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 Type

Resources
by Theory

 VIEW BY THEORY HOME
For the full list of resources
see View by Type

Instructors can get additional
resources. Read more





CONVERSATION VIDEOS








Archived chapters (PDF)
from previous editions are
available in Resources by
Type. See list

New to Theory Resources?
Find out more in this
short video overview (3:01).


Narrative Paradigm
Walter Fisher

SOCIAL INFLUENCE: PUBLIC RHETORIC

Chapter 19
 Dramatism
Group Communication 
Chapter 19
 Dramatism
Group Communication 

Chapter Outline 11th Edition

  1. Introduction.
  1. For Walter Fisher, storytelling epitomizes human nature.
  2. All forms of human communication that seek to affect belief, attitude or action need to be seen fundamentally as stories.
  3. Offering good reasons has more to do with telling a compelling story than it does with piling up evidence or constructing a tight argument.
  4. Fisher’s narrative paradigm emphasizes that no communication is purely descriptive or didactic.
  1. A disturbing tale to help understand and apply the theory
  1. In late 2018, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford sat before members of the Senate Judiciary Committee as they weighed the nomination of federal judge Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court.
  2. She recounted her experience, claiming that as a teenager, Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her.
  3. A transcription of her testimony is given and used as an example of the theory.
  1. Narration and paradigm: Defining the terms.
  1. Fisher defines narration as symbolic actions—words and/or deeds—that have sequence and meaning for those who live, create, and interpret them.
  2. Fisher’s definition of narration is broad.
  1. Narration is rooted in time and space.
  2. It covers every aspect of life with regard to character, motive, and action.
  3. It refers to verbal and nonverbal messages.
  4. Even abstract communication is included.
  1. A paradigm is a conceptual framework —a widely shared perceptual filter.
  2. A paradigm is a universal model that calls for people to view events through a common interpretive lens.
  3. Fisher’s narrative paradigm is offered as “the foundation on which a complete rhetoric needs to be built.”
  1. Paradigm shift: From a rational-world paradigm to a narrative one.
  1. According to Fisher, the writings of Plato and Aristotle reflect the early evolution from a generic to a specific use of logos—from story to statement.
  2. As opposed to the abstract discourse of philosophy, rhetoric is practical speech—the secular combination of pure logic on the one hand and emotional stories that stir up passions on the other.
  3. Fisher sees philosophical and technical discussion as scholars’ standard approach to knowledge.
  4. The rational-world paradigm is the mind-set of the reigning technical experts.
  1. People are essentially rational.
  2. We make decisions on the basis of arguments.
  3. The type of speaking situation (legal, scientific, legislative) determines the course of our argument.
  4. Rationality is determined by how much we know and how well we argue.
  5. The world is a set of logical puzzles that we can solve through rational analysis.
  1. The narrative paradigm is built on parallel, yet contrasting, premises.
  1. People are essentially storytellers.
  2. We make decisions on the basis of good reasons, which vary depending on the communication situation, media, and genre (philosophical, technical, rhetorical, or artistic).
  3. History, biography, culture, and character determine what we consider good reasons.
  4. Narrative rationality is determined by the coherence and fidelity of our stories.
  5. The world is a set of stories from which we choose, and thus constantly re-create, our lives.
  1. Unlike the rational-world paradigm, the narrative paradigm privileges values, aesthetic criteria, and commonsense interpretation.
  2. Perhaps the biggest shift in thinking has to do with who is qualified to access the quality of communication.
  3. We all judge stories based on narrative rationality.
  1. Narrative rationality: Coherence and fidelity.
  1. Fisher believes that everyone applies the same standards of narrative rationality to stories.
  2. The operative principle of narrative rationality is identification rather than deliberation.
  3. The twin tests of a story are narrative coherence and narrative fidelity.
  4. Narrative coherence:  Does the story hang together?
  1. How probable is the story to the hearer?
  2. Fisher suggests a number of ways we judge whether a story hangs together.
  3. Narrative consistency parallels lines of argument in the rational-world paradigm. 
  4. The test of reason, however, is only one factor affecting narrative coherence.
  5. Stories hang together when we’re convinced that the narrator hasn’t left out important details, fudged the facts, or ignored other plausible interpretations. 
  6. The ultimate test of narrative coherence is whether or not we can count on the characters to act in a reliable manner.
  7. Each element is applicable in the testimony of Blasey Ford.
  1. Narrative fidelity: Does the story ring true and humane?
  1. Does the story square with the hearer’s experiences?
  2. A story has fidelity when it provides good reasons to guide our future actions.
  3. Values set the narrative paradigm’s logic of good reasons apart from the rational-world paradigm’s logic of reasons.
  4. The logic of good reasons centers on five value-related issues. 
  1. The values embedded in the message.
  2. The relevance of those values to decisions made.
  3. The consequence of adhering to those values.
  4. The overlap with the worldview of the audience.
  5. Conformity with what audience members believe is an ideal basis of conduct.
  1. People tend to prefer accounts that fit with what they view as truthful and humane.
  2. There is an ideal audience that identifies the humane values that a good story embodies.
  3. These stories include the timeless “values of truth, the good, beauty, health, wisdom, courage, temperance, justice, harmony, order, communion, friendship, and oneness with the Cosmos.”
  4. Communities not based on humane virtues are possible, but Fisher believes these less idealistic value systems lack true coherence.
  5. Fisher believes the humane virtues of the ideal audience shape our logic of good reasons.
  6. Four of Fisher’s core values (health, temperance, justice, courage) stand out in Blasey Ford’s words.
  7. But do the values embedded in her narrative guarantee that it will ring true?
  8. Almost all communication is narrative, and we evaluate it on that basis.
  1. Critique: Does Fisher’s story have coherence and fidelity?
  1. Fisher’s theory excels in fulfilling most of the requirements of a good interpretive theory.
  2. He expands our understanding of human nature, is specific about the values we prefer, and supports his new paradigm with intriguing rhetorical criticism of significant texts—a classic method of qualitative research.
  3. If Fisher is right, when it comes to evaluating coherence and fidelity, people with ordinary common sense are competent rhetorical critics.
  4. Fisher’s narrative paradigm offers a fresh reworking to Aristotelian analysis.
  5. Critics charge that Fisher is overly optimistic when, like Aristotle, he argues that people have a natural tendency to prefer the true and the just.
  1. Fisher grants that evil can overwhelm our tendency to adopt good stories, but argues that’s all the more reason to identify and promote the humane values described by the narrative paradigm.
  2. Others suggest that narrative rationality implies that good stories cannot go beyond what people already believe and value, thus denying the rhetoric of possibility.

