Clusters of Communication

Today as I was researching I came across the article "Theory in Communication" which discusses a viewpoint regarding the "tendency towards integrating various points of view [about communication studies] into a single, interlaced 'field' theory to account for all systems of [the discipline]." In other words, instead of identifying the various sub-divisions of study within communication (such as Information, Linguistic, and Behavioral theories among others), specific theories are categorized as one title: communication theory.

Even though there is no comparison to psychology throughout the article, "Theory in Communication" still reinforces my argument that communication takes a "second" seat compared to other disciplines. I believe this is because theories and research done throughout the field are relatively new (mid twentieth century) compared to other social science disciplines like psychology and sociology which originated in the mid to late nineteenth century. It takes time to develop a discipline to the point where legitimate studies and research can uncover new theories and viewpoints that further academic knowledge. Communication has definitely contributed valuable information to the social sciences, but needs more time to confirm and uncover more findings to make it as "credible" as psychology or sociology.

Because of this viewpoint toward communication, I can see the frustration with Gary P. Radford towards psychology. He has contributed numerous articles, books, and papers regarding communication studies and theories, and it seems that he does not receive the recognition that he deserves. Like Ken Sereno stated in his "Introduction to Communication" lecture, psychology uses communication as a second discipline only to prove its own theories and research.

In terms of interdisciplinary studies, communication and psychology need to be recognized as two independent disciplines with equal weight and acknowledgment. Competition and hostility, however, take a front-row seat in determining the attitudes of academic study between the two disciplines; it contributes to the disregard for communication only as a supportive discipline, communication scholars' anger and resentment because of such disrespect, and the overall notion that communication is less credible. The only situation where I have witnessed the incorporation of communication and psychology working together positively is the business venture, Psychology of Communication. I believe this business is likely using both disciplines because of a profit-motive, and not to further academic knowledge! Hopefully communication can be respected and valued as an equal subject so research can evolve.