MIDDLE RANGE THEORIES:Background, Functional Analysis Approach, Elite Pluralism

<< PARADIGM SHIFT & TWO STEP FLOW OF INFORMATION

KLAPPER’S PHENOMENSITIC THEORY:Klapper’s Generalizations, Criticism >>

Theories of Communication MCM 511

LESSON 12

MIDDLE RANGE THEORIES

Background

In US the golden age of TV began in the 1950s and continued throughout the 1960s; the highly

successful introduction of colour television during the 1960s confirmed the popularity of the new

medium. The life styles changed visits with friends and extended family members declined sharply,

decline in book reading, less out door games.

Concern grew that Television is: affecting nation slowly, under mining our mental ability or moral fiber,

making us passive couch potatoes, there was mindless entertainment as against classic .Special attention

was directed at television's influence on children -- is it making them passive, dull or bringing violence

and lead them to juvenile delinquency. In late 1950s Wilbur Schramm, Jack Lyle and Edwin parker

directed on to the most ambitious research projects. During the 1960s and into the 1970s the limited

effects paradigm dominated American mass communication research. In this, the studies conducted by

Schramm's Stanford group demonstrated the power of the paradigm and its ability to produce findings

that had immediate, practical value.

First research center was established at the university of Illinois and then at Stanford university. These

research centers conducted its research without using a single well articulated theoretical framework. It

relied on a number of empirical generalizations that had emerged from earlier studies. Their goal was to

construct a theory based on systematic empirical observation. They worked inductively identifying

consistencies in their data and then summarizing and interpreting them. Their conclusions were No

informed person can say simply that television is bad or good for children ... for some children, under

some condition, some television is harmful for other children under the same condition or for the same

children under other conditions, and it will be beneficial. For most children under most conditions, most

television is probably neither particularly harmful nor particularly beneficial.

So according to the researcher the effect of television could most usefully be viewed as `an interaction

between characteristics of television and characteristics of viewers'

They asserted that the arrival of television hadn't radically altered child-rearing; it had merely

eliminated some old problems (reading comic books) and substituted new ones. The researchers advised

that although television might aggravate some child-rearing problems, these could be handled if parents

provided a little extra care and understanding.

And so other researchers also followed research in the limited effects paradigm they were content to

simply conduct empirical research and address the many research questions that started springing up.

But few thoughtful tried to take stock of what had been done. They wanted to know how all the

individual research findings might be added up or collated

Robert Merton could truly claim to the world of grand sociological theory in the tradition of Emile

Durkheim and the microscopic sociological observation as practice by Lazarsfeld and Hovland and

Schramm

The books he wrote were Social Theory and Social Structure and Social Theoretical Sociology. He gave

them perspective from which to interpret their work and he taught them the necessity of combining

induction with deduction. He provided a conceptual foundation for the new paradigm. He was a strong

advocate for what he called `theories of the middle range'

Unlike grand social theories (that is, mass society theory) that attempted to explain all forms of social

action, middle range theories were designed to explain only limited domains or ranges of action that had

been or could be explored during empirical research

Merton described middle-range theories as follows:

Middle-range theories consist of limited sets of assumptions from which specific hypotheses are

Theories of Communication MCM 511

logically derived and confirmed by empirical investigations. These theories do not remain separate but

are consolidated into wider networks of theory.

These theories are sufficiently abstract to deal with differing spheres of social behavior and social

structure, so that they transcend sheer description or empirical generalization.

The middle range orientation involves the specification of ignorance , rather than pretend to knowledge

where it is in fact absent, this orientation expressly recognizes what must still be learned in order to lay

the foundation for still more knowledge.

So Merton argued that all this research work would eventually be brought to construct a comprehensive

theory that would have the power and scope of theories in physical sciences. Moreover , when it was

finally constructed, this theory would be far superior to earlier forms of social theory that were not

empirically grounded.

Thus, middle rang theory provide and ideal rationale for limited effects research. It implied that

eventually all the individual effects studies would add up and a broad perspective on the role of media

could be constructed

But the effort to combine them into broader theories proved more problematic than had been expected

Functional Analysis Approach

Merton used the perspective of functional analysis from carefully examining research in anthropology

and sociology.