 


CHANGE TO: View by Type

Resources
by Theory

 THEORY HOME
For the full list of resources
see View by Type

Instructors can get additional
resources. Read more





VIDEOS








Archived chapters (PDF)
from previous editions
are available in
Resources by Type.
See list

New to Theory
Resources?
Find out more in this short
video overview (3:01).


Narrative Paradigm
Walter Fisher

SOCIAL INFLUENCE: PUBLIC RHETORIC

Chapter 19
 Dramatism
Group Communication 
Chapter 19
 Dramatism
Group Communication 

Chapter Outline 11th Edition

  1. Introduction.
  1. For Walter Fisher, storytelling epitomizes human nature.
  2. All forms of human communication that seek to affect belief, attitude or action need to be seen fundamentally as stories.
  3. Offering good reasons has more to do with telling a compelling story than it does with piling up evidence or constructing a tight argument.
  4. Fisher’s narrative paradigm emphasizes that no communication is purely descriptive or didactic.
  1. A disturbing tale to help understand and apply the theory
  1. In late 2018, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford sat before members of the Senate Judiciary Committee as they weighed the nomination of federal judge Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court.
  2. She recounted her experience, claiming that as a teenager, Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her.
  3. A transcription of her testimony is given and used as an example of the theory.
  1. Narration and paradigm: Defining the terms.
  1. Fisher defines narration as symbolic actions—words and/or deeds—that have sequence and meaning for those who live, create, and interpret them.
  2. Fisher’s definition of narration is broad.
  1. Narration is rooted in time and space.
  2. It covers every aspect of life with regard to character, motive, and action.
  3. It refers to verbal and nonverbal messages.
  4. Even abstract communication is included.
  1. A paradigm is a conceptual framework —a widely shared perceptual filter.
  2. A paradigm is a universal model that calls for people to view events through a common interpretive lens.
  3. Fisher’s narrative paradigm is offered as “the foundation on which a complete rhetoric needs to be built.”
  1. Paradigm shift: From a rational-world paradigm to a narrative one.
  1. According to Fisher, the writings of Plato and Aristotle reflect the early evolution from a generic to a specific use of logos—from story to statement.
  2. As opposed to the abstract discourse of philosophy, rhetoric is practical speech—the secular combination of pure logic on the one hand and emotional stories that stir up passions on the other.
  3. Fisher sees philosophical and technical discussion as scholars’ standard approach to knowledge.
  4. The rational-world paradigm is the mind-set of the reigning technical experts.
  1. People are essentially rational.
  2. We make decisions on the basis of arguments.
  3. The type of speaking situation (legal, scientific, legislative) determines the course of our argument.
  4. Rationality is determined by how much we know and how well we argue.
  5. The world is a set of logical puzzles that we can solve through rational analysis.
  1. The narrative paradigm is built on parallel, yet contrasting, premises.
  1. People are essentially storytellers.
  2. We make decisions on the basis of good reasons, which vary depending on the communication situation, media, and genre (philosophical, technical, rhetorical, or artistic).
  3. History, biography, culture, and character determine what we consider good reasons.
  4. Narrative rationality is determined by the coherence and fidelity of our stories.
  5. The world is a set of stories from which we choose, and thus constantly re-create, our lives.
  1. Unlike the rational-world paradigm, the narrative paradigm privileges values, aesthetic criteria, and commonsense interpretation.
  2. Perhaps the biggest shift in thinking has to do with who is qualified to access the quality of communication.
