three key principles were identified in the report regarding human subjects: (1)
respect for individuals, (2) beneficence, and (3) justice. Along with these three guiding principles, the Belmont
Report and the Federal government required all organizations receiving federal funds to have an Institutional
Review Board (IRB). IRBs monitor, direct, and are responsible for enacting codes of conduct. Every American
university and college has an IRB. IRBs consist of faculty members from diverse sexual, ethnic, racial, and
disciplinary backgrounds. An IRB needs faculty with various methodological and theoretical specializations. An
IRB needs to have at least one member on the Board who is not affiliated with the university or college to help
make sure rules are followed.
Now, any research involving human subjects should be sent to the college or university IRB for approval before
any data collection is conducted. All research involving human subjects must meet at least three minimum
requirements before an IRB will permit it to take place (the same three principles as outlined by the Belmont
Report). First, the researchers must respect the rights of the participants who take part in the research. Second, the
benefits of the research should outweigh the potential harms of the research for the participants (beneficence).
Third, all participants should be treated fairly (justice).
Based partially on these three principles, as well as on the procedures used in a research project, IRBs make
determinations about levels of risk. An exempt research project has minimal risk—typically similar to the risk a
person faces in a normal day. Examples of these kinds of projects include research conducted on existing data,
research in educational environments, and surveys and interviews without highly probing questions. These
projects receive expedited review by an IRB. An expedited application is typically reviewed by the head or chair of
IRB and not the full board. To qualify for exempt research with humans, you must also make sure you are
working with individuals who are able to personally consent to the research.
If a project involves higher levels of risk for participants, or if individual participants are not able to consent for
themselves (children, individuals with mental disabilities, prisoners, and other “protected” groups), a project will
be non-exempt. Non-exempt projects are sent to the full board for review. Such projects need closer scrutiny to
make sure the project fulfills the three principles established in the Belmont Report. We include at the end of this
chapter an approved IRB Application written by Stephen Croucher to show you how the IRB application process
works.
Now that you know a bit more about the relationship between ethics and the scientific community, and how an
IRB monitors ethics, the following section discusses ethical practices we should all follow when working with
human subjects.
13

Ethics and Human Subjects
When conducting research among human subjects, various principles must be followed. Along with the principles
outlined in the Belmont Report, one should adhere to three additional procedural and ethical guidelines. The
three key elements are informed consent, level of participant privacy, and debriefing.
Informed Consent
When conducting research we must get informed consent from participants. Informed consent requires that you
to tell your participants, in a written document, what they will be doing in the study, explain the risks and benefits
of their participation, explain that individuals have a right to stop participation at any time, provide the
researchers’ contact information, and obtain participant permission to take part in the study. It is of utmost
importance that the consent document be written in language the participants can understand. Try to avoid
jargon and other language that may confuse participants. Informed consent documents should be signed by
participants to show that they have given their permission. In such cases, the researcher should keep names
confidential (private). In some cases, when a researcher is not looking to keep the names of participants
(anonymity), acceptance of the form may count as an agreement to participate. We will talk more about the
difference between confidentiality and anonymity shortly.
Sample Informed Consent Document
INFORMED CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN A RESEARCH STUDY
You are being asked to volunteer for a research study. Please read this form and ask any questions that you
may have before agreeing to take part in this study.
Project Title: “A comparative analysis between Muslim and non-Muslim conflict styles.”
Principal Investigator Stephen M Croucher
Co-Investigators: _________________________
Contact Information: INSERT ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER HERE
Purpose of the Research Study
The purpose of this study is to measure the conflict styles of individuals who reside in France, the United
Kingdom, Germany, Spain, Costa Rica, and the United States.
Procedures
If you agree to be in this study, you will be asked to do the following things: you will be asked to complete an
11-page survey that examines how you rationalize and manage conflict. This survey should take you
approximately 35–50 minutes.
Risks and Benefits of Being in the Study
There are no foreseeable risks to participating in this study.
The benefits to participation are: that you will be able to voice your opinion(s) anonymously on a
controversial issue, which can help relieve stress. Also, this study is important because it examines how
individuals from different cultures rationalize and manage conflict.
Anonymity
Because you have not signed a sign-up sheet, or any other form that includes your name, your participation in
this study is completely anonymous. Furthermore, because your survey will be combined with other surveys
(approximately 3000–4000), your responses will be virtually impossible to separate from the other responses.
Voluntary Nature of the Study
14

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Participation in this study is voluntary. Your decision whether or not to participate will not result in penalty
or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. If you decide to participate, you are free to not answer
any question or withdraw at any time.
Contacts and Questions
The researcher conducting this study can be contacted at (INSERT E-MAIL HERE). You are encouraged to
contact the researcher if you have any questions.
You may also contact the Chair, Human Subjects Review Board, Bowling Green State University, (419)
372–7716 (hsrb@bgsu.edu), if any problems or concerns arise during the course of the study.
You will be given a copy of this information to keep for your records. If you are not given a copy of this consent form,
please request one.
The box opposite contains a sample informed consent document, approved by the IRB at Bowling Green State
University, which Stephen used in a study on conflict styles among Muslim immigrants and non-Muslims in
France.
An informed consent form has many elements. Each college or university’s IRB may have slightly different
requirements. As a student, if you conduct research as part of a course assignment, you may not be required to
produce an informed consent form. However, it is better to be safe than sorry and always ask your teacher if you
need informed consent and if you need IRB approval before conducting your research. An informed consent form
has eight elements.
Required Elements of Informed Consent
Title of the project. You need to have some title for your project. A title is a requirement for an IRB
application.
Names of the investigators. List your name and the names of anyone else in your research group. If you are a
student researcher you will also need to list your teacher as a sponsor of your research.
Contact information. First, you must provide participants with your contact information in case they have
questions about the project during and/or after the project. You should give them your physical address, e-
mail address, and phone number(s). If you are a student researcher, you will need to provide your teacher’s
contact information. Second, IRBs will require that you provide participants with the contact information of
the IRB just in case participants have questions for the IRB to answer.
Purpose of the study. You need to provide a brief description of the study. The description needs to be just
enough to inform the participants of what you are studying.
Procedures. This is where you inform the participants of exactly what they need to do in the study. You need
to describe in basic language what you expect from them. You must let the participants know how much of
their time you will use and outline other obligations you have for them.
Risks and benefits. First, you must tell the participants about any risks or harms that may arise from
participating in the study. Second, you need to let them know of any benefits to them, society, or the
academic world from their participation.
Anonymity. You need to let the participants know if you are keeping track of their names. Some studies keep
track of participants’ names. If so, tell them what steps you will take to protect their identities.
Voluntary nature of the study. You need to make sure all participants know their participation is voluntary.
Voluntary participation means they can enter and end their involvement in the study at any time.
If you focus on these key issues when writing up an informed consent form, you are being ethical in assuring that
you have informed your potential participants of the information essential for their involvement. Participant
privacy is the next issue you must consider when collecting research.
Participant Privacy
An important part of informed consent is letting participants know how you will handle privacy issues. When you
15

