Problematic integration theory: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:46, 29 November 2022

Revision as of 21:50, 29 November 2022

Line 1:

'''Problematic Integrationintegration Theorytheory''' is a [[Outline of communication|theory of communication]] that addresses the [[Process|processes]] and dynamics of how people receive, evaluate, and respond to information and experiences. The premises of PI are based on the view that message processing, specifically the development of probabilistic and evaluative orientations (our perceptions of something's likelihood of occurring and its value, respectively), is a [[social]] and [[Culture|cultural]] construction. In situations where there is agreement between probabilistic orientation (a person's constructed belief about an object's likelihood, i.e., how likely something is to occur) and evaluative orientation (a person's constructed belief about an object's value), integration is in harmony, i.e., not problematic. However, when there is disagreement between these orientations about an object (i.e., an event, thing, person, idea, outcome, etc.), then integration becomes problematic. This disharmony leads to [[Conflict (process)|conflict]] and [[discomfort]], which can manifest itself as cognitive, communicative, affective, and/or motivational.

== History ==

[https://www.ohio.edu/scripps-college/comm-studies/about/faculty-student/babrow Austin Babrow]<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20081014234303/http://coms.ohiou.edu/austin-babrow Austin Babrow, Ph.D.], Ohio University (archived)</ref> first introduced the [[theory]] of Problematic Integration (PI) in 1992. Babrow brought together a diverse and [[Interdisciplinarity|interdisciplinary]] literature (from the field of [[Communication theory|communication]] and related disciplines, like [[psychology]], [[sociology]], and [[philosophy]]) to serve as building blocks for his new theory. Among the theoretical underpinnings that support PI are: [[uncertainty reduction theory]]; the theory of belief in a just world; analysis of decision-making; the theory of and motivation and self-esteem; and [[cognitive dissonance]]. However, despite integrating elements from these theories, PI has striking differences (e.g., unlike URT, PI does not assume that uncertainty is an undesirable situation, nor does it suggest that resolution of uncertainty is always necessary or desirable).<ref>Bradac, James J.; “Theory Comparison: Uncertainty Reduction, Problematic Integration, Uncertainty Management, and Other Curious Constructs”, ''[[Journal of Communication]]'', September 2001, Vol. 51, No. 3, pp. 456-476.</ref>

== Concepts ==

Line 39:

Babrow's theory shares some common ideas with Uncertainty Management Theory (UMT), which was developed by Dale Brashers (2007, A theory of communication and uncertainty management. In B. Whaley & W. Samter (Eds.), Explaining communication theory (pp.&nbsp;201–218). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum). For a comparison of the perspectives, see Bradac (2001).<ref>Bradac, James J.; “Theory Comparison: Uncertainty Reduction, Problematic Integration, Uncertainty Management, and Other Curious Constructs”, ''Journal of Communication'', September 2001, Vol. 51, No. 3, pp. 463-4.</ref>

== Current Usageusage ==

The complexity of PI and the multiplicity of its manifestations makes it difficult to operationalize, measure, and apply. However, this breadth of scope also indicates that it may have extremely wide-ranging applications and opportunities for research.<ref>Bradac, James J.; “Theory Comparison: Uncertainty Reduction, Problematic Integration, Uncertainty Management, and Other Curious Constructs”, ''Journal of Communication'', September 2001, Vol. 51, No. 3, pp. 466.</ref> Because the concepts within PI are based on cultural definitions, PI is seen as being overly responsive to external conceptual influences; thus, making it potentially falsifiable.<ref>Bradac, James J.; “Theory Comparison: Uncertainty Reduction, Problematic Integration, Uncertainty Management, and Other Curious Constructs”, ''Journal of Communication'', September 2001, Vol. 51, No. 3, pp. 468.</ref>

=== Health ===

PI has been used within the realm of [[Health Communication]] studies in order to assess methods of educating, and communicating with, patients facing a variety chronic or life-threatening conditions. In 2003, Babrow received the prestigious Woolbert Award for scholarship of exceptional originality and influence from the National Communication Association [http://www.natcom.org/nca/Template2.asp?sid=9] for his work with PI.

PI has been used extensively in analysis of the health care system, particularly in regard to communication between health care providers and patients. The health-care system inherently involves communication between health-care providers (e.g., doctors, nurses, various therapists, dietitians, social workers, counselors, etc.), patients, and members of the patient's social and support network (e.g., family members, friends, members of support groups, etc.). Because understanding and communicating diagnoses, prognoses, treatment plans, expectations, and more can be complicated and because this communication relies on the communication skills of the various people involved, health-care situations offer ample opportunity to examine problematic integration. Research in this area has revealed that information is used to decrease and increase uncertainty, depending on the situation. In some cases, patients may seek information to reduce stressful uncertainty. However, in other cases, the care team and the patient may need to increase uncertainty in order to increase optimism and allow for re-evaluation of a given situation.<ref>Brashers, Dale E., Daena J. Goldsmith, and Elaine Hsieh; “Information Seeking and Avoiding in Health Contexts”, ''Human Communication Research'', 2002, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 261-2.</ref> PI has been used to study communication involving various medical issues, including breast cancer,<ref>Dennis, Michael Robert, Adrianne Kunkel, and Joann Keyton; “Problematic Integration Theory, Appraisal Theory, and the Bosom Buddies Breast Cancer Support Group”, Journal of Applied Communication Research, Ed. 36, pp. 415-436.</ref><ref>Ford, Leigh A., Austin S. Babrow, and Cynthia Stohl; “Social Support Messages and the Management of Uncertainty in the Experience of Breast Cancer: An Application of Problematic Integration Theory”, Communication Monographs, 1996, Vol. 63, pp. 189-207.</ref> the treatment of diabetes in the elderly, end-of-life issues, and pregnancy.<ref>Matthias, Marianne Sassi and Austin S. Babrow; “Problematic Integration of Uncertainty and Desire in Pregnancy”, Qualitative Health Research, 2007, Vol. 17, pp. 786-798.</ref><ref>Matthias, Marianne Sassi; “Problematic Integration in Pregnancy and Childbirth: Contrasting Approaches to Uncertainty and Desire in Obstetric and Midwifery Care”, Health Communication, 2009, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 60-70.</ref>

=== Organizational Communication ===

Problematic Integration has also been used to evaluate [[organizational communication]]. Organizations, comprising networks and hierarchies of individuals, by their very nature, create complex webs of various dynamic social and cultural relationships. Moreover, most organizations do not exist for themselves, but for an external audience, client, or consumer; thereby, increasing the nature, types, and numbers of relationships. Communication within these relationships will very likely give rise to instances of uncertainty. In the context of such complex systems of communication, PI takes on a much different appearance than intrapersonal situations. An organization's structure, system design, and strategy can create, maintain, or help reduce problematic integration.<ref>McPhee, Robert D. and Pamela Zaug, “Organizational Theory, Organizational Communication, Organizational Knowledge, and Problematic Integration”, ''Journal of Communication'', September 2001, Vol. 51, No. 3, pp. 578-80.</ref>

=== Internal Bureaucracy ===

One area of this study has been problematic integration arising from [[Constitutive role of communication in organizations|internal bureaucracy or organizational rules or objectives]] and how this conflict involves matters of formal rationality (a quantitative calculation of an action or choice) or substantive rationality (a value judgment of consequences of an action or choice).<ref>McPhee, Robert D. and Pamela Zaug, “Organizational Theory, Organizational Communication, Organizational Knowledge, and Problematic Integration”, ''Journal of Communication'', September 2001, Vol. 51, No. 3, pp. 575-6.</ref>