MODULE 3: BASIC COMMUNICATION MODELS AND THEORIES

Prepared by Prof. Ma. Pamela Grace C. Muhi

Overview:
Models of communication simplify the process by providing a visual representation of the
various aspects of a communication encounter. Some models explain communication in more
detail than others, but even the most complex model still does not recreate what we experience
in even a moment of a communication encounter. Models still serve a valuable purpose for
students of communication because they allow us to see specific concepts and steps within the
process of communication, define communication, and apply communication concepts. When
you become aware of how communication functions, you can think more deliberately through
your communication encounters, which can help you better prepare for future communication
and learn from your previous communication.

Communication is a complex process, and it is difficult to determine where or with whom a

communication encounter starts and ends. It can sometimes be helpful to consider different
communication models. Communication theory is a complex topic. It studies the scientific
process of sending and receiving information. There are many principles, methods, and
components that can affect a message, and a communication theory explains it all. There are a
lot of features of communication theory that can affect the process: sender, receiver, noise,
nonverbal cues, cultural differences, and so on. To make things a little less complicated, the
creators of the different communication theories paired them with communication models.

LESSON 1. COMMUNICATION MODELS

Communication models may be grouped and classified as linear, interaction, and transaction
models. Although these models of communication differ, they contain some common elements.
The first two models we will discuss, the transmission model and the interaction model, include
the following parts: participants, messages, encoding, decoding, and channels. In
communication models, the participants are the senders and/or receivers of messages in a
communication encounter. The message is the verbal or nonverbal content being conveyed
from sender to receiver. For example, when you say “Hello!” to your friend, you are sending a
message of greeting that will be received by your friend.

The internal cognitive process that allows participants to send, receive, and understand
messages is the encoding and decoding process. Encoding is the process of turning thoughts

43
into communication. As we will learn later, the level of conscious thought that goes into
encoding messages varies. Decoding is the process of turning communication into thoughts.
For example, you may realize you’re hungry and encode the following message to send to your
roommate: “I’m hungry. Do you want to get pizza tonight?” As your roommate receives the
message, they decode your communication and turn it back into thoughts in order to make
meaning out of it. Of course, we do not just communicate verbally—we have various options, or
channels for communication. Encoded messages are sent through a channel, or a sensory
route on which a message travels, to the receiver for decoding. While communication can be
sent and received using any sensory route (sight, smell, touch, taste, or sound), most
communication occurs through visual (sight) and/or auditory (sound) channels. If your roommate
has headphones on and is engrossed in a video game, you may need to get their attention by
waving your hands before you can ask them about dinner.

Learning Objectives:
1. To learn the different communication models and theories
2. To understand the practical application and uses of these models and theories

Learning Outcomes:
1. Integrates academic preparations and practical applications necessary in communication
and life-long learning.

Linear model of communication

The linear or transmission model of communication, as shown in the Figure 3 below, describes
communication as a linear, one-way process in which a sender intentionally transmits a
message to a receiver (Ellis & McClintock, 1990). This model focuses on the sender and
message within a communication encounter. Although the receiver is included in the model, this
role is viewed as more of a target or end point rather than part of an ongoing process. We are
left to presume that the receiver either successfully receives and understands the message or
does not. The scholars who designed this model extended on a linear model proposed by
Aristotle centuries before that included a speaker, message, and hearer. They were also
influenced by the advent and spread of new communication technologies of the time such as
telegraphy and radio, and you can probably see these technical influences within the model
(Shannon & Weaver, 1949). Think of how a radio message is sent from a person in the radio
studio to you listening in your car. The sender is the radio announcer who encodes a verbal

44
message that is transmitted by a radio tower through electromagnetic waves (the channel) and
eventually reaches your (the receiver’s) ears via an antenna and speakers in order to be
decoded. The radio announcer does not really know if you receive their message or not, but if
the equipment is working and the channel is free of static, then there is a good chance that the
message was successfully received.