conduct research, people may answer questions about themselves or issues that provide insight into their private
lives. In many cases, participants may want their names shared with others. However, in most cases researchers do
not name the participants in their research. In qualitative research (e.g., interviews, ethnography), researchers often
use pseudonyms for participants. In quantitative studies (e.g., surveys), researchers generally report statistical
results; participant names are never reported. It is important for participants to have the ability to speak freely and
to answer questions without fear of being “outed” to the public. This is why participant privacy is so important.
You can take two approaches with participant privacy in a study. One approach is confidentiality.
Confidentiality is where the researcher knows the names and personal information of the participants but does not
share that information with anyone else. Having this information can be very helpful if you ever need to contact
the participants again (e.g., follow-up interviews). Anonymity is when not even the researcher knows the
participants’ names or personal information. In Stephen’s study on conflict styles among Muslims and non-
Muslims in France, anonymity was used. Stephen did not know the participants’ personal information because the
participants filled out anonymous surveys and Stephen had no intention of contacting the participants again. As
long as you are up-front with your participants as to which kind of privacy you are using, you are being ethical
concerning privacy. In some rare cases you may want to use participants’ names, or some participants may ask that
their real names be used.
Debriefing
In Milgram’s studies at Yale University, he explored the power of control on individuals’ actions. He showed that
with the right amount of influence exerted on an individual, most people will do just about anything to another
person. In his experiments, he had two people in separate rooms who could not see one another. One person read
a series of numbers and the other person had to read the series of numbers back. If they got the series wrong, they
were given an electric shock. The voltage increased each time they got an answer wrong. Over time, the person
receiving the shocks would scream in pain, complain of their heart, and ask to end the experiment. The person
giving the shocks would ask a helper in the room if they could stop, and they were told they could not. The helper
giving the order was a confederate (a person who is in on the project and assists with the data collection). A
confederate secretly takes part in the project and guides it along the way. A confederate would guide the
participants into continuing the electric shocks. Some participants stopped, but many continued to shock the
other person until the screams ended. The person could have been dead from a heart attack. At the end of the
experiment the confederate reunited the two individuals. The one giving shocks finally knew that they did not kill
the other person. They were told that the other person was in on it all along.
Our recounting of the Milgram experiment is necessary to provide an example of a debriefing exercise.
Debriefing is when a researcher explains all of the aspects and purpose(s) of the research process after the research
is completed. During debriefing, the researcher provides participants with a chance to ask questions and to remove
their data from the study if they wish. The purposes of the study should be well explained in the informed consent
form. However, deceiving participants may be necessary in some cases. If you are trying to study how people
respond to persuasive messages in the media, you do not want to predispose them to your persuasive tactics. You
might tell participants in the informed consent form that you are studying individuals’ preferences for media
messages. The IRB will weigh whether the benefits of your research warrant deceiving your participants. Many
IRBs will, in fact, ask you for a copy of your debriefing script, especially if your research includes any kind of
deception.
Ethical Practices in School and Scholarship
As a college or university student, you have ethical responsibilities in your everyday academic studies and in any
research you conduct. If you are conducting research for a methods class, you must consider the ethical issues we
have outlined. Now you may be asking yourself, “I don’t plan on presenting or publishing this paper. It’s just a
class project, so why do I need to go through the entire IRB process?” However, you have an ethical responsibility
to get approval for your project. Formal approval ensures your project follows appropriate ethical research
guidelines. Your instructor will know if you are required to get official approval for a research project. Many
instructors require their students to complete an IRB application even for in-class research projects.
Next, we must all work to avoid plagiarism. Plagiarism is the use of someone else’s words or ideas without
giving credit to that person or institution. Blatant examples of plagiarism include borrowing, buying, or stealing a
16

paper and calling it your own. However, most examples of plagiarism are not this blatant. In the years Dan and
Stephen have been teaching, the two have encountered borrowing, buying, or stealing someone else’s paper less
than five times (even five is too many). The most common form of plagiarism is when people (students, faculty,
and researchers alike) paraphrase a source too closely and do not give adequate credit to the source. We may find a
wonderful source that helps us make a great point in a paper, but sometimes we are either apprehensive to cite
quotations from it too much, or we do not know how to synthesize our own ideas well enough. So what happens
is that people “paraphrase” almost word-for-word. Changing a word or two in a sentence does not make it your
own.
Stephen often suggests that, if the student thinks their paraphrasing sounds too similar to the original statement
from the author(s), then the section needs reworking into the student’s own words. Stephen reminds them that
even a paraphrase needs to be cited. Authors deserve credit for their ideas. Most students do not intend to
plagiarize when trying to paraphrase. This is why many faculty members will ask students about their intent in
these situations. If you are aware of the need to avoid this situation and make things your own you can avoid
plagiarism.
Outline of the Book
Whenever we approach a textbook, we think it’s a good idea to know what we are getting into. We like to know
the format of the text and what we will be reading. This textbook is divided into three main sections: 1)
Introduction to Research and Research Paradigms, 2) Research Design, and 3) Research Methods. At the end of
each chapter you will find a list of activities, discussion questions, and key terms to help clarify each chapter.
The first section is an Introduction to Research and Research Paradigms and has four chapters. The chapters
define the various approaches to research (paradigms) and discuss ethical practices in research.
The third section on Research Methods has 13 chapters. Each chapter introduces you to different methods you
can use to explore, test, or analyze phenomena, theory, or research questions. The end of most chapters includes
an example student paper utilizing the method. These are real student papers—unedited, so all typographical
errors were in the original—written in a class like the one your are taking now. Maybe one of your papers will be
included in a future edition of the textbook!
Chapter 1 – Introduction and Ethics (you are reading it right now) discusses reasons for taking research
methods, identifies key terms, reviews the importance of ethics and following ethical practices in research, and
outlines the other chapters in the textbook.
Chapter 2 – The Social Scientific Paradigm presents the first of the three research paradigms. The chapter
defines the social scientific paradigm, discusses the development of the paradigm, and outlines key questions
underlying this paradigm.
Chapter 3 – The Interpretive Paradigm presents the second of the three research paradigms. The chapter
defines the interpretive paradigm, discusses the development of the paradigm, describes the three main approaches
to theory and method within this paradigm, and outlines key questions supporting this paradigm.
Chapter 4 – The Critical Paradigm presents the final of the three research paradigms. The chapter defines the
critical/cultural paradigm, discusses the development of the paradigm, describes approaches to theory and method
within this paradigm, and outlines key questions for the paradigm.
The second section focuses on Research Design and has three chapters. The chapters address issues related to
data, how we evaluate research, and what constitutes hypotheses and research questions.
Chapter 5 – Data explores research data. The chapter describes the various sources of data, defines data
sampling, explains the various data collection settings, and discusses the different levels of measurement (types of
variables) available.
Chapter 6 – Evaluating Research discusses the various approaches to evaluating research. The chapter describes
warrants for social scientific research, interpretive research, and critical/cultural research.
Chapter 7 – Hypotheses and Research Questions describes hypotheses and research questions. The chapter
describes the reasoning behind hypotheses and research questions, explains when to use what kind of hypothesis
and/or research question, discusses how to test hypotheses and/or research questions, defines error, and provides a
case study that applies the principles learned in the chapter.
The third section on Research Methods has 13 chapters. Each chapter introduces you to different methods you
can use to explore, test, or analyze phenomena, theory, or research questions. The end of most chapters includes
17