That is the society consists of complex sets of interrelated activities, each of which supports the others.

Every form of social activity is assumed to play some part in maintaining the system as a whole.

So functionalist approach was that all practices that contribute to maintaining the society can be said to

be functional rather than good, any practices that are disruptive or harmful are by definition

Dysfunctional rather than evil.

As long as functional practices dominate and dysfunctional practices are kept to some minimum. The

society will flourish- it can be said to be in balance because the functional practices balance out the

dysfunctional ones. But it turned out to be quite complicated. Various forms of media content can be

functional or dysfunctional for society as a whole, for specific individuals, for various subgroups

E.g. news about a corrupt politician alerts the society is functional but dysfunctional for the politician.

So an over all problem with functional analysis is that it rarely permits any definitive conclusion to be

drawn about the overall functions or dysfunctions of media.

In general functional analysis produces conclusion that largely legitimize or rationalize the status quo.

E.g. existing forms of media content and the industries that produce them can be assumed to be

functional. After all if the society is not falling apart then it must be in balance.

Functional analysis ad the limited effects paradigm made a good fit , if media influence was modest,

media couldn't be too dysfunction

Information Flow Theory

Number of surveys and experiments were conducted to assess the flow of information from media to

mass audiences. The overall objective of this wok was to assess the effectiveness of media in

transmitting information to mass audiences. News flow research focused on determining whether

barriers impeded the flow of information from media to typical audience members

Some barriers investigated included:

· level of education

· amount of media use for news

· interest in news

· talking about news with others

Theories of Communication MCM 511

difference between hard and soft news

hard news typically included news about politics, science world events and community

organizations

soft news included sports coverage gossip about popular entertainers and human interest

stories about average people

The research confirmed the importance of motivating people to pass on information, but suggested that

even a free gift was insufficient to guarantee the accurate flow of information.

The most important limitation of information flow theory is that it is a simplistic, linear, source-

dominated theory.

Information originates with authoritative or elite source then flows outward to ignorant individuals

Barriers to the information flow are to be identified and overcome and little effort is typically made to

consider whether the information has nay value or utility for average audience members.

Elite Pluralism

Like other examples of limited effects theory, elite pluralism assumes that media have little ability to

directly influence people. Media alone cannot alter politics. Elite pluralism argues that media, in the

name of stability should reinforce political party loyalties and assist the parties to develop and maintain

large voter coalitions. Media shouldn't be expected to lead public opinion but rather reinforce it. If

change is to occur, it must come from the pluralistic groups and be negotiated and enacted by the

leaders of these groups. This idea was spawned partly as an effort to make sense of the voter research

initiated by Lazarsfeld in the 1948 election. He and his colleagues found inconsistencies between their

empirical observation of typical voters and the assumption that classical democratic theory made

Classical democratic theory- assumed that every one must be well informed and politically active. But

the new perspective based on empirical data showed that average people didn't care about politics.

Voting decisions were more likely to be based on personal influence than on reasoned consideration of

the various candidates. So they argued that voter apathy weren't really a problem for the political

system as a whole. They argued that we are better off if our political system changes very slowly over

time as result of gradual conversions. They believed that the important factor was not the quality of

voting decisions but rather their stability

Opposition to Elite Pluralism

First look at the two terms ELITE and PLURALISM.

ELITE implies a political system in which power is ultimately in hands of a small group of influential

persons, a political elite.

PLURALISM refers to cultural, social, and political diversity.

It implies a political system in which many diverse groups are given equal status and representation.

Can there be a political system that is based on both of these principles- a system in which power is

centralized in the hands of the few but in which the rights and status of all minority groups are

recognized and advanced.

So to opponents elite pluralism was a rationalization of the status quo that provided no direction for

future development. Strong opposition to elite pluralism came from the political left headed by C.

Wright Mills. Based on his knowledge of survey research he argued that in American society, political

power was not decentralized across a broad range of pluralistic groups. Instead he believed that power

was centralized in a small group of military-industrial-complex leaders whom he called THE POWER

ELITE.

These elite were not representative of pluralistic groups. Rather it was isolated from them and typically

acted against their interests.

Table of Contents: