,,,, [1 ] (paradigm), (meta - ) [2 ] Littlejohn,, [3 ], ( self - consciousness) (in2 trospection), [4 ], [5 ],, Thomas Kuhn [6 ] Kuhn, Kuhn,, [7 ], Kuhn [8 ], Kuhn 21 Kuhn,, [9 ],, Kuhn, :, ;,,,,, [10 ],, Kuhn [11 ],
12,,, Burrell &Morgan [12 ] Kuhn,, Babbie,,, [13 ],,,,,, (assumptions) [14 ] Littlejohn [15 ],, :??? (operationalization),, [16 ],, ;,, [17 ],,,,,,, (criterion),,, Littlejohn [18 ] Hanson :, ;,,,, [19 ] ; (degree of conformity) [20 ], (focus) [21 ],, Kuhn,,, (sets of assumptions), (configuration) [22 ],,, (on2 tology) (epistemology) (axiology) [23 ] Littlejohn [24 ],
13 Littlejohn [25 ] :,, ;,,,,, ;,, (knower and known) [26 ] Littlejohn [27 ],,, Babbie [28 ], (to be) : (should to be),, [29 ],, Littlejohn (dichotomous cate2 gories) (two2category scheme),, : ( science) ( nonscience) ; ( quantitative) (qualitative) ; (social science) (humanism), : ( ) ; ( ) ; ( ) : ; ;,,, ( holistic analysis) (interpretive studies) (value2based judgements) (criticism), (traditions), (trichotomous scheme) [30 ] Fink & Gantz 10 245, (conformity) [31 ],, Fink & Gantz [32 ] 10, :
14 1 ( ; ) 2 ( ), 3 ( central ten2 dencies) 4 ( I) 5 ( II) 6 ( I), 7 (( II) ) 8 (, ), 9 10,,,, Fink & Gantz [33 ],,,, 10,,,,,,, [34 ],, (objective approaches, ) (subjective approaches, ), ;, [35 ], (normal science) [36 ] Littlejohn [37 ] ;
15, 30 (dominant paradigm) [38 ] Potter, Coooper & Dupagen [39 ] 1965 1989 8,,, (conceptualization), (nominal definition), (operational definition), (indicators),, (conceptualization &operationalization), Babbie [40 ],, [41 ],, So & Chan 399,,, 10,,, C. Wright Mills,,,,,, [42 ],, Mills,,,, :,,, (fetishization),,, :,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
16 [43 ], [44 ], [45 ],,,,,,,, [46 ], [47 ] (observer) :,, ;, (generator) :, [48 ],,,,,,,, [49 ],, (context),,,,,,,,,,,, (semiotics semiology) (phenomenology) (hermeneutics), [50 ],, 11, (publish or perish ),,,,
17,, [51 ],, [52 ],,,,,,,,,, (alienation),,, [53 ],, (false consciousness),,,, Hans Magnus Enzenberger :,,,,,, [54 ],,,,,,,,,,,, [55 ],,,,,, [56 ] Fink & Gantz [57 ],,, 21, [58 ],,,,,, [59 ],,, [60 ],, [61 ],,,
18, [62 ]?, [63 ],,, 1978, 20, [64 ],,,,, : ;, ;,, [65 ]?,,? (1),, [66 ],,, [67 ],,,,,,,,, [68 ],,,,,,,,,,, (code),,,,,, ;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
19,,,,,,,,,,,,,, (2), ( ),,,,,,,,,,, (platform),, ;,, (1995 ),,,, [69 ],, 90,,, 80,,,,,, [70 ],,,,,,,,,,,, [71 ],, ;, [72 ],,,,
20,,,,,, ( ),,,,,,, : [1 ] Paradigm [2 ] Littlejohn (metatheory), (meta - ),, Littlejohn (1996, P132), (1993) Lit2 tlejohn : ;, [3 ] (1993) :, : Littlejohn, S. W. (1989). Theories of Human Communication. Belmont. CA : Wadsworth Publishing Company. [4 ] [3 ] [5 ] : D. G. Cedarbaum, :, : (1985) :,, II, 325 288 T. Kuhn 18 Lichtenberg Notebooks : Kuhn, Licht2 enberg, (P. 342) [6 ] (1985) : : Kuhn, T. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago : University of Chicago Press. (1992) :, :,, 41 61 [7 ] Potter, W. J., Cooper, R. and M. Dupagne (1993). The three paradigms of mass media research in main2 stream communication journals. Communication Theory. 3 (4) : 317-335 Schaefer, R. T. (1995). Sociology (5th Edition). New York : McGraw - Hill. & R. P. Lamm [ 8 ] Masterman, M. (1976). The nature of a paradigm. in I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (eds. ). Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. PP. 61 51 [9 ] (1994) :, (1998) :, (1994) :, : Berger, A. A. (1991). Media Analysis Techniques. Sage Phblications, Inc. [ 10 ] Babbie, E. (1998). The Practice of Social Research (8th Edition). Belmont, CA : Wadsworth Publishing Company. [11 ] [6 ] [ 12 ] Burrell, G., &Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and organizational Analysis. London : Heinemann. [13 ] [10 ]
