Selective Exposure Theory, Selective Perception Theory and Selective Retention Theory

Selective Exposure Theory 

The Selective Exposure Theory implied that the audience had the tendency to expose themselves only to those messages that were in accordance with their attitudes and their belief systems. It stated that people tended to ignore those messages that were contradictory to their beliefs or challenged their attitudes and belief systems.

Stanley Baran and Dennis Davis in their book, “Mass Communication theory: Foundations, ferment and Future” mention the study of Paul Lazarsfeld, Bernard Berelson and Hazel Gaudet (1944, p.89), in their Erie County voter study. The study led to the discovery that “about two thirds of the constant partisans (republicans and Democrats) managed to see and hear more of their own side’s propaganda than the opposition’s…the more strongly partisan the person, the more likely he is to insulate himself from contrary points of view”.

Selective Perception Theory

Selective Perception Theory implied that a person decodes a given media message in a way that the meaning is in alignment with one’s personal beliefs, disposition and attitudes.

Stanley Baran and Dennis Davis in their book, “Mass Communication theory: Foundations, ferment and Future” mention that “Selective Perception is the mental or psychological recasting of a message so that its meaning is in line with person’s beliefs and attitudes.”

Often, while consuming media, we tend to be biased when we interpret the message to conveniently suit our thoughts, attitudes and views. This is the basic component of the Selective Perception Theory.

Gordon Allport and Leo Postman’s in their study of rumour in 1945 provide an ideal example of selective perception research. It is said that the two psychologists showed the picture of a fight aboard a train to some persons. The fighters were a Caucasian Male grasping a Razor and an unarmed Afro- American Male. The persons who saw the scene were further asked to communicate the scene to others. It is said that in a later stage, the white people recounting the story of this picture would inevitably be confused, and would end up saying that the razor was in the hands of the Afro- American (black man).

The Concise Encyclopaedia of Communication says that ‘When information is processed in the course of everyday experiences, the information is integrated into existing concepts stored in memory. Those concepts that are at the Top of Mind are the most likely to be retrieved in everyday experiences, and thus are most likely to be used in interpreting everyday experiences. This bias toward the most accessible constructs in memory for interpreting situations defines the concept of selective perception.’ (Selective Perception and Selective retention by L.J Shrum, HEC Paris, Concise encyclopedia of Communication. Wolfgang Donsbach, Wiley pulishers)

Selective Retention Theory

The Selective Retention Theory implied that persons mostly retained only those messages which supported their beliefs and attitudes. The messages which were not consistent with their personal views and belief systems were generally not retained by individuals.

Stanley Baran, Dennis Davis, in their book, ‘Mass Communication theory: Foundations, ferment and Future’, Cengage Learning say that “Selective Retention also known as selective memory is a process by which some information is retained and stored in memory and is thus available for retrieving and other information is not (and is thus forgotten)”.  They further expound that Selective Retention is a bias wherein the information that gets retained is more congruent with existing belief structures (and thus more likely to be recalled at a later time) as compared to the information that is less congruent with existing belief structures.

Selective Retention Theory- Communication theories

Selective Retention Theory

The Selective Retention Theory implied that persons mostly retained only those messages which supported their beliefs and attitudes. The messages which were not consistent with their personal views and belief systems were generally not retained by individuals.

Stanley Baran, Dennis Davis, in their book, ‘Mass Communication theory: Foundations, ferment and Future’, Cengage Learning say that “Selective Retention also known as selective memory is a process by which some information is retained and stored in memory and is thus available for retrieving and other information is not (and is thus forgotten)”.  

They further expound that Selective Retention is a bias wherein the information that gets retained is more congruent with existing belief structures (and thus more likely to be recalled at a later time) as compared to the information that is less congruent with existing belief structures.

Selective Perception Theory- Communication theories

Selective Perception Theory

Selective Perception Theory implied that a person decodes a given media message in a way that the meaning is in alignment with one’s personal beliefs, disposition and attitudes.

