Communication

Communication (Latin communicatio 'communication') is the exchange or transmission of information, which can take place in a variety of ways (verbal, non-verbal and para-verbal) and in a variety of ways (speaking, writing), now including computer-mediated communication.

"Information" in this context is a summary term for knowledge, cognition, experience, or empathy. By "exchange" is meant a mutual give and take; "transmission" is the description for the fact that distances can be overcome in the process, or it is meant an idea that thoughts, ideas, opinions and other things "leave" one individual and "enter" another. This is a certain view and metaphorical description for everyday life - however, in more precise descriptions of the phenomenon of communication, the application of this metaphor becomes increasingly difficult.

(For more information on "Scientific-theoretical attempts to explain the description of communication" see the article Communication model).

In addition to its original meaning as a social action, the word "communication" is also used for other processes in different contexts. The increasing use of communication technology, for example, has led to the inclusion of technical aspects in the concept of communication. Communication is thus also understood to mean "data transmission", "reciprocal control" and, in simple cases, "connection" of devices; in other situations, however, communication is related to institutions or companies as well as their target groups. Then, instead of living beings, organized entities (or "systems") are regarded as communicators (producers and recipients). This is the case, for example, when talking about communication in the context of journalism, journalism or marketing (cf. specifically communicator (media)).

Communication is an everyday occurrence and is seemingly self-evident, so that it does not appear to be problematic. For most situations, this is sufficient; it would be too time-consuming to constantly question one's own communication. Only in the case of misunderstandings and failures that can be associated with communication does communication become problematic. In the scientific treatment of communication (see link above), the question is posed as to how communication can be explained; under what conditions it takes place; what the criteria for communication success are; and how reliable models can be created from which predictions and instructions for action can be derived.

Etymology

Communication comes from the Latin verb communicare meaning "to share", "to communicate", "to let participate"; "to make common", "to unite". In this original meaning, a social action is meant in which several people (more generally: living beings) are involved. Essential aspects of this social action are, on the one hand, "stimulation and execution of sign processes" and, on the other hand, "participation", in which something emerges "as something common" (Latin communio: "community", communis: "together"). The communication scientist Klaus Merten named 177 different meanings of the term "communication" as early as 1977.

Different access methods

With regard to the description of communication, several different approaches can be distinguished, which are characterized by specific basic assumptions. The main differences in the approaches consist firstly in what the communicators are conceptualized as: as humans, as living beings (including humans and animals), as machines, as behaving bodies, as acting beings. Secondly, there are different approaches as to whether communication is seen as something fundamentally social or as a sum of individual things (individual events, individual actions). Thirdly, differences arise from which parts are particularly emphasized (the side of production or reception).

The different approaches lead to different communication concepts, communication models and communication theories. In the following, some of them will be highlighted.

Access via own experiences

The approach to describing communication between people is determined by the fact that a distance to the phenomenon is not possible, because everyone necessarily has their own experiences and prejudices about communication. Someone who observes communication cannot avoid being involved in the process as a participant through his or her own interpretation, inference and understanding. This is true even if the observed communication is in an unfamiliar language; further, it is true even if the observer does not intervene in the process by speaking himself or herself. Likewise, when communication is spoken or written about, communication takes place. This makes it difficult or impossible to gain a distance.

As a result, one's own prejudices and experiences inevitably enter into the observation and description of communication. This can lead to the observation and description of communication being taken very lightly and thus a deeper insight into the complexity of the phenomenon and the difficulties of forming precise concepts not being achieved.

Access via basic assumptions of action theory

"Action-theoretical approach" means that communicators are viewed as agents. Elements such as thought, awareness, planning and goal setting are included in the description of communication. Communication is then understood as social action determined by communication goals and communication purposes. The communication goal is considered to be understanding. The communication purposes are considered to be the conditions to be achieved in the respective situation - conditions that can (usually) only be achieved collectively.

As a social action, communication is seen as something that only happens in mutual reference. This means, for example, that speaking in a communication situation takes place in relation to listening and listening in relation to speaking. In this view, communication does not occur through actions of isolated individuals existing by themselves. Another characteristic of the social action of communication is creativity: in communicative social action new thoughts, ideas, solutions to problems arise that would not arise in this way on their own.

The communication theory that goes back to H. Paul Grice also originated in the context of action theory. In his 1957 essay Meaning, Grice tried to find conditions for correctly saying that one 'means' something with an action (or an action product, cf. Twardowski 1999). The approach was further developed by Strawson, Searle and Schiffer and taken up by Meggle (1997) using intensional logic. Roland Posner develops a conception of sign on this basis (Posner 1993). Basically, according to this understanding, communicating is linked not only to showing something, but also to showing that one is showing something (the recognition of intention condition, cf. Schiffer). Accordingly, not every sign action is communication. Rather, an action would only be communication if something is 'meant' by it, i.e. if it openly indicates that something is to be understood by it.

Access via basic assumptions of problem theory

In the problem-theoretical approach, communicators are described as solving problems. A problem is understood as a range of differences that are observed and determined (problem definition) and can be overcome (problem solution). This approach is compatible with the action-theoretical approach.

One of the most important solutions to problems that is achieved through communication can be seen as the development and stabilisation of one's own identity, which always takes place in relation to others. This happens, for example, through telling one's own experiences and hearing the stories of others. "Gossip plays an essential role in this process.

Access via basic assumptions of signal theory

In a signal-theoretically oriented approach, communication is understood as the transmission of signals through space. The signals are then considered as triggers for certain processes (e.g. for the ringing of a telephone or the display of letters on a screen). Communication is then seen as a connection of devices that is maintained via signals, and which causes the states of the devices to change reciprocally as a result of this connection. Living beings, social aspects, consciousness, planning and action play no role in this approach. Consequently, no statements or instructions for action for interpersonal communication can be derived from this approach.

