Communication is very essential to human existence. According to
Virginia Satir “communication is to a relationship what breathing is to
maintaining life”. The above statement suggest how essential communication is
to human life and his relationship with others and his environment. Human makes
use of communication in his day to day activities; his actions and inactions
are outcome of meanings communicated to him or within him. There is always
communication process going on within every human being as well in animals.
These processes communication include,
Consequently, as communication entails decoding and encoding of
meanings, that is meant to be shared between individuals and groups of people,
there is need to possess some ability and skills as to communication effectively. Effective
communication can help solve human’s problem. The ability to communicate
effectively influences how one will effectively live his personal and
professional life. Thus, it influences his effectiveness as a friend and a
lover. However, effective communicative skill determines how one can
effectively influence a group of individual, and perhaps emerge as a leader
among such group. Therefore, effective communication increases one’s ability to
transmit or convey meanings or information to others, as well as to influence
their attitude and behavior.
Furthermore, communication represents a key and essential human need as
well as a basic human right. No individual, community, group or any other
institution would be able to exist, or prosper, lacking of the ability to
communicate effectively to other people.Hence, such individual, community,
group or institution will cause or aggravate conflict for himself and with
other individuals.Thus, the ability to communicate effectively makes it
possible and easy to exchange opinions, thoughts and meanings. So this enables
people to express themselves and show their own points of view.
Communication experts believe that poor communication is the root cause
of many problems and conflicts that threatens human peace. What this means is
that communication is capable of aggravating conflicts, in as much as it serves
as tool for conflict resolution. When a meaning is poorly communicated to a
receiver who decodes meaning different from what the sender of the meaning encodes,
this is likely to cause or aggravate conflict. Therefore, lack of effective
communication among individuals, groups and nations can result into conflict.
Thus, there is need for effective communication in order to build peace among individuals.
Human communication is however, not only restricted to spoken words; it
comprises of “sign and symbols, oral and verbal communication”. Communication
is consequential, as any meaning transmitted through a channel produces a
result which can be said to be feedback. Communication produce different
results based on the channel and model of communication used. The feedback to a
particular meaning decoded from the message transmitted by the sender determine
what is the view of the receiver about the sender who encodes the meaning, as
his understanding of the message.It is at this point that communication becomes
a threat to human peace, because probably wrong channel or model of
communication has been used. Therefore it makes the communication poor. So in
view of how communication can aggravate or resolve conflict, this paper will
examine different models of communication relating to pillar analysis of
conflict.
WHAT
IS COMMUNICATION?
The
word Communication comes from the Latin word communicare, which means
to make common or to share. Although communication is ubiquitous,
it appears nonetheless difficult to define. Different individuals have defined
communication differently depending on their interest. Emergence of
communication can be dated back to God’s creation of the world; He said, “Let
there be light, and there was light.” Hence the creation of the world, all that
is in it, and man was through communication.
However,
communication is defined as the process by which people seek to share meaning
via the transmission of symbolic messages. Communication therefore involves people,
shared meaning and symbols (Sapru, 2009). This definition is further explained
by Pearson C. J. et al (2003) as the process by which meaning is exchanged
between individuals through a common system of symbols, signs, or behaviour.
Communication is considered a process because it is an activity, an exchange,
or a set of behaviours- not an unchanging product. Communication is not an object
you can hold in your hands; it is an activity in which you participate, Pearson
C. J. et al (2003). To (Lunenburg,
2010),communication is the
process of transmitting
information and common understanding from
one person to
another.
Communication
involves meaning, which is the shared understanding of the message. Suppose a
lecturer ask a student, ‘What is the ontogeny of your misogyny?’ Although the
student hears the words, he or she may not understand what the lecturer is
asking if the meaning of ontogeny or misogyny is not known. Whereas the
lecturer is asking, ‘what is the origin
of your hatred of women?’ Communication is a learned skill. However, while
most people are born with the physical ability to talk, not all can communicate
well unless they make special efforts to develop and refine this skill further.
Very often, we take the ease with which we communicate with each other for
granted, such that we sometimes forget how complex the communication process
is. Considering the complex nature of communication which makes its
effectiveness difficult in some cases, one needs to take cognizes of the
principles, process, and models. Therefore, there is need for total
comprehension of the shared meanings, ideas and opinions or information
exchanged between individuals.