21 [14 ] [10 ] [15 ] [3 ] [16 ] [7 ] [17 ] [7 ] [18 ] Littlejohn, S. W. (1996). Theories of Human Communication (5th edi. ). Belmont, CA : Wadsworth Publish2 ing Company. [19 ] [7 ] [20 ] Fink, E. J. & W. Gantz (1996). A content analysis of three mass communication research traditions : Social science, interpretive studies, and critical analysis. Journalism &Mass Communication Quarterly. 73 (1) : 114 1341 [21 ] [7 ] [22 ] [7 ] [23 ] [18 ] [24 ] [18 ] [25 ] [18 ] [26 ] [18 ] [27 ] [18 ] [28 ] [10 ] [ 29 ] Grossberg, L. (1987). Gritical theory and the politics of empirical research. in M. R. Levy ( Ed. ). Mass Communicat ion Review Yearbook, California : Sage. 686 106. [30 ] [20 ] [31 ] [20 ] [32 ] [20 ] [33 ] [20 ] [ 34 ] Gudykunst, W. B. & T. Nishida (1988). Theoretical perspectives for studying intercultural communication. in Asante, M. K. & Gudykunst, W. B ( Edi. ). Handbook of International & Intercultural Communication. New2 bury Park, CA : Sage. [35 ] [34 ] [36 ] (1994) : :, : Czitrom, D. J. (1982). Media and the American Mind : From Morse to McLuhan. The University of North Carolina Press1 [37 ] [3 ] [ 38 ] Gitlin, T. (1978). Media sociology : The dominant paradigm. Theory And Society, 6 : 205-523. [39 ] [7 ] [40 ] [10 ] [41 ] [36 ] [42 ] [36 ] [43 ] [29 ] [44 ] Hall, S. (1982). The rediscovery of ideology ; Return of the repressed in media studies, in M. Gurevitch, et al. ( Eds. ). Culture, Society, and the Media. London : Methuen. pp. 56 90. [45 ] (1992) :, :,, 17 40 [46 ] [45 ]
22 [ 47 ] Allen, M. (1993). Critical and tradition science : Implications for communication research. West Journal of Communcation, 57 : 200 208. [48 ] [47 ] [49 ] [45 ] [50 ] [3 ] [51 ] (1992) :, :,, 417 442 [52 ] [36 ] [53 ] [45 ] [54 ] [47 ] [55 ] Chu, G. C. (1998). In search of an asian perspective of communication theory. in Dissanayake, W. Com2 munication Theory, The Asian Perspective. Singapore : AMIC. 204 210. [56 ], (1992) :, :,, i vi [57 ] [20 ] [58 ],,,,,, 150, (academic community),, ;,,,,,, [59 ] (1995) :, : : 1993,, 21 37 [60 ] (1995) :, [61 ] (1995) :, : : 1993,, 39 55 [62 ],, (1997) :, :,, 7 22 [63 ],,,,, (1995), (, P25) ; Hussain (, 1995, P. 25), [64 ] (1995) :, : 1993,, 79 91 [65 ] (1995) :, : 1993,, 67 78
23 [66 ] [61 ] [67 ] [62 ] [68 ] [51 ] [69 ] [62 ] [70 ] (1996) :, 4 : 85 86 1 [71 ] [56 ] [72 ] :,, 1999 1 20, :,, 20,,,,,,,,,,,,, 1997,
JOURNALISM & COMMUNICATION VOLUME 6. NUMBER 2, 1999 2 From Media Reality to Subjective Reality Zhang Kexu Zang Haiqun Han Gang He Jie In this day people live in three different kinds of reality because of rapid develop2 ment of mass media, and from media reality to subjective reality bccomes an im2 portant question for the study of mass communication. Framing Analysis which came into being in 1980gs has been taken seriously in recent years, and it sets up a new research paradigm for studying relation between mass media and public opin2 ion. This thesis takes that the domestic media report NATO bombing Chinese em2 bassy as a case for researching theme. At first, we make content analysis to CCTV, OTV and OTVgs reporting, aiming to understand different Televisions news fram2 ing. Then, we make a telephone interview to find out what is audience framing. At last, we compare news framing with audience framing to confirm our assume offered in advance : when news media report a particular event in the objective reality, they will present a particular part of the event invariably when the audience read or listen to the reports of the news media, they will apear a certian inclination accord2 ing to their former experience, then it will form unanimity, consultation and antag2 onism between the media framing and the audience framing, realizing transferma2 tion and interaction between the three kinds of reality. 11 Paradism of Communication Studies and the Enlightenment on Today gs Communication Studies in Our Country Jin Jianbin The article begins with the discussion of the concept Paradigm. Through the explo2 ration of this conceptπs diverse meanings, the article positions its use of Paradigm on the domain as a set of metatheoretical assumptions regarding the nature of sci2 ence and society. Different categories of communication research paradigms are re2 viewed. B ased on that, the article examines the communication research in Main2 land China and raises some suggestions regarding its f urther development. 24 Legel Relationship between Mass Media and Natural Person Wei Yo ngzheng