Stanley Baran and Dennis Davis in their book, “Mass Communication theory: Foundations, ferment and Future” mention that “Selective Perception is the mental or psychological recasting of a message so that its meaning is in line with person’s beliefs and attitudes.”

Often, while consuming media, we tend to be biased when we interpret the message to conveniently suit our thoughts, attitudes and views. This is the basic component of the Selective Perception Theory.

Gordon Allport and Leo Postman’s in their study of rumour in 1945 provide an ideal example of selective perception research. It is said that the two psychologists showed the picture of a fight aboard a train to some persons. The fighters were a Caucasian Male grasping a Razor and an unarmed Afro- American Male. The persons who saw the scene were further asked to communicate the scene to others. It is said that in a later stage, the white people recounting the story of this picture would inevitably be confused, and would end up saying that the razor was in the hands of the Afro- American (black man).

The Concise Encyclopedia of Communication says that ‘When information is processed in the course of everyday experiences, the information is integrated into existing concepts stored in memory. Those concepts that are at the Top of Mind are the most likely to be retrieved in everyday experiences, and thus are most likely to be used in interpreting everyday experiences. This bias toward the most accessible constructs in memory for interpreting situations defines the concept of selective perception.’ (Selective Perception and Selective retention by L.J Shrum, HEC Paris, Concise encyclopedia of Communication. Wolfgang Donsbach, Wiley pulishers)

Kindly read the above mentioned books for a detailed understanding of the same.

Selective Exposure Theory- Communication Theories

Selective Exposure Theory  

The Selective Exposure Theory implied that the audience had the tendency to expose themselves only to those messages that were in accordance with their attitudes and their belief systems. 

It stated that people tended to ignore those messages that were contradictory to their beliefs or challenged their attitudes and belief systems.

Stanley Baran and Dennis Davis in their book, “Mass Communication theory: Foundations, ferment and Future” mention the study of Paul Lazarsfeld, Bernard Berelson and Hazel Gaudet (1944, p.89), in their Erie County voter study. The study led to the discovery that “about two thirds of the constant partisans (republicans and Democrats) managed to see and hear more of their own side’s propaganda than the opposition’s…the more strongly partisan the person, the more likely he is to insulate himself from contrary points of view”.

Two Step Flow Theory- Personal Influence Theory

Two Step Flow Theory/ Personal Influence Theory

Sociologist Paul Lazarsfeld first introduced the concept of a two-step flow in communication in 1944. Gradually both Paul Lazarsfeld and Elihu Katz expounded on this topic elaborately in 1955 through their book, ‘Personal Influence’. While, the Hypodermic Needle theory spoke of the direct effect on the passive recipients of Mass Media, the two-step flow theory, as its name rightly suggests spoke of the influence of Mass Media messages in two steps.

The book showed the role of opinion leaders in disseminating the information from mass media to the people around. The opinion leaders were performing the role of intermediaries. 

According to Lazarsfeld and Katz, the Opinion Leaders were primarily influenced by Mass media and the information that it provided. They had a better understanding of the content and it is they who helped in explaining it to the people around, thus diffusing this information to others. The process thus implied that opinion leaders had a personal influence on the media message and its receptivity by the audience. Through interpersonal communication the media message was diffused to the masses.

Thus, according to Lazarsfeld, there was a Two-Step flow of communication:

• The first step: The message was sent through the Mass media and was first understood by individuals who served as opinion leaders and gave more attention to these media messages.
• The second step: These Opinion Leaders who were trusted in their circles interpreted these media messages to the masses around at an interpersonal level.

Therefore, Katz and Lazarsfeld (1955) in their book ‘Personal influence’ mention that “the traditional image of the mass persuasion process must make room for ‘people’ as intervening factors between the stimuli of the media and resultant opinions, decisions and actions.”

However, this theory was gradually criticised by many scholars as it had a very narrow dimension in its perception of Media and its effects.