an example student paper utilizing the method. These are real student papers – unedited, so all typographical
errors were in the original – written in a class like the one you are taking now. Maybe one of your papers will be
included in a future edition of the textbook!
Chapter 8 – Ethnography guides you in learning how to conduct ethnographic research. The chapter defines
ethnography and the different approaches to ethnography, explains how to make claims with each approach, how
to collect and analyze data, what makes good ethnographic research, and provides a student paper example of
ethnographic research.
Chapter 9 – Interviewing describes how to conduct studies using interviews. The chapter defines interviewing
and the different approaches to interviewing, describes data collection and grounded theory as a form of data
analysis, and provides a student paper example of interviewing.
Chapter 10 – Focus Groups develops skills to conduct focus groups. The chapter defines focus groups and
explains why they are used, describes how to prepare and conduct a focus group, outlines the advantages and
disadvantages of focus groups, and provides a student paper example of focus group research.
Chapter 11 – Social Media and Research Methods explores the contemporary connections between the online
world (e.g., Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, texting) and research in communication. The chapter defines social
media (it may be broader than you realize), the key features of social media, and special considerations using social
media as a site and a tool for research. Finally, it discusses the unique ethical questions involved in conducting
research involving social media.
Chapter 12 – Qualitative Content Analysis explores the difference between qualitative and quantitative content
analyses, different approaches to a qualitative content analysis, and the process for gathering and analyzing your
data. The chapter concludes with a sample student paper.
Chapter 13 – Quantitative Content Analysis is a follow-up to Chapter 12, in that this Chapter further defines
content analysis, and specifically focuses on quantitative content analysis. The chapter concludes with a sample
student paper.
Chapter 14 – Discourse Analysis offers an approach for researching everyday communication. The chapter
explores options for collecting and processing data to produce reliable research, and identifies principles and
practical advice for conducting a discourse analysis.
Chapter 15 – Surveys helps you better understand the function of surveys. The chapter describes surveys, why
they are used, survey creation, survey delivery, and data analysis. Next, the chapter explains the advantages and
disadvantages of surveys, and provides a student paper example of survey research.
Chapter 16 – Descriptive Statistics breaks down the purpose and the uses of statistics to organize and describe
data. The chapter defines visual data, measures of central tendency, variability, distribution, and provides a
student paper example that uses descriptive statistics.
Chapter 17 – Inferential Statistics illustrates how statistics can be used to test for differences, relationships, and
prediction. The chapter explains the foundations of inferential statistics, tests of mean differences, tests of
relationships and prediction, and provides a student paper example that uses inferential statistics.
Chapter 18 – Mixed Methods investigates the complex world of mixed-methods research. The chapter sets the
parameters for a mixed method study, important issues to consider when planning a study, and the steps involved
in conducting your research. The chapter concludes with a student paper using a mixed-methods approach.
Chapter 19 – Rhetorical Criticism guides you in learning how to conduct rhetorical criticism. The chapter
defines rhetoric, rhetorical criticism, and the various approaches to rhetorical criticism, explains how to conduct a
rhetorical criticism, and provides a student paper example of a rhetorical criticism.
Chapter 20 – Critical/Cultural Methods guides you in learning how to conduct a critical/cultural study. The
chapter explains the critical/cultural method, discusses various approaches, explains how to conduct a
critical/cultural study, and provides a student paper example of a critical/cultural critique.
Summary
In this chapter, we explored the terrain of this course. Every class should be an adventure. Communication
research methods are a process where you will exchange ideas on how to study a variety of different subjects. You
will leave this class more prepared for your academic and non-academic lives. In the next chapter we examine
research ethics. As budding communication scholars, it is essential to start off on the right foot and understand the
ethical principles of research.
18

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
1.
2.
Communication is a process of sharing meaning with others.
Communications is a technological system for the transmission of information.
Communication and communications are different. Communication is a human process of sharing meaning
with others; communications is a technological system for the transmission of information.
A theory is a formal statement of rules on which a subject is based or an explanation of the relationship
between variables.
Research is the detailed or in-depth study of a subject (often a theory) to reach a greater understanding or to
obtain new information about the subject.
Method is the systematic technique or procedure used to conduct research.
Methodology is the study of a method, or of multiple methods.
The method is the how-to, and the methodology is the theory behind the method.
Ethics are the actions, thoughts, values, principles, and communicative practices one enacts in determining
how to interact with and treat others.
Utilitarian ethics comes from utilitarianism, which means one should have full freedom to conduct research
as long as the benefits of the research outweigh the potential harms of that research.
Institutional Review Boards were developed after the Belmont Report was published.
Informed consent involves telling participants, in a written document, what they will be doing in the study,
explaining the risks and benefits of their participation, explaining that participants have a right to stop
participation at any time, providing contact information for the researchers, getting participant permission to
participate in the study, and other things.
Two important elements of participant privacy are confidentiality and anonymity.
Debriefing is when a researcher explains all of the aspects and purpose(s) of the research process after the
research is completed.
Why should we study communication?
Why are ethics important?
Key Terms
Anonymity
Communication
Communications
Confidentiality
Debriefing
Ethics
Exempt
Expedited
Informed Consent
Institutional Review Boards
Method
Methodology
Non-Exempt
Plagiarism
Research
Theory
Utilitarian Ethics
References
19