Figure 3. Linear Process of Communication

Although the transmission model may seem simple or even underdeveloped to us today, the
creation of this model allowed scholars to examine the communication process in new ways,
which eventually led to more complex models and theories of communication. The following
communication models are examples of linear model:

Lasswell’s Model
Lasswell’s communication model was developed by communication theorist Harold D. Lasswell
(1902-1978) in 1948. Lasswell’s model of communication (also known as action model or linear
mode or one-way model of communication) is regarded as one of the most influential
communication models. Lasswell states that in order to understand the process of mass
communication one has to understand each of the stages. This model stresses on the effect
rather than the message itself. Effect means observable or measurable change in the receiver.
It also suggests that any change in the elements will change the effect. Until the 1960s,
Lasswell’s questions below dominated the scene of mass media research.

45
 Figure 4. Lasswell’s Model of Communication

Lasswell model suggests the message flow in a multicultural society with multiple audiences.
The flow of message is through various channels. In this model, the communication component
WHO refers the research area called “Control Analysis”,
SAYS WHAT is refers to “Content Analysis”,
IN WHICH CHANNEL refers to “Media Analysis”,
TO WHOM is refers to “Audience Analysis”
WITH WHAT EFFECT is refers to “Effect Analysis”

The notable advantages of Lasswell’s Model, it is found to be easy and simple, it suits almost all
types of communication and it considers the concept of effect. However, since it is linear and
one-way, feedback was not taken into account and thus, some practitioners found this
incomplete. Noise was also not a factor in the process.

Shannon and Weaver Model

In 1948, Claude Shannon was an American mathematician, Electronic engineer and Warren
Weaver was an American scientist both of them join together to write an article in “Bell System
Technical Journal” called “A Mathematical Theory of Communication” and also called as
“Shannon-Weaver model of communication”. This model gave us the concept of “Noise”. This is
often called Telephone Model because it is based on the experience of having the message
interfered with by “noise” from the telephone switchboard back in 1940s. This model is specially
designed to develop the effective communication between sender and receiver. Also, they find
factors which affecting the communication process called “Noise”. At first the model was
developed to improve the Technical communication. Later it’s widely applied in the field of
Communication.

46
As illustrated, the model deals with various concepts like Information source, transmitter, Noise,
channel, message, receiver, channel, information destination, encode and decode.
Sender : The originator of message or the information source selects desire message
Encoder : The transmitter which converts the message into signals
Note: The sender’s messages converted into signals like waves or Binary data which is
compactable to transmit the messages through cables or satellites. For example: In telephone
the voice is converted into wave signals and it transmits through cables
Decoder : The reception place of the signal which converts signals into message. A reverse
process of encode
Note : The receiver converts those binary data or waves into message which is comfortable and
understandable for receiver. Otherwise receiver can’t receive the exact message and it will
affect the effective communication between sender and receiver.

Figure 5. Shannon and Weaver Model of Communication

Receiver : The destination of the message from sender

Note : Based on the decoded message the receiver gives their feedback to sender. If the
message distracted by noise it will affect the communication flow between sender and receiver
Noise: The messages are transferred from encoder to decoder through channel. During this
process the messages may distracted or affected by physical noise like horn sounds, thunder
and crowd noise or encoded signals may distract in the channel during the transmission process
which affect the communication flow or the receiver may not receive the correct message.

47
Note : The model is clearly deals with external noises only which affect the messages or signals
from external sources. For example: If there are any problems occurring in network which
directly affect the mobile phone communication or distract the messages

Practical Example of Shannon-Weaver model of communication:

Thomson made call to his assistant “come here I want to see you”. During his call, noise
appeared (transmission error) and his assistant received “I want” only. Again Assistant asked
Thomson (feedback) “what do you want Thomson”.
Sender : Thomson
Encoder : Telephone (Thomson)
Channel : Cable
Noise : Distraction in voice
Reception : Telephone (Assistant)
Receiver : Assistant.
Due to transmission error or noise, Assistant can’t able to understand Thomson’s messages.
*The noise which affect the communication flow between them.

Criticism of Shannon-Weaver model of communication:

1. One of the simplest model applied in various communication theories

2. It’s more effective in person-to-person communication than group or mass

audience.

