Communication Theory

Communication Theory

Overview

This Skill runs the Theory Gate: it decides whether a theory is genuinely explaining a mechanism rather than sharing keywords with the topic, and it returns defensible anchors, boundaries, and rival explanations.

Required start

1. State the phenomenon and the mechanism claim to be explained.
2. List the candidate theories and what each would predict differently.
3. Read references/theory-anchors.md only when choosing among the common communication anchors, and references/css-theory.md when the phenomenon is a general social-science process (contagion, segregation, collective action, attention, cultural evolution) rather than a communication-specific mechanism.

Theory Gate checklist

For each candidate theory, answer all of:

• Mechanism: what mechanism does the theory name, and is that mechanism present in this phenomenon?
• Keywords: is the theory cited because of concepts, or because its terms co-occur with the topic?
• Boundary conditions: under what conditions does the theory apply, and is the study inside or outside them?
• Rival explanations: which alternative mechanisms predict the same observation?
• Construct mapping: which constructs does the theory require, and are they distinguishable in the design?
• Falsification: what observable pattern would count against the theory, and can the design produce it?
• Evidence fit: does the chosen design actually test the mechanism, or only an outcome the theory also predicts?

A theory that fails the mechanism or falsification item is not an anchor; it is a label.

Anchor selection rules

• Prefer the narrowest theory whose mechanism matches the phenomenon; add a second theory only when it explains something the first cannot.
• Never combine theories just to look rich. If two theories are needed, state the boundary where each applies.
• Treat China or any non-Western setting as a boundary test, not an automatic theory failure: name the boundary conditions and what the setting revises.

Output shape

End with a theory memo:

1. phenomenon and mechanism claim;
2. selected anchors with one-line mechanism and boundary;
3. rejected theories and the reason (keyword-only, wrong mechanism, untestable);
4. rival explanations the design must address;
5. constructs the theory implies (ready for the construct gate);
6. the falsifiable prediction that anchors the RQ/H.

Common anti-patterns

• Citing "media equation" or "CASA" because an AI is involved, without the mechanism (mindless social attribution).
• Citing "trust" or "credibility" as if they were theories.
• Using "perceived X" as the mechanism with no theory behind the perception.
• Importing a theory from another discipline without arguing that its boundary conditions transfer.
• Claiming a theory is supported by data that a rival theory predicts equally well.

Reference

• references/theory-anchors.md contains a compact anchor table for common communication theories with mechanism, boundaries, suitable evidence, and common misuses.
• references/css-theory.md contains the companion table for computational social science theory anchors (threshold contagion, homophily, structural holes, segregation/tipping, social identity, polarization, collective action, cultural evolution, attention economy, computational grounded theory).