Communication studies, disciplination and the ontological stakes of interdisciplinarity: a critical review

Abstract

Building on an in-depth analysis of the core literature grappling with the philosophical problematization of communication, this article examines the oft-asserted interdisciplinary nature of communication studies by assessing some of its underlying presuppositions at the ontological and epistemological levels. The article evaluates the coherence of our fragmented discipline through the articulation of the categories of the One and the Multiple in ontological and epistemological directions. In doing so, the recurrent conception of communication studies as an interdiscipline is criticized while recognizing the importance of undertaking interdisciplinary research within the field. Are especially considered the historical roots of interdisciplinary advocacies, namely the institutional demands for interdisciplinarity that have often resulted in conceptions of communication studies by communication scholars themselves as a crossroads or a service discipline. Building from Ernst Cassirer's developments regarding the "theory of the concept'', the author contends in the final section of the paper that the solution to the lack of coherence of the field lies in the necessity for communication studies to discipline themselves in order for the research undertaken within the field to acquire a common framework of intelligibility. KeywordsInterdisciplinarity, disciplinization, ontology, theory of the concept, Ernst Cassirer IntroductionIn the following pages, I examine efforts emerging from theoretical literature that are concerned with the problematization of the field of communication studies in its current state of development. First, I propose a few approaches for articulating what appears to be a consensual understanding of the current state of the discipline: we have a field characterized by a deep process of fragmentation at the epistemological level as well as at the level of objects and theoretical approaches. From this perspective, I then address the problem of disciplinization and illustrate the significant difficulty communication scholars have in organizing the field despite the existing theoretical potential for constructing disciplinary coherence, a difficulty that arises from the diversity I examine in the first section. Certain risks are identified and linked to the central thesis of the article which, through a critical reexamination of the systematic advocacy for interdisciplinarity emanating from a number of communication scholars as well as from colleagues in neighboring disciplines in the social sciences, aims to assess its consequences at the ontological and epistemological levels. I consequently trace the genesis of this advocacy and the institutional role it originally played. Then I detail some of the dangers that an "inconsequential interdisciplinarity" risks exposing communication research to if it does not properly engage with the aporias such an approach may introduce. I address the reasons why I consider fragmentation to be a problem and the ways I believe more coherence can be achieved a...

İletişim Bilimleri ve Akademik Yayımcılıkta Temsili: Türkiye’deki İletişim Fakültesi Dergileri Üzerine Bir İçerik Analizi

“…Most journals in the field seem to welcome both empirical and critical manuscripts whose methodological tools range from ethnographies to textual analysis, surveys, and archival study (Zelizer, 2016, p. 15). Commonly debated themes include whether this multi-disciplinarity in many aspects renders communication research's identity controversial and eclectic, whether it attracts more attention from other disciplines, and the lack of coherence within the field (Arık & Bayram, 2011;Donsbach, 2006;Jiménez & Guillem, 2009;Kane, 2016;Nordenstreng 2007).…”

Una perspectiva hispánica sobre la actual investigación en comunicación (2014-2019)

“…En otro orden de cosas, y si bien las áreas genuinas de las ciencias de la comunicación reúnen a la mayoría de los autores Saperas;Donsbach, 2006;Tur-Viñes et al, 2014), se advierte, a nivel disciplinar, una pluralidad que, en cierta medida, ratifica el carácter aglutinante de nuestro campo de estudio, así como su permanente intercambio y mutación con otras ciencias sociales y humanas (como la biblioteconomía, donde también están indexadas El Profesional de la Información y Cuadernos.info, o la educación, en la cual se ubica Comunicar). En efecto, parece que la diversidad es un rasgo positivo, ya que atestigua la vitalidad de los estudios en comunicación (Kane, 2016;Waisbord, 2014), constituyendo una fortaleza añadida para su avance. Pero, como afirma Saperas (2016: 42), "se trata de una investigación consolidada, aunque no madura"; esto es, no se puede obviar la transversalidad de la comunicación y su rol protagónico en la actual sociedad de la información, como tampoco su necesidad de fortalecerse en el plano institucional y epistemológico.…”

La mujer en la investigación en comunicación en España: un análisis de la producción científica (2007-2013)

“…La disciplina académica de la comunicación, en España como en otros lugares, nació sin un objeto de estudio bien definido, sin fundamentos intelectuales claros e incluso sin un nombre aceptado comúnmente. El caso español no es diferente al resto de países del mundo, pues hay unanimidad en considerar la debilidad intelectual y la falta de coherencia como problemas de nuestro campo (Peters, 1986;Shepherd, 1993;Anderson, 1996;Craig, 1999;Martino, 2003;Donsbach, 2006;Martín Algarra, 2009;Charaudeau, 2010;Calhoun, 2011;Kane, 2016).…”