3. The model based on “Sender and Receiver”. Here sender plays the primary role and
receiver plays the secondary role (receive the information or passive)

4. Communication is not a one-way process. If it’s behaved like that, it will lose its
strength. For example: Audience or receiver who listening a radio, reading the books or
watching television is a one-way communication because absence of feedback

5.. Understanding Noise will help solve the various problems in communication

Berlo’s Model
In 1960, David Berlo postulated Berlo’s Sender-Message-Channel-Receiver (SMCR) Model of
Communication with reference to the Shannon and Weaver’s Model in 1949. He described
factors affecting the individual components in the communication making the communication

48
more efficient. This model also focuses on encoding and decoding which happens before
sender sends the message and before receiver receives the message, respectively.

Figure 6. Berlo’s SMCR Model of Communication

Components of Berlo’s SMCR Model of Communication:

Berlo’s SMCR Model of Communication includes four components that describe the
communication process illustrated above. The different components in the model are influenced
by various factors.
1. Sender
The sender of the message is the source who creates and sends the message to the receiver.
The source is the start of the communication process and is the person who encodes the
message. Factors that may influence the sender are also applicable to the receiver. Consider
how the message is interpreted, for example. Berlo’s SMCR Model of Communication identifies
the following factors that affect the source:
Communication skills - includes reading, listening, speaking etc.

49
Attitude - one’s attitude in relationship to the audience, receiver and subject changes the
meaning and consequence of the message.
Knowledge - familiarity with the subject of the message makes communication more effective.
Social systems – includes values, beliefs, religion and rules influence the way in which the
sender communicates the message, alongside location and circumstances.
Culture - cultural differences may result in the message being interpreted differently.

2. Message
The message is the package of information or meaning that is sent from sender to receiver. The
message can be sent in various forms, such as audio, speech, text, video or other media. The
sender of the messages always wants the receiver to interpret the message in a certain way.
The source’s intention is therefore translated into a coded message. The receiver should
understand the message with reasonable accuracy. The message is influenced by:
Content - the content of the message from beginning to end.
Elements - are (non)verbal aspects, such as gestures and signs, that may influence the
message. Albert Mehrabian’s communication model goes into this in more detail.
Treatment - refers to the way in which the message is sent, the message’s packaging.
Structure - as the word suggests, the structure of the message refers to the way the message
was developed and organized.
Code - is the form in which the message is sent. This may include text, language, video,
gestures, music, etc.

3. Channel
The channel is the medium used to send the message. The medium must be able to be picked
up by the sensory system of the receiver and may therefore involve vision, sound, smell, taste
or touch. Physiologically, humans use the five (5) senses to communicate, namely hearing,
seeing, touching, smelling, tasting. While mass communication always involves technical tools,
such as phones, the Internet and television. In these cases, the transmitted information is
assimilated via vision and sound.

4. Receiver
The receiver is the person who receives and subsequently decodes the coded message. In a
linear communication process, the receiver is always located at the end. In order to make
communication as effective and smooth as possible, Berlo’s SMCR Model of Communication

50
assumes the receiver’s thinking pattern must be in accordance with that of the sender. The
same factors therefore influence this component in Berlo’s SMCR Model of Communication.
After all, the receiver decodes the message him/herself and gives it their own meaning.

A Disrupted Communication Process

In practice, communication is not nearly as smooth as described in Berlo’s linear model. There
are a number of factors that may lead to a disrupted communication process. Examples of
disruptions include:

Loss or distortion - the person sending the message must encode the message in such a way
that the full intention of the message is clear. He/she may choose to do this with words, but it is
very rare that the full intention is encoded in a message. In some cases, a message may even
barely contain the information the sender wants to convey. Even if an additional channel is
added to the communication process, the message may become distorted. For example,
consider the familiar team-building game where a message is constantly passed on in a circle of
people. The last person will often hear a completely distorted or unrecognizable message.
Every time the message is conveyed by a different person, part of its initial intention is lost.

Noise - after the message is sent, noise may occur. This noise disrupts the source and
message and causes the receiver to only partially receive the message or not at all. Internal
noise refers to a state in which part of the communication process, the receiver for example, is
not feeling well, or not entirely focused. As a result, the receiver may miss out on certain parts of
the message. External noise, on the other hand, may be caused by background noise during a
phone call, for example. This also causes the receiver to potentially misunderstand certain parts
of the message.

