Research Report on Speech Codes Theory
By:Danielle McLaughlin

In order to more fully understand Gerry Philipsen's Speech Codes Theory I read an article which was published in Communication Monographs in 1981. This article was titled "Fieldwork with Nacirema: What We Need Is Communication: Communication as a Cultural Category in some American Speech" and was written by Tamar Katriel and Gerry Philipsen. The article gave more of an in depth look at Speech Codes Theory which helped me to understand it better. However, before I give a summary of the article I would like to provide you with some useful terms that will help you understand the meaning of this theory.


VOCABULARY
SUMMARY
"Fieldwork in Nacirema: What We Need Is Communication: Communication as a Cultural Category in Some American Speech" was an ethnographic exploration of communication and of the discourse field in which it finds its place. The study's purpose was to see what people meant when they said the word communication. The study also wanted to see what differentiates that term communication from mere talk. The core of the information that was researched for this study came from case studies of communication in the lives of two women who were both raised in the American Pacific Southwest. Each study was constructed of transcripts from interviews and by a log kept by each women for three days.


INFORMANT 1-

This woman was thirty-six years old, divorced, with two daughters and was named "M". The major discovery that Katriel and Philipsen found with "M" was that she associated small talk with acquaintances and real communication with close friends. The problem with "M" was that she could not grasp real communication. "M" thinks that the reason she can not grasp this form of communication is that she was emotionally abused as a child by her parents and then later in life by her husband. Thus, "M" concludes that communication was a major factor in the conflicts of her life. Like most parents, "M" tries to communicate well with her children because she did not have effective communication with her parents. She states that she wants her children to develop a positive image so they will feel good about themselves. This positive image is something that "M" feels she lacks.


INFORMANT 2-

This second women was referred to as "K". "K" was a twenty-five year old, single women with a degree in business administration. In her case study she refers a lot to her work setting. However, she made no reference to the vital function of communication in this setting. "K" thinks that she is a good communicator and prides herself on her versatile. She sees communication as a process and lack of communication as stagnation. "K" talked a lot about the climate in which communication occurred. The one major observation that the researchers made about this second informant was that "K" liked metacommunication, which is communication about communication.


It was made evident to the researchers, from these two studies that, there are two distinctive clusters of terms that refer to communication. One- includes real communication, which refers to close, supportive, and flexible speech. Two- includes mere talk, which refers to distant, neutral, and rigid talk. This cluster also includes discussing self and relationships. The researchers used three dimensions to differentiate communication from mere talk.



    DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN COMMUNICATION AND MERE TALK

  • CLOSE/DISTANT-"Communication is a medium for intercourse between those who are close and intimate." In mere talk people keep their distance. They do not penetrate psychological boundaries and barriers.

  • SUPPORTIVE/NEUTRAL-"To engage in communication it is not necessary to approve of everything that the other has done." However, it is important to listen to the other person and be sympathetic. On the other hand, mere talk does not require that people are sympathic to one another.

  • DEGREE OF FLEXIBILITY-"In communication this is the willingness to listen to and acknowledge the other's presentation of self and try to understand other's evaluations of themselves." In mere talk it is just the opposite. We do not try to sympathize with the other.


As one can see these terms are opposites, thus showing that communication and mere talk are in fact, opposites. For the informants, "communication refers to close, supportive, and flexible speech between two or more people and that it can be contrasted with mere talk which is relatively more distant, neutral, and rigid."

EVALUATION

I think that this study falls very short on a scientific and humanistic level. It draws good conclusions from the information that was presented by the informants. However, I think that this study is biased because it only looks at one gender within one culture. I think that the information would be different if it came from male informants who lived in Holland and were 55 years old. I think that Katriel and Philipsen overlooked this aspect. I also think that this study could have utilized more people. Two women are not a good representation of all the human beings on earth who communicate! Speech Codes Theory is one theory that deserves much more research. The initial theory was put together well; however more studies need to be done on the subject. Perhaps it would be better to read an article by someone other then Gerry Philipsen.

LINKS

Click on TITLE to view our homepage.

Click on APPLICATION to read Jeff's work.

Click on CRITIQUE to read Chasity's work.

Click on WAR OF WORDS to read about speech codes at colleges in the United States.

Click on A FIRST LOOK AT COMMUNICATION THEORY to read more about Speech Codes Theory and other communication theories.

Click on GENDERLECT STYLES to read about a theory that deals with men and women's distinctive speech codes

Katriel, Tamar, Gerry Philipsen "What We Nedd Is Communication: Communication as a Cultural Category in some American Speech." Communication Monographs, 48 (1981): 302-317.