Audi, R. (Ed.), (1999). Cambridge dictionary of philosophy (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Arnett, E. C., Harden Fritz, J. M., Bell, L. M. (2009). Communication ethics literacy. Los Angeles: Sage.
Baynard, P., & Flanagan, C. (2005). Ethical issues and guidelines in psychology. London: Routledge.
Christians, C. G. (2000). Ethics and politics in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.
pp. 133–155). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Croucher, S. M. (2011). Muslim and Christian conflict styles in Western Europe. International Journal of Conflict Management, 22, 60–74.
Hobbes, T. (1651). Leviathan, or, the matter, form, and power of a common-wealth ecclesiastical and civil. London: Printed for Andrew Crooke.
Kampmeier, R. H. (1972). The Tuskegee study of untreated syphilis. South Medical Journal, 65, 1247–1251.
Mill, J. S. (1957). Utilitarianism. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill. (Original work published 1861).
Mulford, R. D. (1967). Experimentation on human beings. Stanford Law Review, 20, 99–117.
Pojman, L. P. (2005). How should we live? An introduction to ethics. Belmong, CA: Wadsworth.
Shelley, M. W. (1998). Frankenstein, or, the modern Prometheus: the 1818 text. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Stolley, K. S. (2005). The basics of sociology. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.
20

2 The Social Scientific Paradigm
21

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Chapter Outline
What Will I Learn About the Social Scientific Paradigm?
Social Scientific Paradigm Defined
Development of the Social Scientific Paradigm
Key Questions that Underlie the Social Scientific Paradigm
Summary
Activities
Key Terms
References
What Will I Learn About the Social Scientific Paradigm?
This is a photo of Professor Michael Pfau, a former Department Chair at the University of Oklahoma. He passed
away in 2009, but not before he taught and inspired generations of scholars, including Stephen. While he
respected all paradigms of thought, he was at his heart a social scientist. On Stephen’s first day of Introduction to
Graduate Studies at the University of Oklahoma (many years ago now), Michael said, “you should be any kind of
researcher you want, as long as you are good at it.” When he said he was a social scientist, a student asked what
that was. He said something to the effect of how his approach to research closely resembles the natural sciences,
and that he looks for causal laws, develops testable theories, gathers empirical data, and is value-free in his testing
of theory. These four issues came up a lot in his discussions of social scientific theory and method. Michael made a
prolific career out of being a social scientist; his work on inoculation has spawned countless studies (for reviews see
Compton, 2013; Pfau & Burgoon, 1988; Pfau, Kenski, Nitz, & Sorenson, 1990; Szabo & Pfau, 2002). Stephen
became a social scientist under Michael’s mentorship.
The social scientific paradigm is one of the three main paradigms, or approaches, to method discussed in this
book; the other two are the interpretive (Chapter 3) and the critical/cultural paradigms (Chapter 4). Social
scientists prefer doing research that looks for causal laws, describes and predicts things, and gathers empirical data;
they try to be as value-free as possible in research. This brings up a lot of broad questions. For example: 1) what is
theory, 2) what are causal laws, 3) what is empirical data, and 4) what does it mean to be value-free in research? In
Chapter 2 we explore these questions and other aspects of the social scientific paradigm or approach to research.
Social Scientific Paradigm Defined
22

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The social scientific paradigm is one of the three main paradigms of research, along with the interpretive (Chapter
3) and the critical/cultural (Chapter 4) paradigms. Social scientific research borrows heavily from the scientific
method. Social science is an organized method of research combining empirical observations of behavior with
inductive and deductive logic to confirm and test theories that are then used to describe and/or predict human
activity. For social scientists, describing and/or predicting human behavior, particularly through the testing of
theory, is of the utmost importance. The testing of theory is where the scientific method comes into play.
The scientific method is a four-step systematic process in which a researcher conducts “research” which, as we
discussed in the introduction, can be done in various ways. The ancient Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans all
created systems for conducting research that closely resemble today’s scientific method. These systems were later
modified by Muslim philosophers, Sir Francis Bacon, René Descartes, David Hume, Charles Pierce, and many
others. The scientific method has four basic principles that form the backbone of social scientific research: theory
should be proposed or present, predictions (hypotheses) should be made, observations should be made, and
empirical generalizations should be generated.
The first step in the scientific method is proposing a theory. A theory is any conceptual representation or
explanation of a phenomenon. Theories are attempts by researchers and scholars to represent processes. We all
know Isaac Newton’s (1642–1726) theory of gravity: very simply put, “what goes up must come down.” Countless
scientists have made careers out of refining and expanding this theory into new horizons. Thanks to Newton’s
initial explanation of how gravity works, we have had breakthroughs in mathematics, architecture, and science.
We identify eight important things to know about theories (Craig & Tracy, 1995; Littlejohn, 1999).
Important Things to Know About Theories
Theories organize and summarize knowledge. What we know about the world is organized into a collection
of systematic theories created by researchers.
Theories focus attention on specific variables and the relationships between those variables. When you are
thinking about a project and wondering what variables to look at, look to the body of theory for guidance on
variable selection.
Theories clarify what is observed and studied and how to study it in our research. In essence, theories provide
roadmaps for explaining and interpreting human behavior.
Theories allow for the prediction of human behavior. As theories are systematic explanations of phenomena,
we can make predictions based on certain kinds of data (we talk more about this later in the chapter).
A “good” theory should generate research; this is the heuristic function of a theory.
No theory can reveal the whole truth about a phenomenon. Some descriptive and/or explanatory aspects will
always be left out, which leaves the theory abstract and partial.
People create theories. Theories represent how people see the world and not how some divine entity sees the
world. It is important to recognize that theories are not perfect and we continue to test theories with new
research. The issue of continued testing is at the heart of being a social scientist and represents what Popper
(1968) argued is a key aspect of a theory—a theory must be falsifiable (or testable through empirical
research).
Some theories have a generative function, which means that the theory’s purpose is to challenge existing
cultural life and generate new ways of living.
The second step in the scientific method is developing predictions about the relationships between phenomena.
Predictions usually come in the form of hypotheses. A hypothesis is a prediction about what a researcher expects
to find in a study. Hypotheses are educated guesses (predictions) about relationships between variables. When
conducting research, the purpose of hypotheses is to help researchers make predictions based on theories. We will
come back to hypotheses in much more detail in Chapters 5–7.
The third step in the scientific method is testing hypotheses, or the observations step. A researcher can test
hypotheses in multiple ways; one purpose of this book is to provide new researchers with numerous ways to
observe (test) their hypotheses. One important criterion for a social scientist when it comes to observation is that
the method must be empirical, objective, and controlled. Empiricism is the notion that a researcher can only
research what they can observe. Something you can’t observe is generally outside of the realm of science. For
example, most empirical scholars will not conduct research on the existence of God, or gods. Why, you ask? The
23

