SELECT AN EDITION:
9th EDITION   10th EDITION   11th EDITION
A First Look at Communication Theory Reveal main menu
 

The screen on this device is not wide enough to display Theory Resources. Try rotating the device to landscape orientation to see if more options become available.

Resources available to all users:

  • Text Comparison—theories covered in A First Look and ten other textbooks
  • Theory Overview—abstract of each chapter
  • Self-Help Quizzes—for student preparation
  • Chapter Outlines
  • Key Names—important names and terms in each chapter
  • Conversation Videos—interviews with theorists
  • Application Logs—student application of theories
  • Essay Questions—for student prepatation
  • Suggested Movie Clips—tie-in movie scenese to theories
  • Links—web resources related to each chapter
  • Primary Sources—for each theory with full chapter coverage
  • Further Resources—bibliographic and other suggestions
  • Changes—for each theory, since the previous edition
  • Theory Archive—PDF copies from the last edition in which a theory appeared

Resources available only to registered instructors who are logged in:

  • Discussion Suggestions
  • Exercises & Activities
  • PowerPoint® presentations you can use
  • Short Answer Quizzes—suggested questions and answers

Information for Instructors. Read more


CHANGE TO View by Theory
Application Logs
10th Edition

Student comments on practical use of a theory, from the Instructors Manual and additions to the website

List mode: Normal (click on theory name to show detail) | Show All details | Clear details

Chapter  6Coordinated Management of Meaning


Kerry

I stumbled into a conversation taking place between three of my girlfriends and one of our mutual guy friends, Marty. They were attempting to define the word "sexy" as a combination of a person's attractiveness and unattainability. Their speech acts were coherent because they were shaped by the episode of defining a word over dinner. The relationship between them, their self-identities, and their culture helped them to be talking about the same thing and understanding each other. The relationship between them is close and open, and not strained by any romantic interest. Each of the four has good self-esteem and receives assurance of their attractiveness from other friends. Thus, the conversants were less likely to be driven to "prove" anyone sexy. Finally, our Christian college culture shaped what was said. The word "sexy" was stripped of its emotional charge and defined as the more quantifiable "attractive and unattainable." This made the word safe to talk about, where it might otherwise have been too carnal for Christian discussion.


Andrew

When we arranged ourselves along the objective-subjective spectrum, I was one of the most objective people in the class. I like theories with a strong scientific background. I am also wary of theories that might undercut the ideas of objective truth and metanarratives. However, despite these things, I like CMM. Why does an objectivist like me have some sympathy for this socio-cultural and phenomenological theory? CMM makes many observations about life and communication that ring true, and by focusing heavily on action it doesn't launch a wanton assault on objective truth.


Sarah

Coordinated Management of Meaning states that peoples' stories lived may mesh while their stories told may not. In other words, coordination without coherence can occur, in that individuals can coordinate effectively without a mutual understanding. I have seen this in my own life, especially during my days in high school when my core group of friends consisted of a gay atheist, a non-practicing Jewish girl, and a devout Jewish girl. Colin, Stephanie, Aliza and I (a Christian) were all committed to the same moral principles of abstaining from drinking, drugs, and sex, but our reasons for holding to these principles were extremely different. Thus, after reading this theory it has become obvious to me that we were more interested in coordination and not on forcing our religious beliefs upon one another for the sake of coherence.


Celeste

Escher's Bond of Union comes alive as I put in my face and the face of a friend of mine. First, our communication formed our relationship and who we were together. When together we had our own "language" that kept us from being real with one another and created at times a fake social environment. The manner in which we communicated took the form of a win/lose situation and I normally took the position of the one who lost. Our process of communicating often entailed me figuring out what would make my friend happy and then deciding to do it that way. Secondly, our nonverbal language spoke volumes when we didn't talk to one another. I could tell if she was upset with me and this created a tense environment in which we lived and operated. The environment that we made together wasn't healthy for the majority of our relationship. By having an argument and not resolving conflict, we created a reality that I didn't want to be in. We truly did create our own social reality.