An outstanding example is the mathematical theory of communication by Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver. Mathematical models, with which the probability of the occurrence of signals and signal combinations are treated, and which serve, among other things, the calculation of line capacities, are called the theory of communication. The reception of the theory led to the fact that until today the signal-theoretical and the action-theoretical approach are not always exactly separated from each other.

Access via basic scientific and biological assumptions

In scientific theorizing about living beings, thoughts, consciousness, planning, and goal setting are completely disregarded. In the biological approach, processes down to the molecular level are described as communication under certain conditions.

In the scientific approach, communication can also be seen as a factor in evolution. The description of communication under scientific conditions can be used in medicine and pharmacy to explain the development of diseases.

Access via basic psychological assumptions

In communication psychology, communicators are viewed in terms of "inner", "mental" processes and using the theories that explain these processes. In this context, communicators are primarily regarded as individuals (Latin: individuus "indivisible"). Starting from the psychological description of the individual, reference is made to social processes. This approach gives rise to communication models and communication theories which are used, for example, for therapeutic purposes. However, these theories are also frequently referred to in further training courses on the subject of communication.

A description of communication based on experience with therapies was presented by the psychologists Paul Watzlawick, Don D. Jackson and Janet H. Beavin. In 1967 they dealt with the role of communication in interpersonal relationships from a therapeutic perspective. The German translation of the work led to a preoccupation with the phenomenon of communication in the 1970s. The widespread view that "you cannot not communicate" also originates from this work. Following Watzlawick, Friedemann Schulz von Thun developed a four-sided model ("communication square") in which communication is described as a four-sided process.

Access via basic assumptions of behavioural theory

Basic assumptions of behavioural theory are based on an 'external' observation of living beings, in which the concepts of effect, stimulus and reaction are in the foreground. In this approach, communication is seen as a process of mutual interaction. The basic assumptions of action theory, according to which living beings plan, develop ideas, form goals and pose problems, are dispensed with. The focus is on the observation of living beings as bodies that are subject to external influences and react to them.

The effects can be related to individual living beings (by assuming them to be 'within' the living being), to processes between living beings and their material environment, and to processes between several living beings. The effects can be described for the simplest living beings on the basis of very simple stimulus-response patterns. The observation and description of humans as behaving bodies becomes very complex due to extraordinarily diverse influences and possibilities of intervention.

The behavioural approach was widespread at the end of the 19th century until the middle of the 20th century. Today, it no longer plays a role in communication and media studies because no answers to current questions in the communication and media field can be derived from it (see the section on stimulus-response models in the article Communication models).

Access via basic assumptions of systems theory

Niklas Luhmann's sociological systems theory emerged in the 1970s and 1980s. This approach is characterized above all by a high level of abstraction and the claim to universality. In this view, communication is not a human action, but a product of social systems, i.e. an autopoietic operation that leads to their differentiation and maintenance.

This systems-theoretical approach also disregards basic assumptions of action theory. Acting people do not appear in it because they are controlled by consciousness and bring their individuality to bear as mental systems, whereas social systems operate by means of communication. The special feature of this approach is that it does not base a theory of society exclusively on action theory. In relation to communication, this is reflected in Luhmann's dictum "Man cannot communicate; only communication can communicate." This means that communication can only be followed by further communication, so that social systems autopoietically maintain their existence via communication. In contexts of structures and functions of social systems, mental systems can either functionally bring themselves to bear by connecting to processing communication through topic-related contributions or dysfunctionally by responding to the selective communicative components of information and form of communication of this information not with understanding but with misunderstanding and disrupting ongoing communication. Communication disruptions can be dealt with through procedures of meta-communication. The background to this is the distinction made between the "autopoiesis of social systems and the autopoiesis of mental systems" (N. Luhmann 1987, p. 355). This distinction is then the object of meta-communication, where the self-reference of individual consciousnesses (mental systems) is confronted with the self-reference of communication (social systems) and can be dealt with by mediation, instructing information, further education or the like.

Access via the interdisciplinary perspective

The interdisciplinary perspective takes into account findings from disciplines such as biology, neurobiology, cybernetics, systems theory, semiotics and kinesics. The foundations were laid in particular by Humberto Maturana and Ernst von Glasersfeld. With Maturana, the understanding of language as coordinated behavioural coordination results almost inevitably from his autopoiesis concept. In addition to natural language, all sign processes (i.e. also of a non-linguistic nature), as described in their entirety by semiotics in particular, are considered. Von Glasersfeld's perspective is compatible with Maturana's view, but he places natural language in the foreground in his explanations.

The special feature of the interdisciplinary perspective is that it consistently illuminates the functioning of linguistic interactional behaviour and does not pause at the level of generating theories to explain appearances. This approach is also clearly distinguishable from Luhmann's approach, who strongly modified the concept of autopoiesis originally coined by Maturana and put it in the service of his systems theory.

Consequences of the access methods for the description

Understanding communication is made more difficult if the basic assumptions of the respective approach are not made clear and the approaches are not sufficiently separated from each other conceptually. Then it is not exactly clear what is being talked about when communication is discussed. This would be the case if communicating living beings were first described as bodies interacting with each other, but then it was said that communication leads to understanding. This is a change from the basic assumption 'to regard living beings as behaving bodies' to the basic assumption 'to regard living beings as acting beings'. An ambiguity in the basic assumptions would also be the case if communicators were described as 'senders and receivers'. "Sending" and "receiving" may refer to letters as a medium of communication in the original basic assumption, or to devices and processes of signal transmission in the basic technological assumption. In everyday descriptions, however, signal transmission between technical devices is generally not meant.