existence of God is a matter of faith, and something one cannot empirically observe. Objectivity refers to the need
for a researcher to be sure that his/her emotions and personal feelings do not interfere with their research and/or
predictions. For a social scientist, objectivity is an important thing many social scientists strive for in research. For
an interpretive or critical/cultural scholar, objectivity is not as much of a concern. All researchers should recognize
that the choice of method they make is a subjective choice. An interpretive/critical/cultural scholar relies more on
subjectivity. For example, Dan is a qualitative and rhetorical scholar while Stephen is a quantitative scholar
(statistics). The fact that they use these methods represents a choice (subjectivity) on their part. Stephen discusses
in his work his role as an objective observer of human behavior. Stephen takes a scientific approach to his analysis,
while Dan takes a more interpretive or critical approach to his research.
Control is where the researcher makes sure (or at least tries to prevent) that personal biases and other
influencing variables do not interfere with a research study. As much as social scientists attempt to make research
value-free, we are all human, and so our personalities and pre-determined preferences will influence our research
methods (and our findings) to some extent (Condit, 1990). Those working in the natural sciences, in
pharmaceuticals for example, take many steps to make research value-free. In medical experiments, researchers
work to prove that the medicine is affecting the body and not some other random variable like researcher
personality, or the weather. This is why pharmaceuticals go through massive and long clinical trials including
control groups and often use things like placebos.
Once you have chosen a theory, generated a hypothesis or hypotheses, and tested the hypothesis or hypotheses,
you move to the fourth step of the scientific method: making empirical generalizations. An empirical
generalization is what you use to describe a phenomenon based on what you know about it from your research.
Your generalizations should build on and/or refine the theory in some way, and if at all possible provide some
practical (real-world) implications from the research you conducted.
Michael Pfau’s primary area of research was inoculation theory. This theory asserts that an individual can be
inoculated against negative messages by giving them a small dose of the message before they encounter the full
message. This is a persuasive form of a flu shot. Michael and his research teams developed countless hypotheses
over the years. They tested their hypotheses using surveys and experiments. Their research was empirical, they
were objective, and they took numerous steps to control for interfering variables. In all, this body of research has
provided countless refinements to inoculation theory and numerous practical implications for media, politics,
economics, and other walks of life. For example, Pfau argued that if a message had the right level of persuasive
elements it could affect viewers enough so that they would not be impacted by future negative messages. Think
about this in terms of political campaigns. If a candidate knows bad news is coming out about them, it serves
them well to craft a pre-emptive message to counter the bad news before it hits the airwaves. While this tactic may
seem counter-intuitive, it actually works. During the 2016 U.S. Presidential elections, Donald Trump would
regularly tweet statements about what his challengers were going to say about him before it was said. Such
inoculatory statements helped propel him to victory.
Now that we have gone over the basic definition of social science and the scientific method, the next section of
Chapter 2 offers a brief historical review of the development of the social scientific paradigm.
Development of the Social Scientific Paradigm
The process of social science dates back to the ancient Greeks, Romans, and Egyptians. During these times,
ancient thinkers combined empirical observations of behavior with deductive logic when confirming and
discovering theories used to describe and predict human activity. Scholars such as Hippocrates (the father of the
Hippocratic Oath) would typically gather massive amounts of empirical (scientific) data on specific issues and
write about their observations. As the centuries progressed, and data collection and scientific methods advanced,
researchers continued to develop the social scientific paradigm.
Great leaps forward were made in the social scientific paradigm in Europe in the 1700s, 1800s, and 1900s. Two
British philosophers furthered a concept known as positivism, a highly social scientific paradigm. David Hume in
his Treatise of Human Nature (1738/2000) outlined how human nature affects scientific research, and outlined his
experimental method. John Stuart Mill, in his A System of Logic (1843/2011), discussed the relationships between
logic and scientific research; specifically, he outlined the five principles of inductive reasoning known as Mill’s
method. Emile Durkheim, a noted French researcher, argued in Rules of the Sociological Method (1895) that
science should be value-free. Durkheim argued that sociology must study social facts and researchers must use a
24