Hypodermic Needle Theory or Magic 'Bullet theory' in Communication theories

Hypodermic Needle Theory or Magic 'Bullet theory'

In the 1920s and 1930s, Mass Media and its effects garnered a huge interest. It was around this time that Harold Lasswell proposed the theory termed as ‘Hypodermic Needle theory’. This theory was also addressed as ‘Bullet Theory’ (Schramm, 1971).

Hypodermic Needle Theory- It spoke about media injecting information directly into the minds of people who are basically passive recipients.

Bullet Theory- The message was considered as a magic bullet fired by a Mass Media gun into the ‘Head’ of the Recipient/ Audiences.

Through this theory Harold Lasswell propounded that Mass Media had a direct effect on its audiences from his era. Mass Media was considered to be like a needle that injects information or a bullet of information that directly influences an individual and the effect can cause immediate effects. Harold further added that just like a bullet, messages are shot in the minds of the people, who are the direct audience and there are desired effects.

The period between 1940’s to 1950’s gradually saw the rise of Mass Media and its power to influence. This was in the background of the gradual discovery of radio and television. World War II also saw the massive propaganda done by Hitler using mass media. It was also a time when there was an emergence on the study of persuasion and the persuasion industries of advertising and propaganda.

The effect of Mass Media also became an issue of concern due to the Payne Fund Studies in 1930’s which focused on the impact of Motion pictures and Children.

A classic example of the Magic Bullet theory or the Hypodermic Needle theory effect was seen in a Radio Broadcast that occurred in 1938 in the US. On October 30, 1938, Orson Welles and his theatre group broadcasted their ‘Radio Edition’ based on the story by H.G Wells, ‘War of the Worlds’.

On Halloween, the Radio Programme was intercepted by a ‘news Bulletin’ for the first time announcing the invasion from Martians in a place called Grover’s Mill, New Jersey. It was called a Panic Broadcast and around one million people from among the 12 Million people who read the broadcast were affected. There was a pandemonium of sorts where people rushed out to rural areas and raided shops to stock food out of fear of war with aliens. There were interrupted religious services, traffic jams and communication systems seemed to have got clogged. This is how the theory was considered to have been proved successful as information had been directly shot at the public. This theory proved that Mass Media could be used to manipulate the thoughts patterns and mindsets of gullible and passive recipients of Mass Media.

However, newer discoveries occurred between 1940 to 1968, wherein during the election of Franklin D Roosevelt in 1940, the Propaganda done through Mass Media did not affect voting Patterns, on the contrary people were influenced by Interpersonal Communication, opinion leader circles, etc. This was the result why the theory was replaced by other theories. 

Classical and Linear Models - Chapter 4

Classical communication Models

Aristotle’s Rhetoric Model of Communication (384-322 B.C)

Aristotle focussed on the Speaker, Speech and Receiver which was explained with the terms Ethos (speaker), Logos (the content of the message itself) and Pathos (inheres in the audience).

Aristotle defines rhetoric as ‘the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion’ (350 bce: Rhetoric 1.2.1). For Aristotle, rhetoric leverages logos (logic and reason), pathos (appeals to emotion) and ethos (character, ethics) to persuade audiences. (Soules, 2015)

 Aristotle’s Model is unidirectional or linear in nature which means there is no feedback.

This model was to propagate an idea or persuade the audience. It emphasised on the speaker and the capacity to convey the message in a skilful manner to an audience. It is said that Quintillian, a roman educator (CA 35-95 A.D.), built up on this model of Aristotle in his institute ‘Institutio Oratoria’ which was known for its skills on advising a good speaker statesman in the ancient times.

However, in today’s world scholars have observed that rhetoric can often be used for negative purposes. Marshall Soules says, “Rhetoric has a history of abuse, and in our time ‘rhetoric’ often refers dismissively to language filled with empty phrases and false sentiments. Ideally, rhetoric gives language additional interest and impact and is judged by its effectiveness. (Soules, 2015)

In the later years, based on this model of Aristotle, research scholars developed a more precise model which showed five elements and which is popularly available on many educational sites.The model showed the Speaker, the Speech which is the message, the Occasion, the Recipient Audience and the Effect the occurred in the Audience due to the Speech.