There may also be situations in which noise is caused intentionally. Non-intentional noise is
caused unintentionally and can, for example occur if sender uses difficult words, which then
makes it more difficult for the receiver to understand the message.

Berlo’s SMCR Model Synchronization

The communication process may be either synchronous or asynchronous. If the receiver is in
direct contact with the sender, this is referred to as a synchronous channel or process. If, on the

51
other hand, the sender and receiver are not in direct contact with each other, this is referred to
as an asynchronous communication process.

The danger of asynchronous communication is that both the sender and receiver will not receive
direct feedback on how the message is conveyed. It also prevents the message from being
adjusted, making it impossible to clarify certain matters further.

Criticism of Berlo’s Model :

• There is no concept of feedback, so the effect is not considered.

• There is no concept of noise or any kind of barriers in communication.

• It is a linear model of communication, there is no two-way communication.

• Both of the participants must be similar according to all the factors mentioned.

Interactive Model of Communication

The interactive or interaction model of communication, the figure below shows communication
as a process in which participants alternate positions as sender and receiver and generate
meaning by sending messages and receiving feedback within physical and psychological
contexts (Schramm, 1997). Rather than illustrating communication as a linear, one-way
process, the interactive model incorporates feedback, which makes communication a more
interactive, two-way process. Feedback includes messages sent in response to other
messages. For example, your instructor may respond to a point you raise during class
discussion or you may point to the sofa when your roommate asks you where the remote control
is. The inclusion of a feedback loop also leads to a more complex understanding of the roles of
participants in a communication encounter. Rather than having one sender, one message, and
one receiver, this model has two sender-receivers who exchange messages. Each participant
alternates roles as sender and receiver in order to keep a communication encounter going.
Although this seems like a perceptible and deliberate process, we alternate between the roles of
sender and receiver very quickly and often without conscious thought.

52
 Figure 7. Interactive Model

The interactive model is also less message focused and more interaction focused. While the
linear model focused on how a message was transmitted and whether or not it was received,
the interactive model is more concerned with the communication process itself. In fact, this
model acknowledges that there are so many messages being sent at one time that many of
them may not even be received. Some messages are also unintentionally sent. Therefore,
communication is not judged effective or ineffective in this model based on whether or not a
single message was successfully transmitted and received.

The interactive model takes physical and psychological context into account. Physical context
includes the environmental factors in a communication encounter. The size, layout,
temperature, and lighting of a space influence our communication. Imagine the different physical
contexts in which job interviews take place and how that may affect your communication.
Whether it is the size of the room or other environmental factors, it is important to consider the
role that physical context plays in our communication. Psychological context includes the mental
and emotional factors in a communication encounter. Stress, anxiety, and emotions are just
some examples of psychological influences that can affect our communication. Seemingly
positive psychological states, like experiencing the emotion of love, can also affect

53
communication. Feedback and context help make the interaction model a more useful
illustration of the communication process, but the transaction model views communication as a
powerful tool that shapes our realities beyond individual communication encounters. Osgoods
and Schramm’s model is an example of interactive model.

Osgoods and Schramm’s Model

The Osgood-Schramm model is built on the theory that communication is a two-way street, with
a sender and a receiver. Charles Egerton Osgood popularized the notion that communication
was circular rather than linear, meaning that it required two participants taking turns sending
and receiving a message.

Figure 8. Osgood’s and Schramm’s Circular Model

It is a Circular Model, so that communication is something circular in nature of which its

components are:
Encoder – Who encodes and sends the message (message originates)
Decoder – Who receives the message
Interpreter – Person trying to understand (analyses, perceive) or interpret

Note: From the message starting to ending, there is an interpretation goes on. Based on this
interpretation only the message is received.

This model breaks the sender and receiver model it seems communication in a practical way. It
is not a traditional model. It can happen within our self or two people; each person acts as both
sender and receiver and hence use interpretation. It is simultaneously taking place e.g.
encoding, interpret and decoding.