scientific method. Auguste Comte in Cours de Philosophie Positive (The Course of Positive Philosophy) (1830–
1842) outlined the key principles of social science. He argued that the natural sciences were already being studied
and conducted properly and that the social sciences would soon be conducted properly, too. Popper, an Anglo-
Austrian (1902–1994), argued that key aspects of social scientific research—theories and knowledge—“can never
be proven or fully justified, they can only be refuted” (Phillips, 1987, p. 3). This is the falsification aspect of a
theory again. Collectively, these researchers paved the way for a wave of researchers who have continued to strive
for value-free, logical, empirical, and predictive social scientific research.
With a basic understanding of the social scientific paradigm, and some of its early researchers, the following
section outlines nine key questions guiding the social scientific paradigm
Key Questions that Underlie the Social Scientific Paradigm
1. How do the social sciences differ from the natural sciences?
Social scientists are concerned with describing and predicting human behavior. But the “social” part of social
science can be very unpredictable. While a biologist might be able to predict the exact composition or behavior of
a single-cell organism, social scientists are more concerned with predicting patterns based on general human
behaviors. For example, a social scientist could be interested in the relationship between levels of violence and how
much someone plays video games, such as Grand Theft Auto. This relationship will differ quite a bit depending on
countless variables: what kind of video games does the person play, how long do people play the games per day,
the person’s psychological state before and during play, their relational status, their age, their sex/gender—the list
goes on and on. The following studies have all looked at this phenomenon using the social scientific paradigm
(Ivory & Kalyanaraman, 2009; Lachlan & Maloney, 2008; Williams, 2011). We will discuss more in chapters 16
and 17 how social scientists measure these behaviors and make claims based on human behavior.
2. What is the purpose of research?
As with every research paradigm, an important question to ask is: what is the ultimate purpose of the research? For
the social scientist, the purpose of research is the discovery of theories that explain and predict human behavior
and traits (Lindlof & Taylor, 2002; Littlejohn, 1999). In this quest, social scientists collect data and test the data
with systematically developed theories of human behavior and traits. The process of testing theories is endless for a
social scientist, just as knowledge is endless (Neuman, 2011). It is important to note, though, that the process is
never-ending because theories are not perfect. Theories are constantly being refined as testing methods improve
and as our understanding of phenomena changes.
3. What is reality?
For social scientists, reality can be observed by the researcher because reality is “out there” waiting to be observed,
identified, and explained. Social scientists adopt a realist ontology (philosophical study of the nature of being). If
we can see and/or touch something through our research, then it really is not complex at its basic root. For
example, we can see or measure someone’s sex, gender, race, and age. When variables relate to other variables, we
work to explain why. For example, scholars have found that males are more likely to express argumentativeness
than females (Schullery, 1998). Perhaps males express more argumentativeness because they are males? Research
has shown sex and gender is related to heightened expressions of argumentativeness, along with numerous other
variables. Thus, researchers interested in argumentativeness explore the reasons why males have been found to
express more argumentativeness than females in some studies. Second, social scientists view reality as generally
stable. Our traits and behaviors do not change dramatically over time; so if we conduct sound research today we
can make predictions about human behavior that can be viable for many years.
4. What is human nature?
Social scientists recognize that human beings are essentially animals (mammals). While we sometimes forget this
fact, humans are, unlike other mammals (as far as we know), consciously self-interested, rational, and take steps to
avoid pain and seek out pleasure (Neuman, 2011). A social scientist typically tries to observe the stimuli occurring
outside of the animal (humans). These researchers understand the difficulty (if not impossibility) in isolating every
25

phenomenon happening in the brain of an animal. As Durkheim (1938) argued, “social phenomena are things
and ought to be studied as things” (p. 27).
5. Do humans have free will?
It is important to know that social scientists are deterministic in their thinking. Determinism refers to social
scientists’ belief that humans are created and their actions caused mainly by identifiable external forces as well as
internal attributes. This means that many of the decisions we make in life are not only determined by our internal
makeup, but also our surroundings (culture, people, politics, economics, etc.). Social scientists, therefore, study
how external behaviors affect humans, and how these factors lead us to do certain things or act in certain ways. We
are not saying that humans are robots who bend to the will of external commands (though some social scientists
do operate under this philosophy). However, with determinism backing social scientific thought, we are able to
make our predictions about human behavior because we can estimate how specific stimuli may lead to a change in
some behavior.
For example: Michael Pfau’s research on inoculation showed that if you give an audience the right amount of
a persuasive message, you could inoculate them against a future persuasive message. This is powerful
information if you consider how political candidates and corporations are constantly trying to persuade us to
do things … and they are doing it quite well, as we are regularly inoculated against messages without even
knowing it.
6. What is theory?
Theory is one of the most important factors for a social scientist. Stephen fondly remembers Michael Pfau talking
about how one of the goals of a social scientist is theory-testing and theory-building. In Stephen and Dan’s early
theoretical training, they were told that social scientific theory involves four elements. First, a theory can be
descriptive, predictive, or causal in its explanation. If a theory is causal, it explains that X causes Y because Y and X
are related in some way. If a theory is descriptive or predictive, it explains that X is related to Y and outlines the
reasons. Second, a theory should clearly outline the situations under which it operates and/or applies. These
situations are typically called boundary conditions (Dubin, 1978). One should not use a theory meant to study
the immigrant cultural adaptation process when studying a potential spiral of silence around a political issue.
Third, for social scientists, a theory should typically have axioms, postulates, and theorems. These statements add
to the testability of theories. Fourth, a theory should, if at all possible, be applicable in various cultures.
7. How do you determine if an explanation is good or bad?
Social scientists use two criteria to determine whether an explanation is good or bad. First, you must ask yourself if
the results are logical. Are contradictions evident in what you are presenting? If your results contradict previous
research, can you offer a logical response as to why this might be the case? Stephen published a piece in 2011
(Croucher, 2011), in which he found that Muslims in Western Europe prefer to oblige and compromise in
conflicts than to dominate. The stereotype was that Muslims would want to dominate a conflict and be an
aggressor. Stephen had to provide an argument as to why Muslims would logically not be more dominating in a
conflict. He argued that Muslims were not dominating because they were minorities in Western Europe, and so
they had less power in the culture. Since this 2011 work, he has conducted additional analyses among Muslim
populations in Europe and the U.S. to further his initial arguments. Thus far, his initial thoughts have held true,
that the power dynamics of being a minority do indeed influence conflict style (Croucher, 2017). Second, social
scientists are big fans of replication, more replication, and even more replication. A standard scientific practice is
to repeat experiments to make sure they work the same way for every researcher every time. The same holds true
for social scientific research. If you look at the method section of a statistics article in any communication journal,
you will find that the author(s) provide(s) detailed information about how they conducted their research. The
details are provided so other scholars can replicate the study.
8. How do you determine good or bad claims?
Claims are weighed based on our knowledge of empirical facts and theory. Popper argued that knowledge claims
26