Communication
takes place when a message is transmitted between a sender and a receiver. It
can flow in one direction and end there. Or a message can elicit a response
(called feedback) from the receiver. The diagram below shows the communication
process this model consists of seven distinct elements: sender, message,
encoding, channel, decoding, receiving and feedback. In addition, the entire
process is susceptible to noise.
|
|
|
|
 |
|||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Feedback
Receive Transmit
Communication
Process Model (Sapru, 2009: pg 423)
Sapru, (2009) also went further to
explain each stage of the communication process model as follows:
1.
The
Sender (Source) initiates the communication. An information source, presumably a
person who creates a message.
2.
The
message, which is both sent by the information source and received by the
destination.
3.
Encoding
takes place when the sender translates the information to be transmitted into a
series of symbols.
4.
The
channel is the medium chosen by the sender to send the message. Common channels
are air for the spoken word and paper for the written sounds.
5.
Decoding
is the process by which the receiver interprets the message and translates it
into meaningful information. In general, the more the receiver’s decoding
matches the sender’s intended message, the more effective the communication.
6.
The
receiver is the person whose senses perceive the sender’s message. If the
message does not reach the receiver, communication has not taken place.
7.
Feedback
is the final link in the communication process. Feedback returns the message to
the sender and provides a check on whether understanding has been achieved.
8.
Noise
refers to disturbances that can interfere with the transmission of the message.
It can create distortion at any stage of the communication process. It is
particularly troublesome in the encoding and decoding stages.
To Taylor, S. (2000), there are a
number of factors which may disrupt this process and affect the overall
interpretation and understanding of what was communicated. Myriad problems can
pop up at different stages of the communication process. These can relate to
any of the elements involved- the sender, message, channel, receiver, feedback
and context. It is therefore important to understand some of the factors that
affect communication so that you can try to get your message across with
minimal misunderstanding and confusion. Below are some possible problem areas
that may turn out to be barriers to effective communication:
(a) Status/Role
The sender and receiver of a message may be of
equal status within a hierarchy (e.g. managers in an organization) or they may
be at different levels (e.g. manager/employee, lecturer/student, business
owner/clients). This difference in status sometimes affects the effectiveness
of the communication process.
(b) Cultural Differences
Cultural differences, both within and outside
the organization (for example, inter-departmental dealings and communication
with outside organizations or ethnic minorities) may impede the communication
process. The meaning of communication lies in the way that it is received. Do
you agree with the above statement? Discuss with your friends during the next
tutorial session.
(c) Choice of Communication Channels
Before you choose your communication channel,
you should ask yourself whether the channel is appropriate for a particular
purpose and the person/receiver you have in mind. Sending messages via
inappropriate channels can send out wrong signals and end up creating
confusion.
(d) Length of Communication
The length of the message also affects the
communication process. You need to be sure that it serves the purpose and is
appropriate for the receiver. Is the message too long or too brief?
(e) Use of Language
Poor choice of words or weak sentence
structure also hampers communication. The same goes for inappropriate
punctuation. The two sentences below illustrate clearly how different placement
of punctuation can change the entire meaning of a sentence:
(f) Disabilities
Disabilities such as impaired sight, dyslexia
and poor mental health can also be barriers to good communication, and should
be taken into consideration when evaluating the effectiveness of the
communication process. You may need to use hearing aids, sign language,
magnifying systems, and symbols to alleviate problems caused by disabilities.
(g) Known or Unknown Receiver
Whether the receiver is known or unknown to
you also plays a major role in determining the effectiveness of your
communication. A known receiver may be better able to understand your message
despite having insufficient information as both of you probably have common
experiences and a shared schemata. An unknown receiver, on the other hand, may
require more information and time to decode the message.
(h) Individual
Perceptions/Attitudes/Personalities
Sometimes, the method of communication needs
to take into consideration the receiver’s personality traits, age and preferred
style. The elderly and children, for example, have different communication
needs and preferences when compared to young adults. Is the receiver of your
message a visual, auditory, or kinesthetic sort of person? How do you think
they will react to your message? Can you adapt your communication style to suit
theirs?
(i) Atmosphere/Noise/Distraction
Our surroundings can sometimes pose asbarriers
to effective communication. A noisy place (a party, for instance) usually puts
a strain on oral communication as both the sender and the receiver need to put
extra effort to get the message across and ensure that itis understood clearly
and correctly.