54
Semantic noise is a concept introduced here it occurs when sender and receiver apply different
meaning to the same message. It happens mostly because of words and phrases such as
technical language. So certain words and phrases will cause you to deviate from the actual
meaning of the communication.

Note: When semantic noise takes place decoding and interpretation becomes difficult and
people get deviated from the actual message.

Advantage of Osgood- Schramm model of communication

• Dynamic model- Shows how a situation can change
• It shows why redundancy is an essential part
• There is no separate sender and receiver, sender and receiver is the same person
• Assume communication to be circular in nature
• Feedback – central feature.

However, this model does not talk about semantic noise and it assume the moment of encoding
and decoding.

Later, Wilbur Schramm, who talked about the model in his book, The Process and Effects of
Communication, adapted the model and added the notion of field of experience, or
commonality, to the mix. Field of experience incorporates what is mutually understood between
the sender and receiver. For example, a professor of calculus would have very little luck
communicating important math principles to a classroom of kindergarten students, because they
do not share a field of experience that makes the message easy to understand.

For his part, Schramm is considered one of the pioneers of the mass communications field. He
started the doctoral program in mass communication at the University of Iowa, helping develop
mass communication (television, print news, and other ways to communicate) as a university
discipline. Wilbur Schramm proceeded from a simple human communication to a more
complicated model that accounted for the accumulated experiences of two (2) individuals trying
to communicate and then to a model that considered human communication with interaction
between two (2) individuals.

55
 Figure 9. Schramm’s Model I and II

In his second model, Schramm introduced the notion that only what is shared in the fields of
experience of both source and destination is actually communicated, because only that
proportion of the signal is common to both of them.

Transactional Model of Communication

As the study of communication progressed, models expanded to account for more of the
communication process. Many scholars view communication as more than a process that is
used to carry on conversations and convey meaning. We do not send messages like computers,
and we do not neatly alternate between the roles of sender and receiver as an interaction
unfolds. We also cannot consciously decide to stop communicating because communication is
more than sending and receiving messages. The transaction model differs from the
transmission and interaction models in significant ways, including the conceptualization of
communication, the role of sender and receiver, and the role of context.

The Transactional Model of Communication proposed by Barnlund states that giving and
receiving messages is reciprocal (Barnlund, 1962). During the exchange of messages between
sender and receiver, each take turns to send or receive messages. In this model, both sender
and receiver are known as communicators and their role reverses each time in the
communication process as both process of the sending and receiving occurs at the same time.
This means that both communicators (the sender and the receiver) are responsible of the effect
and effectiveness of the communication. People do not simply send meaning from one to the
other then back again. They need to build a shared meaning of the message. In addition, both
verbal and non-verbal behavioral cues, the environmental and noise are a part of the message.

56
The transaction model of communication describes communication as a process in which
communicators generate social realities within social, relational, and cultural contexts. In this
model, which is shown in the figure below, we do not just communicate to exchange messages;
we communicate to create relationships, form intercultural alliances, shape our self-concepts,
and engage with others in dialogue to create communities.

Figure 10. Transactional Model of Communication

The roles of sender and receiver in the transaction model of communication differ significantly
from the other models. Instead of labeling participants as senders and receivers, the people in a
communication encounter are referred to as communicators. Unlike the interactive model, which
suggests that participants alternate positions as sender and receiver, the transaction model
suggests that we are simultaneously senders and receivers. This is an important addition to the
model because it allows us to understand how we are able to adapt our communication—for
example, a verbal message—in the middle of sending it based on the communication we are
simultaneously receiving from our communication partner.

References:
1. [Link]
2. Barnlund,D. (1962). Toward A Meaning-Centered Philosophy Of
Communication. Journal of Communication.12.4 197-211.

57
Activity:
I. Identification:
1. _____ A concept introduced by Schramm in his 2nd model of communication.
2. _____ Refers to the way in which message was sent and packaged.
3. _____ Observable or measurable change in the receiver.
4. _____ The pioneer theorist of one-way communication.
5. _____ Visual representation of various aspects of a communication encounter.
6. _____ The first model that gave us the concept of noise.
7. _____ The communication model that may either be synchronous or asynchronous.
8. _____ A type of communication model that is one way.
9. _____ Circular model of communication.
10. _____ It occurs when sender and receiver apply different meaning to the same
message.
II. (50 pts.) Learning the different communication model and its elements. Think of a situation
where you can apply each of the following models:
1. Lasswell’s Model
2. Berlo’s Model
3. Shannon and Weaver
4. Osgoods and Schramm
5. Barlund’s Transactional Model

LESSON 2. COMMUNICATION THEORIES

Overview:
We live in an era in which the processes of news production and the patterns of media
consumption are changing rapidly with the advent of new digital technologies. Even the most
seasoned professionals are struggling to determine what the media landscape of the future will
look like and what business models can be used to support it. It is in times like these when the
theories of mass communication are particularly valuable. The broadly explanatory concepts of
theory help us understand some of the underlying ways in which humans respond to and share
different types of information, and as thus can help us to make some informed predictions about

58
what the future may hold. How to communicate something, and how to do it right were the main
concerns in this area of study. We, communicators, understand that communication is not a
singular, but a plural process between two or more persons, and so the exchange of messages
is only a minor part in this complex and interesting process.

Learning Objectives:
1. To learn the different communication theories
2. To understand the practical application and uses these theories

Learning Outcomes:
1. Integrates academic preparations and practical applications necessary in communication
and life-long learning.

THEORY is “an umbrella term for all careful, systematic, and self-conscious discussion and
analysis of communication phenomena,” by University of Minnesota communication professor
Ernest Bormann. THEORY is nothing more than a “set of systematic hunches about the way
things operate.” Theory consists of a set of systematic, informed hunches about the way things
work. It studies the scientific process of sending and receiving information including its
principles, methods, and components that can affect the elements of communication. Theory is
a set of logical tested and systematically interrelated proportions that have been developed
through research, describing and explaining some social phenomena (Seranda Kos, 1998). It is
a set of statements or principles to explain a group of facts or phenomena especially that have
been repeatedly tested or widely accepted and can be used in more predictions about natural
phenomena.

Images of Theory
Theories as Nets: Philosopher of science Karl Popper says that “theories are nets cast to catch
what we call the ‘world’. We endeavor to make the mesh ever finer and finer”. For serious
scholars, theories are the tools of the trade. The term the world can be interpreted as everything
that goes on under the sun – thus requiring a grand theory that applies to all communication, all
the time. Conversely, catching the world could be constructed as calling for numerous special
theories – different kinds of small net to capture distinct types of communication in local
situations. Yet either way, the quest for finer-meshed nets is somewhat disturbing because the
study of communication is about people rather than schools of fish. The idea that theories could

59
be woven so tightly that they would snag everything that humans think, say, or do seems naïve.
The possibility also raises questions about our freedom to choose some actions and reject
others.

Theories as Lenses: Many scholars see their theoretical constructions as similar to the lens of a
camera or a pair of glasses as opposed to a mirror that accurately reflects the world out there.
The lens imagery highlights the idea that theories shape our perception by focusing attention on
some features of communication while ignoring other features, or at least pushing them into the
background. Two (2) theorist could analyze the same communication event – an argument,
perhaps – and depending on the lens each uses, one theorist may view this speech act as a
breakdown of communication or the breakup of a relationship, while the other theorists will see it
as democracy in action. The danger of the lens metaphor is that we might regard what is seen
through the glass as so dependent on the theoretical stance of the viewer that we abandon any
attempt to discern what is real or true.

Theories as Maps: We use this image to describe the First Look text to others. Within this
analogy, communication theories are maps of the way communication works. The truth they
depict may have to do with objective behaviors “out there” or subjective meanings inside our
heads. Either way we need to have theory to guide us through unfamiliar territory, however, that
the map is not the territory. A static theory, like a still photograph, can never fully portray the
richness of interaction between people that is constantly changing, always more varied, and
inevitably more complicated than what any theory can chart.