Linear Models

Shannon and Weaver’s Model of Communication

This model was propagated by Claude Elwood Shannon and Warren Weaver while on their work at Bell Laboratories. This model is considered to be one of the earliest influential models in the field of communication and was developed in 1948. It is also called Shannon and Weaver's Mathematical Model.

It is said that Claude Elwood Shannon was working out on an effective way to transmit electric signals. Shannon and Weaver also found that ‘static’ interferes while a telephonic conversation occurs. This was gradually developed into the concept of ‘noise’ in communication. Gradually, Shannon also introduced a mechanism in the receiver which corrected the differences between the transmitted and the reception signals- It is this mechanism which introduced a corrective technique which gradually led to the concept of feed-back in the long run.

Shannon’s model is directed at solving the problem of “noise in the channel” when an electrical signal is transmitted from one machine to another. The small unlabeled box in the middle of the diagram represents the physical channel, such as a telephone line, fiber optic cable, or computer chip. (Paul Cobley, Peter J. Schulz, Theories and Models of Communication, Handbook of Communication Science)

Shannon emphasized that his ‘mathematical theory of communication’ is relevant only for understanding and solving the engineering problem of signal transmission, He refrained from any implication the solution of this problem could have or understanding the ‘semantic aspects of communication’. Indeed, he originally presented not ‘the’ but ‘a’ mathematical theory of communication (Shannon 1948), Leaving the selection of the holder definite article to Weaver, who put the book together out of Shannon’s papers. But Shannon’s reluctance to generalize his theory could not prevent his and Weaver’s ideas on ‘communication’ from being quickly and enthusiastically received as well as fervently rejected by social scientists (as regards reception, fakobson 1981; Sense 1969; and with respect to rejection, Hayles 1999).

However, the model introduced by Shannon and Weaver is linear in nature. There is a sender, a channel and a receiver. There was no element of feedback entailed, hence it is called linear. 

Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver’s Model thus included the following elements:

•   A source of information which produced a message (sender)
•  A transmitter which encoded the message into signals for transmission.
•  A channel through which the signals were to be transmitted
•  A receiver that decoded the message from the signals that were transmitted.
•  A destination where the message arrived after the decoding.
•  The concept of 'Noise' that hampers or interferes when communication is occurring.
  

Problems with the Mathematical model of Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver-

•   Being a linear model, there is no feedback
•  As there is no feedback, the clarity and the understanding of the decoded message was questionable.
• Situational or contextual noise at that point of time was not taken into concern.
•  It is not known as to how effective the received meaning was and if it lead to an affect in behaviour or action of the recipient.

      

Harold Lasswell’s - Lasswell Model of Communication

Harold Lasswell, a professor at Yale Law School,  was an American political scientist and communication theorist, whose model 'Lasswell model of Communication' was considered to be one among the influential models in the earlier days. It was developed somewhere around 1948 and was surrounded with a lot of research criticism and analysis. 

Harold Lasswell's model is founded on a 5 W's approach. This model can be defined in just one statement – WHO says WHAT to WHOM through WHICH channel with WHAT EFFECT.

Lasswell was primarily concerned with Mass Communication and Propoganda. In this model, the focus was on the source and the channel through which information was sent. While, effect was taken into consideration, there was no concept of feedback. Hence, it is a linear model.

Lasswell’s model indicated that there was an effect of the communication that occurred. It assured that Communication did not occur in a vacuum. Rather, every message was send across with a purpose- and it gave rise to the concept of ‘effect’. Since, Laswell was concerned with Propoganda, his focus was the effect that communication led to. Effect here includes the observed changes that occurred in the receiver due to the communication process that occurred.

Main characteristics of the Lasswell model are:

• A linear Model
• It is based on effect of the sender’s message on receiver.

Problems with Laswell’s Model-

• There is no feedback for the message.
• It is very linear in nature (researchers say communication is always in circular motion because of feedback element)
• It presents communication as more of a persuasive process rather than an informative process as the focus is on the effect that the communication causes on the receiver.