  3. We all judge stories based on narrative rationality.
  1. Narrative rationality: Coherence and fidelity.
  1. Fisher believes that everyone applies the same standards of narrative rationality to stories.
  2. The operative principle of narrative rationality is identification rather than deliberation.
  3. The twin tests of a story are narrative coherence and narrative fidelity.
  4. Narrative coherence:  Does the story hang together?
  1. How probable is the story to the hearer?
  2. Fisher suggests a number of ways we judge whether a story hangs together.
  3. Narrative consistency parallels lines of argument in the rational-world paradigm. 
  4. The test of reason, however, is only one factor affecting narrative coherence.
  5. Stories hang together when we’re convinced that the narrator hasn’t left out important details, fudged the facts, or ignored other plausible interpretations. 
  6. The ultimate test of narrative coherence is whether or not we can count on the characters to act in a reliable manner.
  7. Each element is applicable in the testimony of Blasey Ford.
  1. Narrative fidelity: Does the story ring true and humane?
  1. Does the story square with the hearer’s experiences?
  2. A story has fidelity when it provides good reasons to guide our future actions.
  3. Values set the narrative paradigm’s logic of good reasons apart from the rational-world paradigm’s logic of reasons.
  4. The logic of good reasons centers on five value-related issues. 
  1. The values embedded in the message.
  2. The relevance of those values to decisions made.
  3. The consequence of adhering to those values.
  4. The overlap with the worldview of the audience.
  5. Conformity with what audience members believe is an ideal basis of conduct.
  1. People tend to prefer accounts that fit with what they view as truthful and humane.
  2. There is an ideal audience that identifies the humane values that a good story embodies.
  3. These stories include the timeless “values of truth, the good, beauty, health, wisdom, courage, temperance, justice, harmony, order, communion, friendship, and oneness with the Cosmos.”
  4. Communities not based on humane virtues are possible, but Fisher believes these less idealistic value systems lack true coherence.
  5. Fisher believes the humane virtues of the ideal audience shape our logic of good reasons.
  6. Four of Fisher’s core values (health, temperance, justice, courage) stand out in Blasey Ford’s words.
  7. But do the values embedded in her narrative guarantee that it will ring true?
  8. Almost all communication is narrative, and we evaluate it on that basis.
  1. Critique: Does Fisher’s story have coherence and fidelity?
  1. Fisher’s theory excels in fulfilling most of the requirements of a good interpretive theory.
  2. He expands our understanding of human nature, is specific about the values we prefer, and supports his new paradigm with intriguing rhetorical criticism of significant texts—a classic method of qualitative research.
  3. If Fisher is right, when it comes to evaluating coherence and fidelity, people with ordinary common sense are competent rhetorical critics.
  4. Fisher’s narrative paradigm offers a fresh reworking to Aristotelian analysis.
  5. Critics charge that Fisher is overly optimistic when, like Aristotle, he argues that people have a natural tendency to prefer the true and the just.
  1. Fisher grants that evil can overwhelm our tendency to adopt good stories, but argues that’s all the more reason to identify and promote the humane values described by the narrative paradigm.
  2. Others suggest that narrative rationality implies that good stories cannot go beyond what people already believe and value, thus denying the rhetoric of possibility.

 


 
 
 
Home  McGraw-Hill—How to get copies of A First Look  Information for Instructors  Meet the Authors
Compare Comm Theory Texts  Viewing Hints & Troubleshooting  Changes in the 11th Edition 
Contact Us  Instructor Login 
 
 

Copyright © Em Griffin 2024 | Web design by Graphic Impact