Below are some examples of communication theories:

1. Magic Bullet and Hypodermic Needle Theory

The mass media in the 1940s and 1950s were perceived as a powerful influence on behavior
change. Several factors contributed to this “strong effects” theory of communication, such as:

• The fast rise and popularization of radio and television

• The emergence of the persuasion industries, such as advertising and propaganda

60
 • The Payne Fund studies of the 1930s which focused on the impact of motion pictures on
children, and Hitler’s monopolization of the mass media during the WWII to unify the
German public behind the Nazi party.

The Hypodermic Needle Theory implies that mass media has a direct, immediate and powerful
effect on its audiences. The theory suggests that the mass media could influence a very large
group of people directly and uniformly by “shooting” or “injecting” them with appropriate
messages designed to trigger a desired response. The effects of this theory suggest that media
could manipulate a passive and gullible public, leading theorists believed this was one of the
primary ways media authors shaped audience perception. A linear communication theory which
suggests that the media has a direct and powerful influence on audiences, like being injected
with a hypodermic needle. This theory considers only one option. That the audience are passive
and what they see they will act out or believe. The majority of Copy Cat murders that take place
relate heavily to this theory. You could argue that when a Copy Cat murder takes places, the
predator watches, hears or plays something and then goes and acts out the crime. Although
many people still talk about the media in this way, this theory is disregarded as an out-dated
way of thinking about media influence. Audiences are more active than this theory suggests.

The Hypodermic Needle Theory suggests that the media has a direct and powerful influence on
audiences. It was developed in the 1920s and 1930s after researchers observed the effect of
propaganda during World War I and incidents such as Orson Welles’ War of the Worlds
broadcast. It became the dominant way of thinking about media influence during the subsequent
decades. The Hypodermic Needle theory is a linear communication theory which suggests that
a media message is injected directly into the brain of a passive, homogenous audience. This
theory suggests that media texts are closed and audiences are influenced in the same way. The
Hypodermic Needle Theory is no longer accepted by media theorists as a valid explanation of
communication and media influence. Indeed, some dispute whether early media theorists gave
the idea serious attention. In their book An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and
Research, Michael Salwen and Don Stacks write: “The hypodermic-needle model dominated
until the 1940s. As discussed earlier, although there is some question whether such a model
influenced scholarly research, anyone reading pre-World War II popular literature will see that it
underlay much popular thinking about the mass media and their consequences.” Although the
Hypodermic Needle Theory has been abandoned by most media theorists, it continues to
influence mainstream discourse about the influence of the mass media. People believe that the

61
mass media can have a powerful effect on people and parents continue to worry about the
effect of television and violent video games

Figure 11. Hypodermic Needle Theory (CCTO)

The public essentially cannot escape from the media's influence, and is therefore considered a
"sitting duck". Both models suggest that the public is vulnerable to the messages shot at them
because of the limited communication tools and the studies of the media's effects on the
masses at the time. It means the media explores information in such a way that it injects in the
mind of audiences as bullets. The "magic bullet" and "hypodermic needle" models originate
from Harold Lasswell's 1927 book, Propaganda Technique in the World War. Recent work in the
history of communication studies have documented how the two models may have served as
strawman theory or fallacy or even a "myth". Others have documented the possible medical
origins of the metaphor of the magic bullet model.

2. Two-step Flow of Communication by Lazarsfeld

New assessments that the Magic Bullet Theory was not accurate came out of election studies in
"The People's Choice," (Lazarsfeld, Berelson and Gaudet, 1944/1968). The project was
conducted during the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1940 to determine voting patterns and
the relationship between the media and political behavior. The majority of people remained
untouched by the propaganda; interpersonal outlets brought more influence than the media.

62
The effects of the campaign were not all-powerful to where they persuaded helpless audiences
uniformly and directly, which is the very definition of what the magic bullet theory does. As focus
group testing, questionnaires, and other methods of marketing effectiveness testing came into
widespread use; and as more interactive forms of media (e.g.: internet, radio call-in shows, etc.)
became available, the magic bullet theory was replaced by a variety of other, more instrumental
models, like the two step of flow theory and diffusion of innovations theory.

The Two-step Flow of Communication asserts that information from the media moves in two (2)
distinct stages. First, individuals (opinion leaders) who pay close attention to the mass media
and its messages receive the information. Opinion leaders are quite influential in getting people
to change their attitudes and behaviors and are quite similar to those they influence. Second,
opinion leaders pass on their own interpretations to the public.