You can access Application Logs for a particular chapter in several ways:

  • Switch to View by Theory, then select the desired theory/chapter from the drop-down list at the top of the page. Look in the list of available resources.
  • To quickly find a theory by chapter number, use the Table of Contents and link from there. It will take you directly to the theory with available options highlighted.
  • You can also use the Theory List, which will take you directly to the theory with available options highlighted.

Back to top



Resources
by Type


Instructors can get
additional resources.
Read more






 VIDEOS

 APP LOGS

 ESSAY


 LINKS





New to Theory
Resources?

Find out more
in this short
video overview
(3:01).

CHANGE TO View by Theory
Application Logs
10th Edition

Student comments on practical use of a theory, from the Instructors Manual and additions to the website

List mode: Normal (click on theory name to show detail) | Show All details | Clear details

Chapter  6Coordinated Management of Meaning


Kerry

I stumbled into a conversation taking place between three of my girlfriends and one of our mutual guy friends, Marty. They were attempting to define the word "sexy" as a combination of a person's attractiveness and unattainability. Their speech acts were coherent because they were shaped by the episode of defining a word over dinner. The relationship between them, their self-identities, and their culture helped them to be talking about the same thing and understanding each other. The relationship between them is close and open, and not strained by any romantic interest. Each of the four has good self-esteem and receives assurance of their attractiveness from other friends. Thus, the conversants were less likely to be driven to "prove" anyone sexy. Finally, our Christian college culture shaped what was said. The word "sexy" was stripped of its emotional charge and defined as the more quantifiable "attractive and unattainable." This made the word safe to talk about, where it might otherwise have been too carnal for Christian discussion.


Andrew

When we arranged ourselves along the objective-subjective spectrum, I was one of the most objective people in the class. I like theories with a strong scientific background. I am also wary of theories that might undercut the ideas of objective truth and metanarratives. However, despite these things, I like CMM. Why does an objectivist like me have some sympathy for this socio-cultural and phenomenological theory? CMM makes many observations about life and communication that ring true, and by focusing heavily on action it doesn't launch a wanton assault on objective truth.


Sarah

Coordinated Management of Meaning states that peoples' stories lived may mesh while their stories told may not. In other words, coordination without coherence can occur, in that individuals can coordinate effectively without a mutual understanding. I have seen this in my own life, especially during my days in high school when my core group of friends consisted of a gay atheist, a non-practicing Jewish girl, and a devout Jewish girl. Colin, Stephanie, Aliza and I (a Christian) were all committed to the same moral principles of abstaining from drinking, drugs, and sex, but our reasons for holding to these principles were extremely different. Thus, after reading this theory it has become obvious to me that we were more interested in coordination and not on forcing our religious beliefs upon one another for the sake of coherence.


Celeste

Escher's Bond of Union comes alive as I put in my face and the face of a friend of mine. First, our communication formed our relationship and who we were together. When together we had our own "language" that kept us from being real with one another and created at times a fake social environment. The manner in which we communicated took the form of a win/lose situation and I normally took the position of the one who lost. Our process of communicating often entailed me figuring out what would make my friend happy and then deciding to do it that way. Secondly, our nonverbal language spoke volumes when we didn't talk to one another. I could tell if she was upset with me and this created a tense environment in which we lived and operated. The environment that we made together wasn't healthy for the majority of our relationship. By having an argument and not resolving conflict, we created a reality that I didn't want to be in. We truly did create our own social reality.




You can access Application Logs for a particular chapter in several ways:

  • Switch to View by Theory, then select the desired theory/chapter from the drop-down list at the top of the page. Look in the list of available resources.
  • To quickly find a theory by chapter number, use the Table of Contents and link from there. It will take you directly to the theory with available options highlighted.
  • You can also use the Theory List, which will take you directly to the theory with available options highlighted.

Back to top



 

Copyright © Em Griffin 2024 | Web design by Graphic Impact