In his book, ‘Mass Communication in India’, Keval J. Kumar says, “Lasswell saw communication as performing three functions:

• Surveillance of the environment
• Co-relation of components of society
• Cultural transmissions between generations.

Such a mechanistic and effects approach to communication was to influence communication theory for decades to come.”

 David Berlo’s SMCR Model

In 1960, David Berlo elaborated on the Shannon and Weaver Mathematical Model, and created another model which is called the SMCR model- ‘SENDER- MESSAGE- CHANNEL- RECEIVER MODEL’ and published it in a book titled El Proceso de la Comunicación (The Process of Communication). Berlo’s model depicted how there were several factors that influenced each element in the process of communication.

The source encodes the message through a channel which is decoded by the receiver. This is a linear model. The stress is placed on the message which is to be transmitted. David Berlo’s Model can ideally be used for Oral Communication.

Some important elements of this model were: 

He included the ‘Channel’ as his element as he foresaw the arrival of mass media as the circulation of the Newspaper had already begun. 

An important factor of Berlo’s Model is that it shows there are external factors that influence the entire process. For instance the Sender sends the message, but can be influenced by the social system, communication skills, attitudes, etc.

The same goes for the Message and the manner in which it is communicated. The content of the message and the way in which it is structured and delivered or transmitted matters. Here, Code is attributed to the form in which the Message may be communicated. Later researchers have attributed to Code as either textual, verbal or visual style of encoding one's message. 

Berlo has also shown the different ways in which communication can occur by showing different aspects of the ‘Channel.’ He uses the five senses of the Human being to explain the channel through which the message is given. 

The Receiver too receives his or her message based on the factors that influence the receiver. The factors that create an influence on the Sender while sending a message are also factors that influence a Receiver and the manner in which the receiver receives the message. Sender and receiver are surrounded by factors that influence them individually which the message is sent across. 

 

For instance, the source and the recipient communicate based on their communication skills, attitudes, knowledge, social system, culture- as the picture above shows.

Communication skills: 

If an individual has good communication skills, the communication surely is better as the receiver is able to grasp the message quickly.

Poor communication skills can hamper a healthy communication.

Communication skills include varied skills like fluent speaking, clear presentation, clear reading/ writing, careful listening, avoiding clutter, cutting the other person short, etc.

Attitude:

The sender’s attitude is of equal importance as is the recipient’s attitude in order to create the impact of the message.

A person’s attitude depends on his/ her understanding of self, the other, and the environment around. The attitude can create a whole lot of meaning and influence the effect of the message. A sender and a recipient’s attitude matters.

Knowledge:

Communication can be powerful, when the individual communicating has in-depth knowledge of the topic or the subject that one is talking about. This teamed with an open attitude also allows a give and take of knowledge, sharing of view- points and a better outcome of the communication.

Knowledge on the subject of conversation is important, all the more, since today’s technology does not permit to you go laxed. People verify and respond to ignorance.

Social Systems:

As human beings, we are born into a family that belongs to a particular social system. May be a particular family unit, community, schooling institute, organisation, industry, etc. The individual’s location, socioeconomic status, race, religion, societal function, are all influential factors.

Every individual communicates and every recipient receives and interprets the message according to these factors that are constantly within us and are an integral part of us.

Culture:

As human beings, we are born into a family that follows, certain traits that includes, their faith practices, their beliefs, their community or ethnic orientations, their values, the laws they abide with, the societal norms they follow, and many other social factors. Cultural nuances enhance any communication. What might be appealing and beautiful in one culture, maybe highly derogatory in another culture.

While communicating, it is advisable to understand the recipient of the message and the cultural background before the message is spoken. On the other hand, a recipient too must understand, the communicator’s cultural context before retaliating or reacting.

 

Problems with Berlo’s Model

•  It is a linear Model so, there is no concept of feedback.
• There is no concept of Noise or Barriers in this model of communication
• Some scholars mention the lack of the concept of the sixth sense or feelings that can effect communication.