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
cannot be proven or entirely justified, “they can only be refuted” (Phillips, 1987, p. 3). In this sense, refuting
claims to knowledge is the never-ending quest that social scientists consider the testing of theory.
Michael Pfau once told Stephen that being a social scientist means forever looking for the outlier, or the one
oddball that makes us question our outlook on reality as we know it.
9. What is the place of values in social scientific research?
Social scientific researchers try to be devoid of values (objective). When conducting research from a social
scientific paradigm, values and morals should not influence research decisions or outcomes. Social scientists
strongly believe that research should be free of interference from religious, political, and other personal influences
that may alter the objectivity of a researcher’s process and/or findings. A researcher should be a disinterested
scholar, one who observes and reports on phenomena without allowing values or morals to interfere. Value-free
research is the ideal for social science. However, this is not always the case, as humans are by nature value-laden
creatures. The job, then, of the social scientist is to recognize the place and impact of values on their research
(Condit, 1990).
Michael Pfau told Stephen when he was a student that to be a social scientist he should do his best to be an
observer and not allow his personal feelings and/or other values to interfere with his research. Pfau told his
students that scientists like Copernicus and Kepler were persecuted because others around them allowed their
religious values to interfere with how they interpreted research. For social scientists, research should be
separate from values, but this is not always 100% possible.
Summary
This chapter explored the first of the three paradigms, the social scientific paradigm. As stated earlier in the
chapter, these researchers emphasize research combining empirical observations of behavior with inductive and
deductive logic to confirm and test theories that are used to describe and/or predict human activity. For social
scientists, describing and/or predicting human behavior, particularly through the testing of theory, is of the utmost
importance. In Chapter 3 we delve into a different research paradigm, the interpretivist paradigm.
Social science is a method of research combining empirical observations of behavior with inductive and
deductive logic to confirm and test theories used to describe and/or predict human activity.
A theory is an explanation of a phenomenon. Theories are not perfect. Theories should be continually
refined.
Social science research is often based on hypotheses, which are educated guesses (predictions) about
relationships between variables.
Social scientists differ in their preferred level of objectivity from interpretive and/or critical/cultural scholars.
While we try to describe, predict, and show causal relationships, human beings are not 100% predictable.
Social science is the study of human nature, not natural science.
Social scientists strive for value-free research. However, it is virtually impossible to have 100% value-free
research.
Activities
Look up a definition of the scientific paradigm and compare the standards, assumptions and expectations to
the social scientific paradigm. Where do the two approaches agree and diverge?
You have significant experience with classroom communication. (After all, you have been attending classes
for more than a decade—stretching back to kindergarten!) Reflect on your years and write down a list of
classroom communication behaviors you can recall. Apply the standards of empiricism to your list. What
27

3.
1.
2.
communication behaviors were observable and could count as data for a social scientific study?
Using the lists from the second activity, create a master list of classroom communication behaviors. Are any
of the behaviors more tied to a specific grade (1st
, 2nd
, 3rd
, etc.) or to a specific stage of school (elementary,
middle school, college, etc.)? Can you draw any basic theories from the observations?
What is the purpose of communication research for social scientists?
How do the requirements for a social scientific study change how we approach the study of communication?
What aspects of communication do you see as worthwhile for study? What aspects of communication might
be difficult to study from the social science paradigm?
Key Terms
Control
Determinism
Empirical Generalizations
Empiricism
Hypothesis
Objectivity
Scientific Method
Social Science
Theory
References
Comte, A. (1998, original 1830). Introduction to positive philosophy. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.
Compton, J. (2013). Inoculation theory. In J. P. Dillard & L. Shen (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of persuasion: Developments in theory and practice (pp.
220–236). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Condit, C. M. (1990). The birth of understanding: Chaste science and the harlots of the arts. Communication Monographs, 57, 323–327.
Craig, T., & Tracy, K. (1995). Grounded practical theory: The case of intellectual discussion. Communication Theory, 5, 248–272.
Croucher, S. M. (2011). Muslim and Christian conflict styles in Western Europe. International Journal of Conflict Management, 22, 60–74.
Croucher, S. M. (2017). Changes in conflict over time: A longitudinal examination of conflict style approaches. In B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, P.
Wilson, & S. M. Croucher (Eds.), Approaches to conflict: Theoretical, interpersonal, and discursive dynamics (pp. 33–42). Lanham, MD: Rowman
& Littlefield.
Dubin, R. (1978). Theory building (Rev. ed.). New York: Free Press.
Durkheim, E. (1938). Rules of the sociological method. (S. Solovay & J. Mueller, Trans.). G. Catilin (Ed.), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hume, D. (2000, original 1738). Treatise on human nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ivory, J. D., & Kalyanaraman, S. (2009). Video games make people violent – Well, maybe not that game: Effects of content and person abstraction
on perceptions of violent video games’ effects and support of censorship. Communication Reports, 22, 1–12.
Lachlan, K. A., & Maloney, E. K. (2008). Game player characteristics and interactive content: Exploring the role of personality and telepresence in
video game violence. Communication Quarterly, 56, 284–302.
Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. (2002). Qualitative communication research methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Littlejohn, S. W. (1999). Theories of human communication (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Mill, J. S. (2011, original 1843). A system of logic, ratiocinative and inductive: Being a connected view of the principles of evidence and the methods of
scientific investigation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Neuman, W. L. (2011). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Pfau, M., & Burgoon, M. (1988). Inoculation in political campaign communication. Human Communication Research, 15, 91–111.
Pfau, M., Kenski, H. C., Nitz, M., & Sorenson, J. (1990). Efficacy of inoculation strategies in promotion resistance to political attack messages:
Application to direct mail. Communication Monographs, 57, 25–43.
Phillips, D. C. (1987). Philosophy, science and social inquiry: Contemporary methodological controversies in social science and related applied fields of
research. New York: Pergamon.
Popper, K. R. (1968). The logic of scientific inquiry. New York: Harper & Row.
Schullery, N. M. (1998). The optimum level of argumentativeness for employed women. Journal of Business Communication, 35, 346–367.
Szabo, E. A. & Pfau, M. (2002). Nuances in inoculation: Theory and application. In J. P. Dillard, & M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook:
Developments in theory and practice (pp. 233–258). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Williams, K. D. (2011). The effects of homophily, identification, and violent video games on players. Mass Communication and Society, 14, 3–24.
28

Discovering Diverse Content Through
Random Scribd Documents

Hints to Travellers
A Manual of Education
Hoodoo McFiggin's Christmas
The Life of John Smith
On Collecting Things
Society Chat-Chat
Insurance up to Date
Borrowing a Match
A Lesson in Fiction
Helping the Armenians
A Study in Still Life.—The Country Hotel
An Experiment With Policeman Hogan
The Passing of the Poet
Self-made Men
A Model Dialogue
Back to the Bush
Reflections on Riding
Saloonio
Half-hours with the Poets
PART I
PART II
PART III
A, B, and C
Acknowledgments

By Stephen Leacock
CONTENTS
I. My Revelations as a Spy
II. Father Knickerbocker: A Fantasy
III. The Prophet in Our Midst
IV.
Personal Adventures in the Spirit
World
V. The Sorrows of a Summer Guest
VI. To Nature and Back Again
VII. The Cave-Man as He is
VIII. Ideal Interviews
I.
WITH A EUROPEAN
PRINCE
II.
WITH OUR GREATEST
ACTOR
III.
WITH OUR GREATEST
SCIENTIST
IV.
WITH OUR TYPICAL
NOVELISTS
IX. The New Education
X. The Errors of Santa Claus
XI. Lost in New York
XII. This Strenuous Age

