Evaluating Communication Theory

Theoretical Scope

Scope refers to the comprehensiveness or breadth of a theory. Although theories vary in coverage, some level of generality is necessary for a theory to have value. In other words, a theory must explain events beyond a single observation. One can explain an observation, but that explanation is not theoretical if it does not apply to other observations as well. In other words, a theory must cover a range of events. The more observations that a theory covers, the better the theory is judged to be.

A theory can have two types of generality. The first is the extent of a theory's coverage. If a theory addresses a wide spectrum of topics, it has value in helping us understand characteristics that span many aspects of communication. For example, a theory might explain how people create meaning in all forms of communication. Because the topic of meaning is so broad and covers such a wide spectrum of events, the theory would help us understand many things about communication in all its forms.

The second type of generality applies a narrow concept across many situations. The theory in this case would not address very many topics but would be widely applicable across many situations. For example, a theory might explain attitude change, a relatively narrow topic applicable in many kinds of communication, from interpersonal exchanges to media campaigns. Such theories have power because they explain something in many different kinds of situations.

Good theories can possess either of these types of generality. In applying this criterion, the critic looks at the usefulness of the theory in explaining a range of experiences. Does it have an appropriate level of generality? Is its coverage so narrow that it is not very helpful or so broad that it is meaningless? To whom is the theory's breadth most relevant? A theory that looks very narrow from one vantage point may actually turn out to be quite useful to certain scholars and practitioners who work in a relatively limited field. For example, general communication scholars may find a theory of early childhood communication development too narrow to help understand communication processes across the life span, yet early childhood specialists may find the scope of such a theory just right for the kind of work they do.

Consistency

The criterion of consistency refers generally to the coherence or fit between a theory's philosophical assumptions and substantive claims. Are the theory's concepts and explanations consistent with the theory's assumptions? For example, if a theory assumes that genetics and learning determine behavior, then it leaves little room for individual human choice. We might question such a theory's appropriateness in making claims about decision making, since deterministic premises cannot lead logically to decision-making conclusions.

[Page 364]Appropriateness is related to the language used in theoretical statements. For example, the term decision making implies weighing options and making choices, while the term behavior does not necessarily imply choice. On the other hand, if a theorist claims that behavior is determined by previous events, then he or she would be perfectly consistent in making behavioral predictions.

...