chramm[edit]

Communication is usually described along a few major dimensions: Message (what type of things are communicated),
source / emissor / sender / encoder (by whom), form (in which form), channel (through which medium), destination / receiver
/ target / decoder (to whom), and Receiver. Wilbur Schramm (1954) also indicated that we should also examine the impact
that a message has (both desired and undesired) on the target of the message. [5] Between parties, communication includes
acts that confer knowledge and experiences, give advice and commands, and ask questions. These acts may take many
forms, in one of the various manners of communication. The form depends on the abilities of the group communicating.
Together, communication content and form make messages that are sent towards a destination. The target can be oneself,
another person or being, another entity (such as a corporation or group of beings).
Communication can be seen as processes of information transmission governed by three levels of semiotic rules:

1. Syntactic (formal properties of signs and symbols),

2. Pragmatic (concerned with the relations between signs/expressions and their users) and
3. Semantic (study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent).
Therefore, communication is social interaction where at least two interacting agents share a common set of signs and a
common set of semiotic rules. This commonly held rule in some sense ignores autocommunication, including intrapersonal
communication via diaries or self-talk, both secondary phenomena that followed the primary acquisition of communicative
competences within social interactions.

Barnlund Communication Model

In light of these weaknesses, Barnlund (1970) proposed a transactional model of communication. [6] The basic premise of the
transactional model of communication is that individuals are simultaneously engaging in the sending and receiving of
messages.
In a slightly more complex form, a sender and a receiver are linked reciprocally. This second attitude of communication,
referred to as the constitutive model or constructionist view, focuses on how an individual communicates as the determining
factor of the way the message will be interpreted. Communication is viewed as a conduit; a passage in which information
travels from one individual to another and this information becomes separate from the communication itself. A particular
instance of communication is called a speech act. The sender's personal filters and the receiver's personal filters may vary
depending upon different regional traditions, cultures, or gender; which may alter the intended meaning of message
contents. In the presence of "[communication noise|noise]" on the transmission channel (air, in this case), reception and
decoding of content may be faulty, and thus the speech act may not achieve the desired effect. One problem with this
encode-transmit-receive-decode model is that the processes of encoding and decoding imply that the sender and receiver
each possess something that functions as a [code-book], and that these two code books are, at the very least, similar if not
identical. Although something like code books is implied by the model, they are nowhere represented in the model, which
creates many conceptual difficulties.
Theories of [co-regulation] describe communication as a creative and dynamic continuous process, rather than a discrete
exchange of information. Canadian media scholar Harold Innis had the theory that people use different types of media to
communicate and which one they choose to use will offer different possibilities for the shape and durability of society (Wark,
McKenzie 1997). His famous example of this is using ancient Egypt and looking at the ways they built themselves out of
media with very different properties stone and papyrus. Papyrus is what he called 'Space Binding'. it made possible the
transmission of written orders across space, empires and enables the waging of distant military campaigns and colonial
administration. The other is stone and 'Time Binding', through the construction of temples and the pyramids can sustain
their authority generation to generation, through this media they can change and shape communication in their society
(Wark, McKenzie 1997).

Constructionist model[edit]
There is an additional working definition of communication to consider [examples needed] that authors like Richard A. Lanham (2003)
and as far back as Erving Goffman (1959) have highlighted. This is a progression from Lasswell's attempt to define human
communication through to this century and revolutionized into the constructionist model. Constructionists believe that the
process of communication is in itself the only messages that exist. The packaging can not be separated from the social and
historical context from which it arose, therefore the substance to look at in communication theory is style for Richard Lanham
and the performance of self for Erving Goffman.
Lanham chose to view communication as the rival to the over encompassing use of CBS model (which pursued to further
the transmission model). CBS model argues that clarity, brevity, and sincerity are the only purpose to prose discourse,
therefore communication. Lanham wrote: "If words matter too, if the whole range of human motive is seen as animating
prose discourse, then rhetoric analysis leads us to the essential questions about prose style" (Lanham 10). This is saying
that rhetoric and style are fundamentally important; they are not errors to what we actually intend to transmit. The process
which we construct and deconstruct meaning deserves analysis.
Erving Goffman sees the performance of self as the most important frame to understand communication. Goffman wrote:
"What does seem to be required of the individual is that he learn enough pieces of expression to be able to 'fill in' and
manage, more or less, any part that he is likely to be given" (Goffman 73), highlighting the significance of expression.
The truth in both cases is the articulation of the message and the package as one. The construction of the message from
social and historical context is the seed as is the pre-existing message is for the transmission model. Therefore, any look
into communication theory should include the possibilities drafted by such great scholars as Richard A. Lanham and
Goffman that style and performance is the whole process.
Communication stands so deeply rooted in human behaviors and the structures of society that scholars have difficulty
thinking of it while excluding social or behavioral events.[weasel  words] Because communication theory remains a relatively young
field of inquiry and integrates itself with other disciplines such as philosophy, psychology, and sociology, one probably
cannot yet expect a consensus conceptualization of communication across disciplines. [weasel  words]
Communication Model Terms as provided by Rothwell (11-15):

 Noise; interference with effective transmission and reception of a message.

 For example;
 physical noise or external noise which are environmental distractions such as poorly heated
rooms, startling sounds, appearances of things, music playing some where else, and someone talking really
loudly near you.
 physiological noise are biological influences that distract you from communicating competently
such as sweaty palms, pounding heart, butterfly in the stomach, induced by speech anxiety, or feeling sick,
exhausted at work, the ringing noise in your ear, being really hungry, and if you have a runny nose or a
cough.
 psychological noise are the preconception bias and assumptions such as thinking someone
who speaks like a valley girl is dumb, or someone from a foreign country can’t speak English well so you
speak loudly and slowly to them.
 semantic noise are word choices that are confusing and distracting such as using the word tri-
syllabic instead of three syllables.
 Sender; the initiator and encoder of a message
 Receiver; the one that receives the message (the listener) and the decoder of a message
 Decode; translates the sender's spoken idea/message into something the receiver understands by using their
knowledge of language from personal experience.
 Encode; puts the idea into spoken language while putting their own meaning into the word/message.
 Channel; the medium through which the message travels such as through oral communication (radio, television,
phone, in person) or written communication (letters, email, text messages)
 Feedback; the receiver's verbal and nonverbal responses to a message such as a nod for understanding
(nonverbal), a raised eyebrow for being confused (nonverbal), or asking a question to clarify the message (verbal).
 Message; the verbal and nonverbal components of language that is sent to the receiver by the sender which
conveys an idea.
Humans act toward people or things on the basis of the meanings they assign to those people or things. -"Language is the
source of meaning". -Meaning arises out of the social interaction people have with each other.
-Meaning is not inherent in objects but it is negotiated through the use of language, hence the term symbolic interactionism.
As human beings, we have the ability to name things. Symbols, including names, are arbitrary signs. By talking with others,
we ascribe meaning to words and develop a universe of discourse A symbol is a stimulus that has a learned/shared
meaning and a value for people Significant symbols can be nonverbal as well as linguistic.
-Negative responses can consequently reduce a person to nothing. -Our expectations evoke responses that confirm what
we originally anticipated, resulting in a self-fulfilling prophecy.