(j) Clarity of Message
Is the message conveyed in a clear or
ambiguous manner?
(k) Lack of Feedback
Feedback is important as it enables
confirmation of understanding to be made by both parties. The lack of feedback
can sometimes create problems as it can lead to uncertainty and confusion.
MODELS
OF COMMUNICATION
To
Al-Fedaghi et al (2009), a communication model is an idealized systematic
representation of the communication process. The Model of communication given
by Pearson J.C et al (2003:20-23) is a simplified analysis which serves as a
predictor of how communication might occur. The models are; the action model,
the interaction model, and the transaction model. These reveal how
communication models have evolved over time.
The
Action Model
In the past, people believed communication
should be viewed as action. Thus, in the action model, one person sends a
message and another person or persons receives it. The communication here is
therefore one way, as it reflects an individual talking to an audience. Communication
experts derided action model by calling it the “inoculation model” because it
depicts a speaker injecting an audience with a message. The Model is Linear,
with movement in only one direction, and it was faulted for not revealing
anything about how audiences influence speakers. The action model however
depicts a public speaking situation, but even in that context, audiences affect
speakers through non-verbal and verbal feedback. A good example of action model
is Military Command.
The
Interaction Model
The interaction model of communication
adds another dimension to the action model; an individual sends a message to a
second person, who receives it and responds with another message. Interaction
model therefore depicts a conversation between two people in which the
communication take turns sending and receiving messages. Thus, communication is
two ways thing between the sender and the receiver. Communication of this type
can be compared to a table tennis game; just as give and take activity, where
the two players sends and receives information taking turn.
The
Transactional Model
Rather than act exclusively as senders
or receivers, in the interaction model of communication, communicators
simultaneously send and receive messages. Thus, sending and receiving are no
longer separate activities, and they do not occur one at a time. According to
the transactional view, people are continually sending and receiving messages;
they cannot avoid communication. With this model, communication becomes a
confusing ball game in which a person catches and throws an unlimited number of
balls at any time, in any direction, and to any person. Whether or not an
individual throws a ball is not dependent on his or her ability to catch one
first. Individuals do not have to take turns in this game. The game has some
rules and predictability, but from time to time balls fly through the air
without preparation. Consequently, in the transaction model, messages are
everywhere. So the person talking to you on the sidewalk can also be nodding to
a passerby. How you look, what you say, how receptive you are, and what is
happening around you all are part of the transactional model.
The
Constructivist Model
Action, Interaction and Transaction are
mechanistic models that are limited in that they simply show the direction of
communication movement; source to the receiver, source to receiver to source,
or source and receiver simultaneously. In the constructivist model, the focus
shifts from sources, messages, receivers and feedback to what occurs in the
minds of the communicators; interpreting meaning.
The constructivist model posits that
receivers create their own reality in their minds. The sender’s words are
symbols to be interpreted, and the receiver constructs his or her own meaning.
However, the receiver’s interpretation of the sender’s message may or may not
be the same as what the sender intended it to be. The only way to reach
agreement about the message is by discussing what the sender intended and what
the receiver interpreted. This is called negotiating meaning.
The constructivist model significantly
reframes the communication process. The message is no longer something that is
simply sent one way to a passive audience that receives it like an injection;
it is no longer passed back and forth like a basketball; and it is no longer
tossed about in a confusing game whose participants might be bombarded with
multiple balls. In this model, the ball (or the message) may be something else
by the time it is received and interpreted. Communication becomes more
confusing under this model. But in reality, communication isn’t as easy as the
earlier models described it as being. Under the best of communication
circumstances, the two people involved learn to manage meaning by negotiating
what each believes the message to be.
MODELS OF COMMUNICATION AS CONFLICT
TRIGER
Model
of communication refer to as various process by which information or messages
are transmitted or sent across from one source (sender) to the other (receiver)
without any hindrance.
Communication
plays a vital role in the conduct of human and organizational interaction or
relationship. However, if not well managed can trigger conflict or disagreement
between individuals and groups. The perception of individual to the way
communication is transmitted differs and determines the interpretation he or
she has about it.
ACTION / LINEAR MODEL
This
model of communication can easily trigger conflict due to some defect inherent
in it as a result of not given opportunity for feedback from the receiver of a
message. In this case, the receiver of a message has no means to ask question
from the sender to clear ambiguities that may arise. The possibility of the
receiver decoding wrong meaning or wrong interpretation to the message is very
obvious and hence may trigger conflict.
A
very good example of this conflict
situation is the message sent across to the public through the media by
the former Inspector General of Police Mr Sulaiman Abba prior to the 2015
general election that voters should stay 300 meters away from polling centres
after casting their votes which generated a lot of argument in the country due
to fact that IGP message was misinterpreted in many quarters because there was
no opportunity for feedback from the
public to clear the air on the message immediately.
INTERACTIVE MODEL
This
communication model can equally act as conflict trigger through the
interruption of noise. Noise is any factor that causes distraction in
communication and thereby leads to its failure. In interactive model,
communication takes place between the encoder and the decoder in such a way
that the sender sends a message and the receiver equally sends another message
in form of feedback to the message he receives.
For
instance, during the 2015 presidential election in Kaduna State when the former
vice president Atiku Abubakar was addressing the audience by shouting PDP, he was expecting the audience to respond
by saying POWER but, contrary to his expectation, the
audience responded by saying; SAY BUHARI
which was different from the sender expected feedback from the audience.
So as a result of this communication failure, conflict arises.
TRANSACTION MODEL
This
model of communication which allows transmission of message a sender who is sending message to
more one person or to many persons and at the same time or simultaneously
receiving several messages from different other individual is potent of causing
conflict. This is so as the persons involved in the communication may not
really understand the message sent across. Thus the message generates noise as
everybody is talking at the same time without giving room for decorum.
MODELS OF COMMUNICATION AS A TOOL FOR
CONFLICT RESOLUTION
The
eras are gone when conflicts were thought of in their entirety as absolute
evil; the presence of which necessarily portends negativity, backwardness and
breakdown in human relationships. It is high time human beings in their various
interrelationships began to view and regard conflict as a necessary phenomenon
of their day-to-day living for some obvious and established reasons. First,
humans are rational beings. This means that they think, and it is not
reasonable that all the human elements of any society will think exactly the
same way. They are bound to see issues from different points of view, have
different views, opinions and suggestions.
However,
they have varied interest in issues, varied goals, values and aspirations. If
this is true, and it is, it necessarily follows that opinions will clash, views
will differ, there will be incompatibility of goals and values, etc. In the
situation described above, it is just an unrealistic day-dreaming to think of
and aspire for a society that is absolutely free from conflicts. To Ademola
(2009:60) one of the fundamental challenges that have confronted man in social
history is that of the inevitability
of conflict and disagreement in human relations. He goes further to say
“reality posed by the challenge of conflict has more often than not, resulted
into social problems, especially, when such conflicts are not well and properly
managed before degenerating into violent confrontations.
Therefore,
the earlier we, humans come to terms with the fact that we cannot do without
conflict, the better for us. From the organizational vantage point, Osisioma
(2012:2) quotes (Ozkalp et al, 2009, p. 419) thus: conflict is inevitable in organizations because
organizations function by means of adjustments and compromises among competitive
elements in their structure and membership. In the organizational context, conflict can be normal and healthy, as
absolute lack of tension is ultimately dull and stagnant, and unlikely to
foster creativity and growth.
The
second reason which necessitates the presence of conflict in either the society
or organizations is that conflict in itself is not negative and this can be
conveniently deduced from Ozkalp’s et al, submission as given above and Dutch
and Coleman’s below. Dutch and Coleman (2000) as quoted by Fisher (2000:1)
conflict occur between people in all kinds of human relationships and in all
social settings. Because of the wide range of potential
differences among people, the absence of conflict usually signals the absence
of meaningful interaction. Conflict by
itself is neither good nor bad. However, the manner in which conflict is
handled determines whether it is constructive or destructive (Deutsch &
Coleman, 2000).
In
the above, Dutch and Coleman want us to be aware of the following realities.
Conflict exists in all human societies and that the absence of conflict among
humans is not healthy for their relationships. Thus, conflict is neither good
nor bad. Hence, the way humans perceive and handle conflict turn it to either
blessing or curse. To this end, it has become obvious that conflict is a normal
part of the society. One other point which has been made clear is that it is
neutral. If conflict is neutral, it means that it is neither bad nor good,
neither negative nor positive, neither destructive nor constructive. However,
this neutral quality of conflict seems either difficult to maintain or depends
on its perception and handling by people. The manifestations of conflict that
we often see are frequently revealed in either positive or negative light. This
is a pointer to the fact that conflicts often shed their neutrality to take on
either positivity or negativity based on whether or not they are carefully
identified early enough and properly managed.
This
brings in the issue of communication. Studies have shown that conflict cannot
be well managed and or resolved without good communication. Krauss and Morsella
(2000:131) have this to say: when neighbours feud, lovers quarrel or nations
war, the predictable remedy prescribed by
the voices of reason is communication.The prevailing view is that, faced with
conflict, communicating is always the right thing to do. The U.N. Security
Council encourages hostile countries to "hold talks," and marriage
counsellors advise quarrelling couples to "express their
feelings." So commonplace is the
prescription, that advice to the contrary seems anomalous; it's difficult to
imagine the Secretary General imploring hostile nations to refrain from
dialogue.
The
above shows the role of communication in conflict management. It is such a
vital tool for managing and resolving conflict that the voices of reason and
prevailing views keep recommending it. However, as important as communication
is in conflict resolution and management, there is little wisdom in taking it
to be an independent element (what Krauss and Morsella call a universal solvent
for conflict) that has conflict resolving power naturally inherent in it. It is
necessary to state that communication is a neutral element and like all neutral
elements, it is at the mercy of the activators. Being neutral, it is vulnerable
in the sense that it does not have any inbuilt natural capacity to act in
specific way and produce specific result on its own. The point being made
therefore is that the potential of any communication model can either worsen or
reduce the effects or extent of conflicts rests heavily on the human actors in
the communication process.
Krauss
and Morsella (2000:131-132) posit that, more realistic is a view of
communication as a neutral instrument, one that can be used to convey threats
as well as offers of reconciliation, to put forth unreasonable offers as well
as acceptable ones, to inflame a tense situation as well as to defuse it... .
More so, the fruit of communication is the establishment of understanding, but
beyond his, communication can do little (directly) to change the state of
affairs or, say, sway the outcome of a conflict based upon irreconcilable
goals. Good communication cannot guarantee
that conflict will be resolved or even ameliorated, but poor communication
greatly increases the likelihood that conflict will be exacerbated. One other
issue that is of great importance here are the intention and the goal of the
communication which also still depends on who are involve in the communication.
At
this juncture, we consider it instructive and useful to adopt the four
principles which, in Krauss and Morsella’s reckoning, can greatly be employed
to facilitate the constructive potentials of communication in conflict
management and resolution. Regardless of the type of communication model
chosen, the following must be born in mind:
i.
Reduce noise. Noise
is anything that can either reduce the amount of the intended meaning or
message received, interpreted, comprehended and retained or the quality of it.
In order to achieve any desired aim in conflict resolution, this suggestion is
very paramount.
ii.
When speaking or
communicating, take the perspective of your listener. It is not enough to be
sure what you mean or intend to pass across by using particular words or
expressions, be sure of how your listener(s) will interpret and comprehend it
and also the effect that the meaning or message thereby produced will have on
him/them.
iii.
When listening, try
to understand the intended meaning of what your counterpart is saying or
communicating. Try to get his intended meaning or message. Do not pre-empt
him/her and do not assume, based on your preconceived perception of him/her
that you know what he or she means or what he/she is capable to mean.
iv.
Be an active listener. Assuming the position
of listeners puts or tempts to put some listeners in a passive position whose
main role is that of a receptacle; receive signals, interpret and store them.
No! Active listening involves raising questions, clarifying ambiguous
declarations, and taking great pains to ensure that what the counterpart is
communicating is the same meaning that one is getting.
From
the above, the success or failure of any communication model to trigger or
resolve conflict depends more on the human elements of the communication
process. The person encoding a meaning must be sure that he or she uses the
communication model that the receiver will not find difficult to decoder the
meaning. The receiver must equally put in the same amount of commitment, and
consider the view of the sender. Beyond this, the needs of the aggrieved
parties must be addressed with all seriousness. Furthermore, communication
model(s) that are more likely to constitute much noise should be avoided in
conflict situation.
THE ACTION MODEL
In
the action model, one person sends message to another person who receives the
meaning and does the decoding. Experts in communication derided this model by
calling it “inoculation model” because of its nature which depicts a speaker
injecting an audience with message. Thus in the action model, feedback is not
expected. This example is often found in church sermon, where the preacher
preaches the sermon to the congregation who do not express the meaning they
conceived from the sermon. Therefore in conflict management and resolution,
action model is not the best communication model to adopt as the mediator needs
to hear the sides of the conflicting parties in case inter-personal conflict.
It is on this ground that the action model is faulted, for it did not reveal
anything about the receiver of the message. If the meaning the receiver decodes
differs from what was transmitted, it does not matter as the opinion of the
receiver is taken for granted. Perhaps, this is enough to trigger conflict or aggravate
existing.
THE INTERACTION MODEL
Here
one person transmits or sends a message to second person, who receives it and
responds with another message by expressing the meaning which he or she
decodes. Hence, it depicts conservation between two or more people in which the
communicators take turns sending and receiving messages. Therefore, in
interaction model of communication, conflicting parties are allowed to air
their views. In conflict management and resolution, effective communication is
key, as through this means their views are expressed and the issues aggravating
conflict are addressed. Thus, it proffers a better ground for effective
communication and conflict resolution.
THE TRANSACTION MODEL
In the transaction model,
communicators simultaneously send and receive messages. Thus sending and
receiving are no longer separate activities, and they do not occur one at a
time. This means people are continually sending and receiving messages; they
cannot avoid communication. This however, suggest or liken communication to be
a confusing act or process, in which a person receives and sends several
meanings or messages at any time through different channels sending to any
person.
To resolve a conflict
using communication there is need for the conflict manager to consider the
principles of communication which are as follow; how do you view yourself, how
do you view the receiver, how do you believe the receiver views you, how do the
receiver view himself, how do the receiver view you (sender), how do the receiver
believe you view him. Hence with this consideration being in place, messages or
meanings conveyed in process conflict resolution is not meant to bring
confusion as anything which creates confusion or noise aggravates conflict.
THE
CONSTRUCTIVIST MODEL
Constructivist model of
communication significantly reframes the communication process. The receiver
creates his own reality or interpretation of message sent to him. In doing this
his interpretation may or may not be the same with the message sent. Communication
under this model is more confusing as the focus here shifts from sources,
messages, receivers and feedback to what occurs in the minds of the
communicators: interrupting meaning. It is difficult to communicate effectively
adopting this process and model of communication. Thus this communication model
poses a big challenge to the conflict manager who mediates over a conflict
issue for peaceful resolution.
CONCLUSION
Communication represents an essential and very
important human need. Without having the possibility to effectively communicate,
to other people, no individual, community, group or any other institution would
be able to exist, or prosper. It is in this light that communication models can
trigger or aggravate conflicts.However, the ability to effectively communicate
makes it possible and easy to exchange opinions, thoughts and meanings. Thus,
when the right principles and process of communication are followed, it enables
people to express themselves and show their own points of view for easy
comprehension.
To manage conflict effectively you must be a
skilled communicator who has the ability to effectively encode and decode
meanings, as well as transmit the coded symbols, signs and expression.This
helps to a conflict manager to really understand what perceptions of the
individual or people he is communicating with.
References
1.
Al-Fedaghi,
S. et al. (2009). International Journal of Computer Science and Information
Security (IJCSIS). Kuwait: University of Kuwait. Vol. 6, No. 2.
2.
Lasswell,
H. D. (1948): “The structure and function of communication in society”, in The
communication of ideas, L., B. (Ed.), Harper, New York, NY.
3.
Lunenburg,
F. C. (2010). Communication: The Process, Barriers, And Improving
Effectiveness. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage. Vol. 1.
4.
McQuail,
D. & Windahl, S. (1989). Models of communication. In E. Barnouw, G.
Gerbner, W. Schramm, T. L. Worth, & L. Gross (eds.), International encyclopedia
of communications, vol. 3 (pp. 36-44). New York: Oxford University Press.
6.
Sapru,
R. K. (2009). Administrative Theories and Management Thought. New Delhi: Rashtaj
printing press.
7.
Schramm,
W. (1954). How communication works. In W. Schramm (Ed.), The process and
effects of mass communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
8.
Shannon,
C. & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana,
IL: University of Illinois Press.
9.
Slater, T. A Definition and Model for
Communication. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Add a Comment...