XIII.
The Old, Old Story of How Five Men
Went Fishing
XIV. Back from the Land
XV.
The Perplexity Column as Done by
the Jaded Journalist
XVI.
Simple Stories of Success, or How to
Succeed in Life
XVII. In Dry Toronto
XVIII. Merry Christmas
FURTHER FOOLISHNESS
Sketches and Satires on The Follies of The Day

By Stephen Leacock
CONTENTS
PREFACE
FOLLIES IN FICTION
I. Stories Shorter Still
CHAPTER ONE AND ONLY
II. Snoopopaths; or, Fifty Stories in One
III. Foreign Fiction in Imported Instalments.
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
Movies and Motors, Men and Women
(II) THE MINISTER WHOSE CHURCH HE ATTENDS
(III) HIS PARTNER AT BRIDGE
(IV) HIS HOSTESS AT DINNER
(III)
X. A Study in Still Life—My Tailor
Peace, War, and Politics
XI. Germany from Within Out
XIII. In Merry Mexico
XIV. Over the Grape Juice; or, The Peacemakers
XV. The White House from Without In

Timid Thoughts on Timely Topics
XVI. Are the Rich Happy?
XVII. Humour as I See It
WINSOME WINNIE AND
OTHER NEW NONSENSE
NOVELS

By Steven Leacock
CONTENTS
I. WINSOME WINNIE; OR, TRIAL AND TEMPTATION 7
I. Thrown on the World 9
II. A Rencounter 14
III. Friends in Distress 18
IV. A Gambling Party in St. James's Close 24
V. The Abduction 28
VI. The Unknown 33
VII. The Proposal 36
VIII. Wedded at Last 42
II. JOHN AND I; OR, HOW I NEARLY LOST MY HUSBAND 43
III. THE SPLIT IN THE CABINET; OR, THE FATE OF ENGLAND 65
IV. WHO DO YOU THINK DID IT? OR, THE MIXED-UP MURDER
MYSTERY 95
I. He Dined with Me Last Night 97
II. I must save her Life 100
III. I must buy a Book on Billiards 108
IV. That is not Billiard Chalk 112
V. Has anybody here seen Kelly? 113
VI. Show me the Man who wore those Boots 119
VII. Oh, Mr. Kent, save me! 123
VIII. You are Peter Kelly 127
IX. Let me tell you the Story of my Life 132
X. So do I 139

V. BROKEN BARRIERS; OR, RED LOVE ON A BLUE ISLAND 143
VI. THE KIDNAPPED PLUMBER: A TALE OF THE NEW TIME 177
VII. THE BLUE AND THE GREY: A PRE-WAR WAR STORY 205
VIII. BUGGAM GRANGE: A GOOD OLD GHOST STORY 225
THE UNSOLVED RIDDLE OF
SOCIAL JUSTICE

By Stephen Leacock
CONTENTS
chapter page
I. The Troubled Outlook of the Present Hour 9
II. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness 33
III. The Failures and Fallacies of Natural Liberty 48
IV. Work and Wages 66
V. The Land of Dreams: The Utopia of the Socialist 88
VI. How Mr. Bellamy Looked Backward 103
VII. What Is Possible and What Is Not 124
BEHIND THE BEYOND

CONTENTS
BEHIND THE BEYOND 11
FAMILIAR INCIDENTS
I. With the Photographer 53
II. The Dentist and the Gas 61
III. My Lost Opportunities 69
IV. My Unknown Friend 74
V. Under the Barber's Knife 84
PARISIAN PASTIMES
I. The Advantages of a Polite Education 93
II. The Joys of Philanthropy 104
III. The Simple Life in Paris 117
IV. A Visit to Versailles 129
V. Paris at Night 143
THE RETROACTIVE EXISTENCE OF MR. JUGGINS 159
MAKING A MAGAZINE 169
HOMER AND HUMBUG 185

ILLUSTRATIONS
The Prologue Frontispiece
to face
page
The curtain rises 12
Their expression is stamped with deep thought 28
He kisses her on the bare shoulder 30
He takes her in his arms 50
"Is it me?" 58
I did go—I kept the appointment 66
He showed me a church that I could have bought for
a hundred thousand
72
I shall not try to be quite so extraordinarily clever 84
When he reached my face he looked searchingly at it 88
The tailor shrugged his shoulders 98
Something in the quiet dignity of the young man held
me
114
The Parisian dog 120
Personally I plead guilty to something of the same
spirit
142
The lady's face is aglow with moral enthusiasm 146
Meanwhile he had become a quaint-looking elderly
man
166
With all the low cunning of an author stamped on his
features
174

A Chronicle of the Frozen Seas

By Stephen Leacock
CONTENTS
Page
I. THE GREAT ELIZABETHAN NAVIGATORS 1
II. HEARNE'S OVERLAND JOURNEY TO THE NORTHERN
OCEAN
34
III. MACKENZIE DESCENDS THE GREAT RIVER OF THE
NORTH
70
IV. THE MEMORABLE EXPLOITS OF SIR JOHN FRANKLIN 89
V. THE TRAGEDY OF FRANKLIN'S FATE 112
VI. EPILOGUE. THE CONQUEST OF THE POLE 136
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 147
INDEX 149

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK INDEX OF THE
PROJECT GUTENBERG WORKS OF STEPHEN LEACOCK ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.
copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying
copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of
Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything
for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and
Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund
from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law
in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated
with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this
agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached
full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge
with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the
terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears,
or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the
United States and most other parts of the world at no
cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You
may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not
located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using
this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived
from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning
of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project
Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without

prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or
expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or
a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original
“Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must
include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in
paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive
from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information

about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who
notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt
that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project
Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend
considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or

damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for
the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3,
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the
Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim
all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR
NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR
BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK
OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL
NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT,
CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF
YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving
it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or
entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide
a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,

INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation,
the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation,
anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with
the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the
following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or
any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission
of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will

remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many

small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to
maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where
we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade
Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and
personal growth!
textbookfull.com

Understanding Communication Research Methods A Theoretical and Practical Approach Stephen M. Croucher

More Related Content

Similar to Understanding Communication Research Methods A Theoretical and Practical Approach Stephen M. Croucher (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Understanding Communication Research Methods A Theoretical and Practical Approach Stephen M. Croucher