The theory refined the ability to predict the influence of media messages on audience behavior,
and it helped explain why certain media campaigns may have failed to alter audience attitudes
and behavior.

Figure 12. Lazarsfeld Two-step Flow

The figure shows that message from mass media was directed to opinion leaders with particular
influence in their respective social environment. Messages were processed and subjected to
interpretation of opinion leader prior to dissemination to public.

3. Agenda-setting Theory

63
Agenda setting describes a very powerful influence of the media – the ability to tell us what
issues are important. As far back as 1922, the newspaper columnist Walter Lippman was
concerned that the media had the power to present images to the public. McCombs and Shaw
investigated presidential campaigns in 1968, 1972 and 1976. In the research done in 1968 they
focused on two elements: awareness and information.

Investigating the agenda-setting function of the mass media, they attempted to assess the
relationship between what voters in one community said were important issues and the actual
content of the media messages used during the campaign. McCombs and Shaw concluded that
the mass media exerted a significant influence on what voters considered to be the major issues
of the campaign.

Figure 13. Agenda-setting Theory

This theory, as shown in the figure above, describes a very power influence of the media – the
ability to tell us what issues are important. Agenda-setting is the creation of public awareness
and concern of salient issues by the news media. Two (2) basic assumptions underlie most
research on agenda-setting:
• The press and the media do not reflect reality; they filter and shape it;
• Media concentration on a few issues and subjects leads the public to perceive those
issues as more important than other issues.

Agenda-setting theory seems quite appropriate to help us understand the pervasive role of the
media (for example on political communications systems).

64
4. Spiral of Silence

German political scientist Elisabeth Noelle- Neumann (1974) introduced the “spiral of silence” as
an attempt to explain in part how public opinion is formed. She wondered why the Germans
supported wrong political positions that led to national defeat, humiliation and ruin in the 1930s-
1940s.

The phrase "spiral of silence" actually refers to how people tend to remain silent when they feel
that their views are in the minority.

The model is based on three premises:

1) people have a "quasi-statistical organ," a sixth-sense if you will, which allows them to
know the prevailing public opinion, even without access to polls,

2) people have a fear of isolation and know what behaviors will increase their likelihood of
being socially isolated, and

3) people are reticent to express their minority views, primarily out of fear of being isolated.

Figure 14. Spiral of Silence (CTTO)

The closer a person believes the opinion held is similar to the prevailing public opinion, the more
they are willing to openly disclose that opinion in public. Then, if public sentiment changes, the
person will recognize that the opinion is less in favor and will be less willing to express that
opinion publicly. As the perceived distance between public opinion and a person's personal

65
opinion grows, the more unlikely the person is to express their opinion. The closer a person
believes the opinion held is similar to the prevailing public opinion, the more they are willing to
openly disclose that opinion in public. Then, if public sentiment changes, the person will
recognize that the opinion is less in favor and will be less willing to express that opinion publicly.
As the perceived distance between public opinion and a person's personal opinion grows, the
more unlikely the person is to express their opinion.

It is related to the mass media, in such a way that mass media influences public opinion. Shifts
in public opinion occur commonly and therefore this theory is used to search an explanation for
behavior (speak up or stay silent). The theory has also been criticized for ambiguity and
methodological weakness, but the idea has persisted. Evidence of the spiral effect is usually
small but significant.

Example:
This example shows an effect of the theory where during the 1991 Gulf War the U.S. support for
the war was measured. Either it is a consensus view or did media coverage contribute to a
spiral of silence that dampened opposition to the war?

In a survey that asked about people’s opinions, 145 respondents were clearly less supportive of
the war than the popular support depicted by the media. Those who watched television and
perceived that the public supported the war, were more likely to support the war themselves.
This study supports the spiral of silence and suggests that people are swayed by bandwagon
effects rather than fearing social isolation.

References:
1. [Link]
2. Lasswell, H. Propaganda Techniques in the World War. University of Michigan.
1927.
3. Griffin, E. A First Look at Communication Theory. Wheaton College, Mcgraw Hill.
2012

66